Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tekboy who wrote (28893)	5/8/2002 5:31:59 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

closest in war leadership ability had some rather disabling character flaws... Yep. Having just finished rereading "About Face", brings it home. The "Combat Bums", the "Gunfighters", usually don't make it above Colonel, and get retired out of the service. The guys that make it are the what Hack calls the "Princes of the Pentagon". Who do you think has the stars fall on him, the Colonel who does well in Afghanistan, or the Colonel who manages an "end run" on Rumsfield at the Pentagon, and gets Congress to authorize the "Crusader" artillery system? I'd take a Grant-Sherman combination, myself, rather than rely on either one alone I was just watching a "History" presentation of Grant that pointed out that Sherman's burning of Atlanta probably got Lincoln reelected in 1864 and save a truce which would have meant a southern victory. Oh, well, "coulda, shoulda, woulda" is not confined to investments!