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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Dorsey who wrote (6873)	3/18/2008 12:02:46 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13056

I agree that war shouldn't be micromanaged from the home front. That doesn't mean people should have or express opinions about it, or even that the broad strategy of the war can't or shouldn't be determined politically. For an example I'll use WWII in Europe. The decision to have war was political. The decision of the allies to land in France (which would be considered to be determining the front, or launching a new major operation) was also political, and I don't really have a problem with that. But FDR and Churchill did not determine the specific beaches where the landings would happen, or which units would land on what beach at what time. With today's rapid communications, and world wide TV images of wars, there is more temptation to over control from the center, be that political control, or even just senior generals and admirals trying to manage down to too low of level. To the extent that this happens you tend to have a problem. With modern communications someone attempting to control everything from the center could do a better job than in the past, but better job is relative, it would still likely be a bad job for multiple reasons.