A Barbour's Life

I spent over 20 years of my life in an world where the mission was dependent on an expected level of discipline, I understand the expectation that General Mcchrystal tender his resignation. It is this sort of violation that has brought many a airmen, soldier, sailor and marine in front of a military judge and resulted in punitive actions being taken. Is it not therefore fair to expect that the General be somehow reprimanded as well.

I wonder however, how many other outspoken and gritty generals have done something similar and worked through it to go on and do great things. Patton’s slapping incident of the recuperating soldier has made its way into the history books and yet we all recognize him as one of life’s greatest General of all time. There are many others with some level of controversy, General McArthur’s opinions turning into demands of the president, quickly resulted in his removal. Yet his dismissal was quickly forgotten and his return home resulted in a parade attended by millions of people.

So the question is this….. Is there room in the military environment and within this civil administration for a result that would allow a great General to continue to do great things. Obviously the needs of the President to be seen as Commander and Chief are vastly important to both the civilian and military populations, it is also very likely that allowing the General to continue to serve might just be what is needed in this situation. It is fitting in our ever more tolerant society that he continue to lead, and yet might very well embolden the military troops morale and set the tone for a victory in Afghanistan.

What are your thoughts?