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: Dayuhan who wrote (35132)	7/28/2002 9:26:44 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

There is a kind of unseemliness in these war cries from Wolfowitz and Perle, who will neither fight in them or command them. There is no question we live in a society in which civilian leadership does and should control the military. But there are civilians and then there are civilians. War hungry, ex-academic, neocon civilians are to be watched carefully.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (35132)	7/28/2002 11:24:33 AM
From: Win Smith	Respond to of 281500

So Perle feels that the military is not equipped to assess threat, but that he is. If we leave the decision up to politicians and political appointees, though, how do we assure that political factors unrelated to national security don't creep into the debate? Then there's the issue of what position Perle is pontificating from. Who appointed him to anything? That is a somewhat rhetorical point, of course. Protege Wolfowitz is only a phone call away when more "official" input is required from the Dark Prince. I'm sure that's a well worn speed dial button. Plus, there's no doubt a hundred or so neocon op-ed types at Perle's disposal when a little mass marketing of some subtle variant of the one true neocon line is required. And what the heck, Perle is somewhat less rebarbative than the king of "American public intellectuals", Henry K. You want "moral clarity", who better to go to than the chief architect of the Cambodia sideshow in the Viet Nam era?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (35132)	7/29/2002 2:05:31 AM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So Perle feels that the military is not equipped to assess threat, but that he is. If we leave the decision up to politicians and political appointees, though, how do we assure that political factors unrelated to national security don't creep into the debate? This is precisely the issue that Eliot Cohen's new book Supreme Command grapples with. I'm no fan of Perle's, but I agree with him in this particular case. The military's job is to explain to their civilian superiors what they think they need to do what task, and what they think the consequences of various policy alternatives might be. Then it's the politicians' job (in both the executive and legislative branches) to decide what to do, and the military's further job to execute their orders as best they can or resign. You're correct that less-than-noble-and-universal interests might be guiding the politicians, but hey--it's still a democracy, and they're the only ones with the authority to make the big calls. tb@godhelpusall.com