tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12796551.post7020481408655426445..comments2024-03-26T05:18:53.709-04:00Comments on Pen and Sword: Iraq: The Perpetual Disaster MachineJeff Huberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14146644937683409726noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12796551.post-91380776374874396002007-03-06T01:02:00.000-05:002007-03-06T01:02:00.000-05:00EdnSted said... .......I listened to the first 3 p...EdnSted said... <BR/><BR/><BR/>.......I listened to the first 3 panels of witnesses this morning at the hearings on the problems at Walter Reed. When Kiley and Weightman were testifying, I kept thinking that they probably weren't fooling anyone other than themselves......<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>I listened to some of that as well and had about the same reaction. While I have never had a great deal of faith in senior Army leadership I find that I have similar concerns about the senior leaders in the Marine Corps as well these days. That is not a position that I ever expected to find myself taking and certainly not one that I relish.<BR/><BR/> The last witness before CSPAN cut away to some other Congressional hearings on matters of extreme trivia was General Peter Schoomaker, Chief of Staff of the Army. He began by telling the convened panel that he had spent thirty-three years in the Army. All well and good. He may be a fine officer. I don't know him.<BR/><BR/> I then looked at the six plus decks of ribbons that he wore topped by a Combat Infantryman's Badge (CIB). He also was adorned with more pins, gewgaws and shinny metal devises than we used to see on the combined chests of a Soviet Field Marshal and a Uruguayan Admiral. The only thing lacking was a multi-colored sash of some sort slung over his shoulder. However, upon closer examination he seemed to have no personal combat decorations. He had been awarded two Bronze Stars but he did not wear a combat "V" on the ribbon (only a Gold Star indicating two awards). Still to the average civilian he must have looked most impressive and martial.<BR/><BR/> So I pulled up his official biography. <BR/><BR/>http://www.army.mil/leaders/leaders/csa/biography.html<BR/><BR/><BR/> He graduated from College in 1969 but somehow managed to miss the Viet Nam War. His biographical sketch for some reason omits his commissioning date in the Army. There is nothing I could see in his official biography that would lead me to believe this officer has ever seen much combat and certainly none at the platoon, company or battalion level. One wonders if he has ever heard a shot fired in anger at a range that might possibly have his name on it. Yet this is the Army officer appointed as the Chief of Staff of the Army. Admittedly stranger things have happened. Walter Reed had the same job at the turn of the 20th century and he was a medical officer. However, those were much different times.<BR/><BR/> I'm still puzzled how Schoomaker qualified for a CIB but I'm sure that Army regulations make that possible in some fashion. Those devises used to be highly prized in the combat arms branches of the Army prior to the Viet Nam War. I don't know what they really mean in today's Army.<BR/><BR/> I don't want to unfairly single out General Schoomaker. If you look at the biographical sketches of most senior general officers in the Army and Marine Corps today you will find a similar pattern. No combat experience at the platoon, company, battalion or regimental levels. Lots of decks of ribbons awarded for being a really fine staff officer but none for actually leading troops in combat.<BR/><BR/> My point being that the current senior leadership of our military really doesn't have much in the way of personal combat experience on which to base their actions and decisions. What they know is largely vicarious or the product of the doctrine taught at the various service schools combined with carefully orchestrated peace time maneuvers and exercises but not real combat experience. As close as most of those officers ever came to real combat was being at a Command Post during the very brief and one-sided Gulf War.<BR/><BR/> We'd probably be better served by retiring every officer about the grade of major general and promoting the best of the current crop of field grade officers. At least they would bring with them some actual and relevant combat experience from the type of wars that we are now engaged in fighting.<BR/><BR/> I don't think you'd see officers of that sort allowing situations that we see at Walter Reed and elsewhere to exist. As far as I know Dereliction of Duty is still a charge under UCMJ and is equally applicable to officers of flag rank.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12796551.post-67459278054216171472007-03-05T16:24:00.000-05:002007-03-05T16:24:00.000-05:00This problem certainly has long term consequences ...This problem certainly has long term consequences our military. How can we attract (and much more importantly, retain) the best and brightest people when this is what they have to look forward to? Would you encourage your children to consider a career of military service today?<BR/><BR/>I listened to the first 3 panels of witnesses this morning at the hearings on the problems at Walter Reed. When Kiley and Weightman were testifying, I kept thinking that they probably weren't fooling anyone other than themselves... but maybe I'm wrong about that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12796551.post-65013764023019052822007-03-05T16:20:00.000-05:002007-03-05T16:20:00.000-05:00Think if we threatened a nuclear attack the insurg...Think if we threatened a nuclear attack the insurgents would stop? "If you don't stop the madness RIGHT NOW we're nuking you. Get your shit together or everyone dies." That's a strategy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12796551.post-43373533028175990822007-03-05T15:23:00.000-05:002007-03-05T15:23:00.000-05:00No professional uses a hammer anymore. It's a nail...No professional uses a hammer anymore. It's a nailgun. These dummies kept trying to use a hammer when we have plenty of nailguns available.<BR/>Maybe we need to send GW and all Senators and Congressmen to be inmbedded with a Marine platoon for 3 months. That would solve all these BS problems one way or another.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12796551.post-68884852954974447962007-03-05T13:50:00.000-05:002007-03-05T13:50:00.000-05:00Having watched this same strategy fail in Viet Nam...Having watched this same strategy fail in Viet Nam, I'm convinced that in highly likely event plan A fails, the solution will be implement plan A again - and this time we really, really mean it.<BR/><BR/>When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12796551.post-23959845236808967212007-03-05T12:38:00.000-05:002007-03-05T12:38:00.000-05:00Jeff, I wouldn't be surprised to see the "bad guys...Jeff, I wouldn't be surprised to see the "bad guys" just disappear into the woodwork of Baghdad & vicinity long enough (with a little encouragement aka "baksheesh") for the current administration to (once again) declare mission accomplished. When mission's accomplished, we can withdraw forces except for strong cordons around oil fields and pipelines. And the Shi'a and Sunni can once again pick up where they left off shooting each other. The current president can look every bit the stud he fancies himself to be, the neocon agenda of a fragmented Iraq becomes fact, Halliburton, et al, get more profitable than they are now. Win-win situation, wouldn't you say? Or is my cynicism in high gear today?Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15308567394308330867noreply@blogger.com