Can we please leave it up to the generals?

Question

Politicians aren't war experts or battle strategists, so why should they have the most power on the military. I say thay we should have the Joint Cheif of staff be the commander in chief of the military so we dont screw anything up.

Do politicians actually know anything about war? No They are policticians, they get elected to make laws. Generals on the other hand, actually have military training.

Politicians DO know what will happen to Iraq if we pull out, it would be anarchy. On the 2nd day, the gov't would be dismantled, and it would be anarchy. Thousands would die, it would be terrible. But politicans don't ******* care. They are selfish. Generals aren't selfish, and know the consequences.

What's say you.

Answer 1

after I heard that the Iraq politicans are taking a 2 month vacation....I saythey aren't serious about reform and we should get our troops out NOW !

Answer 2

This is a bit of a simplistic view on things. If the military had a say in what wars they had to fight in they might very well be involved in way to many, or choose not to defend the legitimate government when they disagree with it.

War is in essence a breakdown in diplomacy where a government chooses to use force to achieve its goals. Going to War must always be a political decision.

There is a theory called manoeuvre warfare. Manoeuvre warfare is where the commander(s) are given the desired end state and any limitations that they might have on achieving the mission i.e. resources or restrictions on such things as theatre of operations etc. Once the commander(s) are given the mission and the limitations the politicians let them achieve it in the way they see fit. An example of where this was used very effectively was in the first Gulf War where General Schwarzkopf was left alone to run the war as he and his staff had planned it.

I hope that gives you a bit of insight.

I agree with Robert (just above me) but the problem with the Iraqi Army is not necessarily accountablity, but the fact that the institution as a whole was dsibanded (a political decision) and then stood up again. This was one the biggest mistakes made in the rebuildiing of Iraq.

Answer 3

Interesting concept, and I think I know what you're shooting for...

As has already been pointed out, civilian control of the military is a halmark of our Constitution and will not change.

One of the things that President Bush keeps pointint out is that we "Have to let the General's on the ground do their jobs"...That's all well and good, and it makes for a good soundbyte, but, it has not been the way it has happened since LONG before the democrats took control of congress. We went to war in Iraq with far fewer troops than the battle plans (drawn up by Generals) called for, and this resulted in the arms caches of Saddam (and perhaps even the WMD, if it actually existed) not being secured...the end result of that was the insurgents and other such bad guys were able to get ahold of some of these caches and build IEDs which have since gone on to kill thousands of American Soldiers.

In the US Army we have this little thing called accountability. As an officer and a commander, I have certain deadlines and benchmarks to meet every year in regard to the training of my Soldiers. If I don't meet these deadlines, even only training 48 days + 2 weeks in the summer per year (I'm in the Reserve), with few to no training funds (all going to Iraq), I get my *** handed to me by my BN Commander.

It appears as though the Iraqi Army has none such concept within their culture. We have been training them for the better part of 3+ years, we have pumped billions of dollars into their country, yet they can't stand up enough forces to maintain their government against a bunch of angry fundamentalists. What we fail to understand is that as long as we're there, the bad guys have an UNLIMITED supply of recruits. I am not saying we pull out tomorrow, but at the same time, until we put SERIOUS SERIOUS pressure on the Iraqi "government" to step up and do their own defense, we're going to be there...it's a slippery slope.

Answer 4

Giving the military free reign without civilian government oversight and control ALWAYS leads to a military overthrow of that government.

Normally, in a conventional war, the leading generals would be aloud to control their military forces. But this NOT a war. It is a hosed up police action for which there can only be a political solution. (unless of course we decide to annex Iraq as the 51st state and really need to wipe the slate clean).

If we had an effective (by that I mean intelligent) commander in chief, our generals would be doing their jobs more effectively.

Answer 5

Absolutely NOT,
Have you taken a good look at what we are calling Generals lately. General Pace, in charge of the Joint Chiefs, formerly known as the Parrot on Rumsfelds shoulder. He sincerly believes that we are doing "Gods Work" in Iraq. He also believes that by helping Israel slaughter Palestinian Christians he will get Tribbled directly to heaven.

There are more general Officers now than when there were 14,000,000 pople in the military. Some of them have jobs that used to be done by enlisted men.

You ask why we can't win, start in the Pentagon and work down.

Answer 6

What I say is that yes the fighting does belong to the military, BUT there are political forces also at work during wartime, so there needs to be a joint effort. This makes for a good balance. Sometimes the military can get quite aggressive and the the politicians sometimes need to draw them back a bit. Patton and MacArthur understood this to the fullest.

Answer 7

What say I.....If you enjoy a military dictatorship and want America to end up like Rome, Persia, Ottaman empire, Communist North Korea, Cuba, Communist Russia, Nazi Germany, The Congo region, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and many others; by all means support your military having no check and balance system.

oh P.S. many politicians are Veterans. Generals answer to them because Generals don't talk to the leaders of other countries, politicians do.

You are obviously a little to simple minded please back away from the computer and go read a history book.

Answer 8

I second wineboy, dude you sound like a retarded eigth grade, you're like, Generals care politicians don't care, let the generals to the fighting ...blah blah blah.
You probably voted for and supported the Bush administration and now you're trying to lump them all into one anonymous group called politicians.

Answer 9

yes,but some politicians are vets,so they may know something. i remember a general saying the war on terror can't be won,i believe it was casey

Answer 10

Your ignorance about the structure of our government is truly breathtaking. Perhaps you need to finish your nigh school education before you ask another question like this and make a bigger fool of yourself. (I'd answer your question, but doing so would be a waste of time and it would hurt my head).