Comments on: Obama in open disagreement with military commanders? http://bearingdrift.com/2008/07/22/obama-in-open-disagreement-with-military-commanders/ Fri, 25 May 2012 03:04:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jeremy Hinton http://bearingdrift.com/2008/07/22/obama-in-open-disagreement-with-military-commanders/#comment-4596 Jeremy Hinton Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:16:59 +0000 http://bearingdrift.com/?p=734#comment-4596 I would argue that a timeline is not a tactical decision at all. A strategy defines a set a parameters and goals, within which tactics must be found and utilized to achieve those goals. A change in strategy can certainly impact the viability of certain tactics, and that is where i think the argument lies. The argument to my mind is the following: We have finally found tactics that seem to be working and making progress with the current strategy. If the strategy is reoriented, it hampers the effectiveness of our current tactics. But if our current strategy is misguided, it needs to be changed. And if that means we need to find a new set of tactics to see through the success of a new strategy, then thats what needs to happen. And i have faith in the ability of our military commanders to do just that. I would argue that a timeline is not a tactical decision at all. A strategy defines a set a parameters and goals, within which tactics must be found and utilized to achieve those goals. A change in strategy can certainly impact the viability of certain tactics, and that is where i think the argument lies. The argument to my mind is the following:

We have finally found tactics that seem to be working and making progress with the current strategy. If the strategy is reoriented, it hampers the effectiveness of our current tactics.

But if our current strategy is misguided, it needs to be changed. And if that means we need to find a new set of tactics to see through the success of a new strategy, then thats what needs to happen. And i have faith in the ability of our military commanders to do just that.

]]> By: Cato http://bearingdrift.com/2008/07/22/obama-in-open-disagreement-with-military-commanders/#comment-4589 Cato Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:08:48 +0000 http://bearingdrift.com/?p=734#comment-4589 mmmm I remember reading something about civiliam control of the military... mmmm I remember reading something about civiliam control of the military…

]]> By: J.R. http://bearingdrift.com/2008/07/22/obama-in-open-disagreement-with-military-commanders/#comment-4583 J.R. Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:30:34 +0000 http://bearingdrift.com/?p=734#comment-4583 Jeremy, I would agree with your analysis, if that was what Obama was saying. At its root, Obama is saying he's going to have a timeline. Commanders are saying that this is a bad tactical decision...exactly the narrow scope you view as their primary responsibility. Jeremy,
I would agree with your analysis, if that was what Obama was saying. At its root, Obama is saying he’s going to have a timeline. Commanders are saying that this is a bad tactical decision…exactly the narrow scope you view as their primary responsibility.

]]> By: Jeremy Hinton http://bearingdrift.com/2008/07/22/obama-in-open-disagreement-with-military-commanders/#comment-4579 Jeremy Hinton Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:11:13 +0000 http://bearingdrift.com/?p=734#comment-4579 I think his response was well reasoned. There are many, many facets to our conflict in Iraq, some of which lie outside the focus of the commanders on the ground. I don't expect the field commanders to concern themselves with the socio-political implications of the war, nor the economic and financial impact of funding it. But I would be very disappointed in a president who did not take those and other factors into consideration when plotting our country's future. To answer your question, i believe on tactical matters regarding the war, the commanders on the ground are the best resource we have. But regarding long term strategic interests and implications, to act purely based on the narrow scope of their responsibities would be and abdication of responsibility. I think his response was well reasoned. There are many, many facets to our conflict in Iraq, some of which lie outside the focus of the commanders on the ground. I don’t expect the field commanders to concern themselves with the socio-political implications of the war, nor the economic and financial impact of funding it. But I would be very disappointed in a president who did not take those and other factors into consideration when plotting our country’s future.

To answer your question, i believe on tactical matters regarding the war, the commanders on the ground are the best resource we have. But regarding long term strategic interests and implications, to act purely based on the narrow scope of their responsibities would be and abdication of responsibility.

]]>