April 18, 2006

What officers owe their superiors

Richard Holbrooke has an opinion piece in this morning's The Virginian Pilot to the effect that the retired generals speak for those who are, in essence, too afraid to speak out. It is opposite to a piece by a Navy commander that tells the retirees to shut up and head back to the golf course. My take is leaders, particularly senior officers, owe their superiors and especially their subordinates, frank assessments, sound courses of action, and considered judgment. If you can't give that to your generals because you are worried about your career, then you do not deserve your rank or command. I have said controversial things to my superiors, including the generals, and they appreciate the "truth in advertising." My generals ultimately are interested in four things from their junior commanders: what's right, what's wrong, what is my plan to fix what's wrong, and what help I need from them.

Posted by LMC at April 18, 2006 06:18 AM | TrackBack
Comments

What bothers me is that if these guys were so upset, they ought to have made their recommendations, and if they weren't followed, picked their time and issue to resign over. A general officer almost always has his 20 years in, so resignation is always an option -- and a threat he can use on a civilian if the civilian overreaches.

To go along when they disagreed with things and then to come out afterward and say "I disagreed" is really not cool. If a decision was made that you disagreed with and you didn't resign, then you're endorsing it. If the issue is so serious that you need to go running to the WaPo about it, then you should have had the stones to quit over it. Otherwise, the best policy is to keep the mouth shut and say "No comment".

Posted by: The Colossus at April 18, 2006 10:37 AM