Are we too nice now? Do we need to fire more leaders?

2015-05-23T05:51:13-04:00

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/good-guys-make-bad-generals/?fb_action_ids= [login to see] 233&fb_action_types=og.likes

‘Good Guys’ Make Bad Generals

How poor leadership loses wars for the U.S. military

Response by PO3 Jonathan Cooper made May 23 at 2015 5:54 AM

2015-05-23T05:54:25-04:00

Read something similar about why jerks make better bosses...may be some truth to this.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made May 23 at 2015 6:50 AM

2015-05-23T06:50:26-04:00

It's all about context. During WWII it was about winning PERIOD to wipe Nazi Germany off the map. We needed tough as nails leaders who could push the limits. Vietnam started the "winning the hearts and minds" campaign because it was about turning back the tide of communism on a small peninsula. Today we are fighting restricted wars of containment - for lack of a better term - to stabilize countries in a region where religion and state are one and slice out the "cancer" while trying to let the "body" heal. We need leaders with a gentler touch because of the situation our government is putting us into. Kill, but don't overkill. Make friends with these guys but get rid of the guys 2 streets over. Back this group but not that group. It must be like walking on eggshells for those at the top and I do not envy but sympathize with the position they are in and the delicate decisions they must weigh and balance. GEN Patton must be doing cart wheels in his grave.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2015 8:38 AM

2015-05-23T08:38:23-04:00

Sir,

I skimmed the article. I was just saying last night that we need to stop confusing the aid mission and military operations. State decided that their job was too dangerous for them to do it so they dumped it on us. Now, I feel what we are trying to do is all convoluted and we are not really trained for it. They need to be doing that mission.

Let's look at the Hearts and Minds concept. During WWII did we worry about winning the "hearts and minds" of the civilian population? Or did we go in there and earn their respect and admiration by handing the bad guys a crushing defeat? Yeah. That works, everyday. People understand that if there is a war, there will be civilian casualties. Fight the fight, accomplish the mission...*then* rebuild. It works.

All this is the long way of saying it's not that our leadership is "too nice," it's that our mission doesn't make sense. It is like hiring a team of master plumbers to do interior design and then blaming them when you don't like the results.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2015 9:17 AM

2015-05-23T09:17:06-04:00

There is a time and a place for everything, and quite honestly you just need to know the difference. Leadership at points need to be empathetic, and other times a hardass. Knowing the when to be both is the difference between a good leader and a great leader.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made May 23 at 2015 9:25 AM

2015-05-23T09:25:43-04:00

So, we haven't been at "WAR" since Japan surrendered in 1945... Can't blame a General for acting on the wishes of his civilian oversight.

Maybe we actually need politicians that are willing to commit to something more than "peacekeeping" and "police actions" so that potential opposition to our "winning the hearts and minds" is dead by the time we get around to enacting our modern versions of the "Marshall Plan"

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 23 at 2015 2:02 PM

2015-05-23T14:02:18-04:00

We are nice guys trying to fight one of the worlds greatest evil organizations. As of now, only total war can deny them the will and ability to fight.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2015 4:00 PM

2015-05-23T16:00:41-04:00

Far too nice.