Update and a reading assignment

Back in the saddle? I wouldn't count on it, but I thought I would include some brief bullets on what I've been up to, but more importantly, I want to share an article from Slate.com and talk about the source of the article.

The Update

So, I finally "finished" the main stem quest of the computer game, Oblivion. I haven't played more than one hour of video games since then (and that was like 4 months ago, very impressive, I hear my imaginary readers saying).

I've read some books. I finished Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the Unitied States." I have many thoughts on this book, but couldn't possibly include them in short a review. I'll say this, PHUSA is very rough read, only recommened for the bravest, most determined readers. I read both Eats, Shoots and Leaves and Talk to the Hand by the same author, Lynn Truss. ES&L was perhaps the articulate, well-engineered book I've ever read. A great read, I would recommend to everyone; Talk to the Hand, not so much. I also read a short book called Longitude. It was great history book about the making of the first very accurate watch for navigation; awesome read, highly recommended.

I actually started my professional military education (PME) correspondence course. I've taken 3 of 5 tests, and I'm playing hookie from studying for the fourth as I type this. Some of the reading is actually pretty interesting. I'm almost enjoying the course. It is required for my job and rank.

Of course, I attended a planning conference in Germany. It is a great story, and given sufficient time and desire, I may even tell you about, dear imaginary reader! Oh yeah, spouse of fourth and I took a bus tour of Italy. You are jealous. It was even better than you already think it could be! Well, maybe not, but it was pretty awesome.

So there is an update. I would love to write about some these things in detail, but I really do have to work on my "PME."

But before I go...

Generalship

You really must read this article on Slate.com: It's Patriotic To Criticize: How our generals got so mediocre. Kaplan is a hard hitter. I'm going to soft play this, but let me spell out my feelings on this topic as I explained to some folks at dinner party a few weeks ago. I've been serving a long time. I started serving and sought a commission before the current war in Iraq got started. To express my true feeling about this war, I would almost have to resign. To resign at this point of life would literally cost me thousands of dollars a month for the rest of my life in retirement pension.

The point I want to make here is that it would also cost some of these generals thousands of dollars a month as well. The difference: I wouldn't get a pension at all; a general who gave a honest and correct assessment of the situation in Iraq and was summarily fired would get his pension, but at a reduced grade, maybe 2 star general instead of 4 star general. A four-star's base pay is about $14,500 per month, so this would equate to $3,000 a month difference for a two-star general. Obviously the General would be giving up more in prestige and post-employment opportunities, but I think he would be okay. My family and I would be significantly worse off.

So the question is, why have so few generals stepped and told the story straight. The Slate.com article points us to this awesome piece by active-duty army LtCol Yingling, A Failure in Generalship. Americans should be reading this. It is important to understand the military organization, and the inherent problems with an organization as large as the Department of Defense.

But being a bit of a conspiracy theorist, I think Yingling is only getting part of the story. It is no secret that the military is heavily conservative, Republican. This demographic holds all the way up. I seriously believe many generals would've fallen on their proverbial swords under command of liberal president, but they are unwilling to damage their own party. Contempt of the Clinton Administration often open and obvious.

But in the end this theory doesn't really cover the whole story. Most generals are incredible people and patriots of extraordinary standing. They are probably are very concerned that our country not go through the whole Vietnam thing again, so they are attempting achieve our President's policies with the available tools at hand. They know how damaging the draft during Vietnam was for our country, and they are following the laws of land and staying out the policy decisions. We don't want to live in a country where the military doesn't follow the orders of the elected President, not one bit. The generals are upholding our constitution as best they can, and you can't ask for much more.

This brings us full circle of course. I've always said, and I think Yingling makes the same point. If the policy (war in Iraq) doesn't have the full support of American people, then ultimately the responsibility lies with the civilian leadership.

Boy, I can't make a point without rambling anymore... I may need to work on that. This is complicated issue though, I give myself a break.