Academic inexperience gone too far?

Just what do our best and brightest learn in school that will help them in warfighting for our side? Just what can be taught about Eastern thought? Most things Eastern thought can only be learned by experience, that is, by exposure to those who state their objectives and logic to achieve it. How many have tribal experience?

This is an armchair general type of review. Here’s why. We are losing winning the peace in Iraq, both at the D.C. level and the Iraq level. Incredibly, the normal reason I hear is D.C. based. There is still no one person in charge of the campaign at either the D.C. or Iraq level of effort. This idea is so fundamental to waging war, and winning the peace, that it is embarrassing to speak about, until today from this citizens point of view. And this is since 2003, to boot. Why is there not one person in charge of the effort? Have buzz words like inter-agency cooperation, action officers, cover your ass point papers, and frustration reports of those in the National Security Council (NSC) become more important than the objective set by our President?

The normal answer is that turf and friction in interagency battles in D.C. trumps all. The bureaucracy in D.C. trumps all, to include the elected Presidents objectives. If this is the case, and even if the public elects a Democratic president and Congress, then the bureaucracy has taken charge, to include losing the winning of the peace in Iraq. Now it is time for citizens to step in, since politicians and bureaucrats can’t. I can almost disbelieve what I just said, the President or Congress is not in charge.

I am disturbed by the minions he has hired at the NSC. They are a bunch of educated fools with little experience in real life and warfighting. Nobody challenges their education or intents and love of their county, but at times like this we as a nation need smart and experienced people running the show, since that is the operational method I believe our President has gone with in Iraq. So unless he will hire and fire (gracefully would be appropriate) people in the NSC, or get more involved in the war he led us into, then winning the peace is still in doubt. Like I said up front, I am being am arm chair general, but also care, a lot.

Politically the win the peace objective method is obvious, mostly in the region. Step in, knock a few heads, fire a few people, and finally set up and ensure unity of effort. Along the way treat the locals as locals, which will take some killings. Otherwise, come home. Time is not on the Presidents side if other courses of action are followed. Winning the peace is obvious as a course of action. Only our President can choose how he goes about it.