Quote:
Originally Posted by regular.joe
If you are an officer, or a cadet of some kind, you better get your head out of your 4th point of contact when it comes to your ideas of enlisted men and women.
|
Apparently you missed my point entirely. The point is why some people even after 20 years service will never be anything more than enlisted man material.
The service defines a major difference between officer and enlisted man for good reason. Enlisted men who do understand the bigger picture (ie a concept called the strategic objective) may become officers. Even Powell and Shinseki (I believe) rose through the ranks this way because they could grasp and categorize these larger perspectives. They could see the bigger picture. Clearly neither lookout123 nor Urbane Guerrilla can.
Well defined is the purpose of war - which neither nay sayer still grasps. The purpose of war is to move that conflict to a negotiation table. There is no purpose to or value of war IF the negotiation table can solve the problem.
Numerous recent examples of people with an 'officer material' perspective exist. Holbrook got Milosevic to negotiation himself right out of office. Jimmy Carter avoided war by simply addressing Kim Jong Il's problem. Powell and Jimmy Carter solved Haiti without military conflict. Kennedy's grasp of the bigger picture in Cuba and his repeated 'put downs' of Gen Curtis LeMay's solution is why we all exist. In every case, war would have accomplished nothing while negotiation solved everything. These concepts are too difficult for the enlisted man UG who can only find solutions in overt conflict.
Others have danced around (have some grasp) of those basic military concepts including a silly, unnecessary 4th generation war in North Korea. They also see the futility in what an enlisted man (who will never be officer material) cannot.
Grasping the need for a strategic objective is fundamental. No strategic objective means no victory. What is the strategic objective in N Korea? UG knows if we bomb them into the stone age, then we will win. He never learned the lessons from Nam or "Mission Accomplished".
I don't know what your above 'quoted point' is about. However we have been through this before. Was it Onyxcougar who also misinterpreted that statement by saying her enlisted man father worked in HQ? Yes, some enlisted men who never become officers can see the bigger picture. But that is completely irrelevant to my point.
My point is about a 20 year enlisted man who could never be officer material as demonstrated by his solutions to everything: more war and bigger guns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla
I'm just starting to read Thomas P.M. Barnett's Blueprint For Action: A Future Worth Creating. So far, I'm fascinated. I'll probably be talking about this book's ideas from time to time.
|
Then he discovered Barnett discusses, for example, how to secure oil by doing NOT what George Jr, wacko extremists, and UG recommend. UG never posts ideas from a book that is quite comprehensive and that demonstrates how his idea of military imposition does not work. In fact, UG perverts quotes from Barnett's book to again promote a 'big dic' solution.
Some who will never be anything but enlisted man material read Thomas Barnett and still completely miss the point - the bigger perspective. For example, UG never comprehended Phase Four planning. 'Planning for the peace' before conflict even begins is completely lost on UG and lookout123. That means grasping concepts well beyond what is in front of a gun barrel. That means seeing the bigger picture: officer material.
These concepts were why I could see the dangers of "Mission Accomplished". These concepts - the same mistakes made in the liberation of Kuwait - were unexpected. Those same people would never make the same mistake again? Cheney, Wolfovitz, Rumsfeld, Feith, etc would never be so dumb as to ignore basic military doctrine? And yet that is exactly what these fools did. They, like UG, also view resolutions only in 'big dic' concepts. No wonder they would do anything necessary to create war in Iran, North Korea, and a shooting war with China over a silly spy plane. Not officer material because they do not grasp basic MS101 concepts such as strategic objectives or the purpose of war.
The enlisted man was not disparaged. Exampled is an enlisted men who never will become officer material - who cannot see solutions beyond the point of a gun. These are 'big dic' types; who advocate war as a solution to everything.