Thomas Sowell: Beyond the McChrystal Flap
[Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.]
The flap about Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s “resignation” was nobody’s finest hour. But there are some painful lessons in all this that go beyond any of the individuals involved — the general, the president, or any of the officials at the Pentagon or the State Department.
What is far more important than all these individuals put together are the lives of the tens of thousands of Americans fighting in Afghanistan. What is even more important is the national security of this country....
In no previous period of history has an American president announced a timetable for pulling out troops. They may have had a timetable in mind, but none of these presidents was irresponsible enough to tell the world — including our enemies — when our troops would be leaving....
Some people see a parallel between McChrystal’s “resignation” and Pres. Harry Truman’s firing of Gen. Douglas MacArthur. No two situations are ever exactly the same, but some of the parallels are striking. MacArthur was proud not only of his military victories but also of the fact that he won those victories with lower casualty rates among his troops than other generals had. But General MacArthur, too, was not always discreet in what he said — and also had reasons to have contempt for politicians, going all the way back to FDR, who cut the army’s budget in the 1930s, while Nazi Germany and imperial Japan were building up huge military machines that would kill many an American before it was all over.
If we are creating an environment where only political generals can survive, what will that mean for America’s ability to win military victories without massive casualty rates? Or to win military victories at all?
Read entire article at National Review
The flap about Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s “resignation” was nobody’s finest hour. But there are some painful lessons in all this that go beyond any of the individuals involved — the general, the president, or any of the officials at the Pentagon or the State Department.
What is far more important than all these individuals put together are the lives of the tens of thousands of Americans fighting in Afghanistan. What is even more important is the national security of this country....
In no previous period of history has an American president announced a timetable for pulling out troops. They may have had a timetable in mind, but none of these presidents was irresponsible enough to tell the world — including our enemies — when our troops would be leaving....
Some people see a parallel between McChrystal’s “resignation” and Pres. Harry Truman’s firing of Gen. Douglas MacArthur. No two situations are ever exactly the same, but some of the parallels are striking. MacArthur was proud not only of his military victories but also of the fact that he won those victories with lower casualty rates among his troops than other generals had. But General MacArthur, too, was not always discreet in what he said — and also had reasons to have contempt for politicians, going all the way back to FDR, who cut the army’s budget in the 1930s, while Nazi Germany and imperial Japan were building up huge military machines that would kill many an American before it was all over.
If we are creating an environment where only political generals can survive, what will that mean for America’s ability to win military victories without massive casualty rates? Or to win military victories at all?