re: "Our Dangerous Commander-in-Chief"

Michael Angley at Big Peace explores the intersection of inexperience and sycophancy.

Money quote(s):

"Lately, in his interactions with key individuals (military leaders, top advisors, and members of Congress, for example), he’s had a tendency to ignore their advice and make decisions on his own. He’s entitled to do that; of course, but given the man’s lack of any military experience – and shallow credentials outside of community organizing – one would think he’d stop and listen to his Generals, at the very least.

When presented recently with options for scaling back military operations in Afghanistan, Obama ignored the recommendations his Generals made and decided to withdraw all surge troops by September 2012. The courses of action the Department of Defense suggested came after careful analysis of the military mission and its requirements. The President’s decision, in contrast, was based upon an election in November 2012. This kind of self-centered decision making is dangerous, and likely to get troops killed."

I'm not sure if there's anyone who believes this decision, and related ones in Iraq, are driven by anything other than electoral political considerations. Anyone? Bueller? The generals aren't fooled, although they'll salute smartly and (perhaps) consider re-reading McMasters book. The troops sure as Hell aren't fooled, and neither are their families.

It remains to be seen how many of the voting public will buy this as the calm, deliberative, decision of a man weighing all the facts and choosing the best course for the Republic as a whole.

(No, seriously. Stop laughing.)

"When I was on active duty in the Air Force, there was something we called “Butter Bar Syndrome.” Newly-minted Second Lieutenants, fresh from their service academies, ROTC programs, or other sources of commissioning, often hit the pavement hard in their first assignments. Eager to demonstrate leadership and to flex their new gold bar rank insignia, they would bark orders to seasoned E-8s and E-9s. Instead of calling them “Chief Jones,” or “Sergeant Smith,” they were called “Stan” or “John.” They would feign listening as these men or women of considerable experience made recommendations, only to take a course of action vastly different from anything they had just heard.

Butter Bar Syndrome resulted from insecurity. Calling a Chief Master Sergeant by his or her first name kept the Lieutenant elevated in status (in the LT’s mind). Ignoring the Chief’s advice showed he was decisive, apt to be recognized by higher command for his leadership acumen, or so the LT hoped. Most Lieutenants learned fairly quickly that all the chest puffing was unnecessary. Oftentimes it took a no-nonsense Chief giving the young officer some closed-door, fatherly counseling to get him on the right track.

Unfortunately, with our current Commander-in-Chief, there appear to be no Chief Master Sergeant types willing to grab him by the scruff of the neck and knock some sense into him."

This is a hazard of our modern spoils system of political appointments. Nobody at that level is going to comment on the transparancy of the emperor's wardrobe.