Running head: MILITARY LEADERS QUESTIONING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Running head: MILITARY LEADERS QUESTIONING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES"

Joleen Mitchell
7 years ago
Views:

1 Military Leaders 1 Running head: MILITARY LEADERS QUESTIONING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES Military Leaders Questioning the President of the United States MSG Scott A. Schade United States Army Sergeants Major Academy Class #58 SGM David C. Taylor January 3, 2008

2 Military Leaders 2 Military Leaders Questioning the President of the United States Retired and active military leaders that question the policies and decisions of the President of the United States affect the health, morale and discipline of any Army organization. The audacity of leaders that speak directly against policies in public should be considered to be in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The impacts of these indiscretions could never be measured, but indisposed into the hearts and minds of the countless Soldiers that served with them through the years. Leaders that decide to go against the norm are out for their own personal gain, trying to write books and become guest anchors on cable news networks. There seems to be a significant number of recent retired Generals and Admirals with the intentions of defacing the current administration. I don t believe these generals are necessarily looking out for the welfare of the Soldiers, but their own futures. There is a significant difference in disagreeing with your superiors within the confines of a boardroom or an office; it is another to speak to the press or other public figures. Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez, the first Multi-National Force Iraq Commander retired on 1 November During an interview on 12 October 2007, he blamed the Bush administration for a catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan and denounced the current surge strategy as a desperate move that will not achieve long-term stability. The fact of the matter was that this man was entrusted with over 100,000 Soldiers in his command and it was his tactics and strategies that we were utilizing to try to win the war during the first 18 months of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Since he was in charge during the Abu Ghriab prison abuse, he was faulted by the American public for his unknowing stance of the treatment of

3 Military Leaders 3 prisoners. I believe that he came out to the American public to try to save face. I find it truly intolerable that this man that was entrusted to do the best job for his country failed at his job and is trying to find ways to justify his own method of handling the war. In the same interview he also stated he was considering a book, and promised further public statements criticizing officials by name. Again, I ask, who does this really benefit? I don t believe the Army, the current administration, or the general public will ever truly benefit from his name calling. Two former top Generals of the United States Army, I believe did the right thing for their country. Former Secretary of State and Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell and Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff General Eric Shinseki, both believed to be the top two Generals of the last two decades. These two very adamant Soldiers were faced with similar decisions while they were part of the Bush administration. General Shinseki stated before congress, the Secretary of Defense, and the President that the United States was about to intrude on a war that would last for years and it would take over 300,000 Soldiers to pacify, stabilize, and rebuild Iraq. I believe this Soldier went about his actions in the right way, testifying before Congress and drawing out his plan on paper to brief Donald Rumsfeld and the President. To me, no other General or person in the United States has a more inalienable right to speak out more than he. Instead, General (Retired) Shinseki hasn t came out on CNN or FOX news to say I told you so or write a book on the ineffective war. To me, this man has character beyond his peers. If you try to get your influence your leadership to make the right decisions and you get told No to your plan ten times, it s probably time to salute the man, and follow his plan or time to salute the flag, and time to retire. Colin Powell, is also a man of character, he was not put in the best spot when he testified at the United Nations on the reasons why we want to utilize preemptive action against Iraq.

4 Military Leaders 4 After the war initial began and no weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) were found, he was viewed as being the man that told the lies for the President. Instead of critizing the administration he worked for he rucked-up and decided that he would step down as Secretary of State. Since that time he not spoke out publically against his own colleagues. He instead, is held in high regard for all the previous years of service he gave to his country. President Ronald Reagan who was admired by most of the military had his own moments with leaders of the military. In 1986, during the peak of the cold war, 22 retired Generals from the United States and over 50 other Generals and Admirals form other countries, including Russia signed a statement, showing their passion for nuclear disarmament. Of course during this time President Reagan was standing tough on his policies of a bigger Army and the need for deterrent nuclear ballistic weapons. He had also introduced the theory of the Star Wars program that would shoot down any Russia ballistic missile that would invade the United States or ally airspace. Looking back at President Reagan s history, it s amazing what he has done to reshape the current world we are living in. The fact that the U.S. leaders during this time held true to their beliefs and decided to speak against his policies was unsound. At this point in time we were heavily engaged in the Cold War. If these U.S. Generals wanted to speak out against their President they should have done it as a sole identity, not involve other countries, including our adversary, Russia. The First Amendment guarantees free speech for everyone. This is an unalienable right that all Soldiers protect day-to-day. There is also a creed we live by in the Army; we do not question our Leaders. We can scrutinize their decisions, make recommendations to persuade them to see things in different ways, but in the end when your military leaders tell you to

5 Military Leaders 5 accomplish a mission and it s not unethical or illegal, it s time to salute, and move out, and do your duty. If young Soldiers were to question their leaders or speak out against them, we would have them standing before us, trying to take pay and rank from them. There is no difference in a Private questioning a Sergeant to a General questioning and bad-mouthing a President. The fact is, it is disrespectful and is unsound to provoke unrest within the population and use your position to gain from the mistakes of an administration or command. Conclusion There is tactful way to question orders, policies and decisions. It is behind closed doors in a setting suitable for conversation. The same oath that you swear to served under should be the same one you live with the rest of your life. At times, it is your place to question, questionable orders. However, the way you go about it will show the true character of your sole and the very patriotism that you claim to stand so firmly on.

Equal marriage What the government says

Equal marriage What the government says Easy Read Document Important This is a big booklet, but you may not want to read all of it. Look at the list of contents on pages 3, 4 and 5. It shows what is in