In any case, decisions on troop levels in the American system of government are not made by any general or set of generals but by the civilian leadership of the war effort.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Success in past U.S. conflicts has not been strictly the result of military leadership but rather the judgment of the president in choosing generals and setting broad strategy.
Under our Constitution, military leaders have no choice but to endorse the president's decision after giving him their best advice.
Decisions! And a general, a commander in chief who has not got the quality of decision, then he is no good.
We have a sufficient political class, and the military doesn't have to get involved in high national office. The days of doing that, post-Civil War and post-World War II, are gone.
It is not the business of generals to shoot one another.
The American people should not wonder where their military leaders draw the line between military advice and political preference. And our nation's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines should not wonder about the political leanings and motivations of their leaders.
Military leaders aren't made. They are born. To be a good leader, you have to have something in your character to cause people to follow you.
Whether you're a second lieutenant working with a captain and a lieutenant colonel, or a four-star general working with the Office Secretary of Defense and the White House, the decision makers have got to have ground truth. Otherwise, the decisions they make could be flawed - and that can be dangerous.
The American people have no control over what the military does. We have no say in American foreign policy.
A general is just as good or just as bad as the troops under his command make him.