Posted on Jan 3, 2019
Trump Escalates His Assault on Civil-Military Relations
1.49K
9
12
4
4
0
Need I say more?
Trump Escalates His Assault on Civil-Military Relations
Posted from theatlantic.com
Donald Trump
GEN
Toxic Leadership
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 4
3
3
0
What kind of moron do you have to be to write an article about how firing a general is somehow a threat to Civil-Military Relations? The author's unstated assumption is that generals need to be pacified or placated to or they will rebel against the constitution. This entire article is a load of rubbish. There is no nor can there ever be an assault on civil-military relations from the commander and chief. We support his legal decisions. If the president were to disband congress or arrest the supreme court justices then there would be no more civil-military relations because we support and defend the constitution, this article is a bunch of malarkey.
(3)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) - Democracies/Republics almost always fail internally. But the hyerboyle is without merit, and the argument about keeping generals within the good graces of the president is again fake news, Last I remember Obama had a rapid turn over of SEC Defs as well primarily due to the yes man attitude as well.
I certainly agree with the high hopes and wishing for better candidates, but that has always been the case and won't be changing anytime soon.
I certainly agree with the high hopes and wishing for better candidates, but that has always been the case and won't be changing anytime soon.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
MAJ (Join to see) - respectfully, it’s not fake news. The article is essentially an Op-Ed piece. It’s not a news story.
And while the previous administration had several Degense Secretaries, it wasn’t, “primarily due to the yes man attitude as well.” He retained Gates from President Bush. After several years, Gates retired. Panetta took over. After a few years, he retired. Hagel took over, and he was asked to resign. Carter took over, and served until a new president was elected.
Anyway, back to the Op-Ed. It is not without merit. The point isn’t about placating Generals. That’s a very basic, surface level of thinking. While civilian leadership is unquestionably in charge, any type of relationship is a two way street. Mutual respect makes it work quite a bit better. And that’s not what’s happening right now.
The point is that Hyperbole can help demonstrate the worst case scenario, and how it might play out over the long term. Imagine 10 or 12 increasingly Trump-style administrations. Honestly, our military (and appointed civilians) would be so diluted with yes-men cowards or they wouldn’t respect smooth transition of civilian control. I hope that never happens, but I can envision that scenario.
Good leaders need yes-men. They also need subordinates that can tell them ‘no’. (Or just the truth, or hard reality of any situation). And they’re smart enough to know that they need both. I don’t think our administration realizes or appreciates the need for both. And it attempts to stomp out the latter.
And while the previous administration had several Degense Secretaries, it wasn’t, “primarily due to the yes man attitude as well.” He retained Gates from President Bush. After several years, Gates retired. Panetta took over. After a few years, he retired. Hagel took over, and he was asked to resign. Carter took over, and served until a new president was elected.
Anyway, back to the Op-Ed. It is not without merit. The point isn’t about placating Generals. That’s a very basic, surface level of thinking. While civilian leadership is unquestionably in charge, any type of relationship is a two way street. Mutual respect makes it work quite a bit better. And that’s not what’s happening right now.
The point is that Hyperbole can help demonstrate the worst case scenario, and how it might play out over the long term. Imagine 10 or 12 increasingly Trump-style administrations. Honestly, our military (and appointed civilians) would be so diluted with yes-men cowards or they wouldn’t respect smooth transition of civilian control. I hope that never happens, but I can envision that scenario.
Good leaders need yes-men. They also need subordinates that can tell them ‘no’. (Or just the truth, or hard reality of any situation). And they’re smart enough to know that they need both. I don’t think our administration realizes or appreciates the need for both. And it attempts to stomp out the latter.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) - Valid points, I quite remember many of the instances that brought up the retirement were due to their failure to be a yes man. In this article the hyperbole is so disproportionate that is detracts from the credibility of the author.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
MAJ (Join to see) - for sure, but that amount of retirements is far outnumbered by the amount of unremarkable, middle of the pack careers blissfully trudged through by dutiful yes-men. The inability to foresee and plan for possible future outcomes, regardless of how far fetched they may seem at the time, has ended a career or two, also.
But I guess at some point, we just have to agree to disagree. Best of luck
But I guess at some point, we just have to agree to disagree. Best of luck
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google