View Full Version : Controversial Article
I read the article, the most interesting part is the section titled; "The Generals We Need." http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/05/2635198
It's rare I guess for an Officer to write something like this while still being on active duty.
"ARMY LT. COL. PAUL YINGLING is deputy commander, 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment. He has served two tours in Iraq, another in Bosnia and a fourth in Operation Desert Storm. He holds a master's degree in political science from the University of Chicago. The views expressed here are the author's and do not necessarily reflect those of the Army or the Defense Department."
If America desires creative intelligence and moral courage in its general officer corps, it must create a system that rewards these qualities.
I think this statement could also be applied to the NCO Corps as well sometimes. It seems all too often that everyone is afraid to "think outside the box" and are stuck on the "that's the way we've always done it..." mentality. People need to step up and not be afraid to color outside the lines every now and then.
The power and the responsibility to identify such generals lie with the U.S. Congress. If Congress does not act, our Jena awaits us.
Not sure how much I really agree with that statement. I don't know how much the average senator would do in identifying the next great general, especially if it were left up to someone like Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid.
The Reaper
04-27-2007, 11:47
I think this statement could also be applied to the NCO Corps as well sometimes. It seems all too often that everyone is afraid to "think outside the box" and are stuck on the "that's the way we've always done it..." mentality. People need to step up and not be afraid to color outside the lines every now and then.
Not sure how much I really agree with that statement. I don't know how much the average senator would do in identifying the next great general, especially if it were left up to someone like Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid.
Exactly what I said when I got this in my emails this morning:
"Yeah, "Yingling advocates overhauling the way generals are picked and calls for more involvement by Congress. To replace today's "mild-mannered team players," he writes, Congress should create incentives in the promotion system to "reward adaptation and intellectual achievement."
Just what we need. Pelosi and Reed picking out future leaders.
Female? Check. Minority? Check. Alternate lifestyle? Check. Democratic surrender monkey? Check.
I think that is about the dumbest idea I ever heard. Congress is already the reason LTG Boykin is retiring. The last thing we need is them picking our leadership.
TR"
Congress is already the reason LTG Boykin is retiring. The last thing we need is them picking our leadership.
TR"
I read this of him and other stuff in the MSM. His line of thinking is right up my alley!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14262-2004Aug19.html
It seems as if many don't care for him. Anyone here serve with / under him that would care to share their opinions?
The Reaper
04-27-2007, 13:48
In case you missed it, yes, I served with LTG Boykin and I would again in a flash.
Good man with the problem of saying what he believes in public, and the media disagree with his views.
TR
Ret10Echo
04-27-2007, 13:59
I read this of him and other stuff in the MSM. His line of thinking is right up my alley!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14262-2004Aug19.html
It seems as if many don't care for him. Anyone here serve with / under him that would care to share their opinions?
Up front and no BS.
NousDefionsDoc
04-27-2007, 14:04
He has identified the problem...solution needs some work.
It seems as if many don't care for him. Anyone here serve with / under him that would care to share their opinions?
I might be one of the only ones here that fits in that category. Edited after I saw TR's post. I would agree with TR's assessment.
LTC Yingling maybe one of the smartest guys I've ever worked with. I'd follow him anywhere. He is well respected by both peers and subordinates as a forward thinking officer, leader, and intellectual.
I talked to him through e-mail this morning before what I'm sure became a mess of e-mails flooding his inbox.
Here's my take on it: This isn't some bitter e-mail or leak to the press. It's an article written for publication in one of our own professional journals. I'm sure he knew that there would be backlash after it came out. Remember this; He was the IO/Effect Cell Chief for 3ACR under COL McMaster. He's authored other papers with LTC John Nagl. He's a SAMS graduate and a BN command selectee. This isn't some bitter retort by some passed over field grade. This is a paper that really speaks to what has been talked about in virtually every TOC and every chowhall east of Washington DC.
I have many of the same reservations on some of his proposal that TR has regarding Congressional selection as TR interprets the article. To be honest, however, I think he was indicting the Congressional selection more than anything. At least, I think he proposes a revamped style of selection. Take, for example, the quote in the last paragraph of the section entitled "THE GENERALS WE NEED."
"As matters stand now, a private who loses a rifle suffers far greater consequences than a general who loses a war."
We've all seen this as the case. I think LTC Yingling is asking for a little more accountability in the selection and assignment of general officers, much like what SEC Gates did in the wake of the Walter Reed scandle - Fire the GO in charge, and appoint someone who could ensure results.
Where are the Cigar smokin', whiskey chuggin' Generals like McArthur, Patton
Schwartzkof. Guys who new that their job was to kill as many of the enemy as possible. I quess they didn't have to worry about fighting a PC war!
jmgrimsh
04-27-2007, 14:42
I cannot attest to LTC Yingling, but I can say that Col. H.R. McMaster (author of Dereliction of Duty), whom he mentions in his article, is one of the finest officers I have ever served under. As my squadron commander in 1-4 CAV, he was a forceful and charismatic leader. He was battle-tested in the Gulf War at the 73 Easting, and in garrison was a true soldier’s officer. As a random PFC, he knew my name without having to look down at my nametape, and could be seen in the motorpool on days when there were no mass formations. I would follow him into the gates of Hell.
Our Army already possesses competent, loyal, leaders who aren’t afraid to speak their mind. I am just so sick of the media throwing them under the bus when they do. (referencing LTG Boykin)
The Reaper
04-27-2007, 14:53
The Army has laid a very clear career path to become a GO. To be successful today, you must follow this pattern, and become a "careerist", or be one helluva special individual.
You must have commands interpersed with career management jobs, like service at Branch or a tour as a General's aide. That has the added benefit of getting you a mentor or sugar daddy, and the follow on assignment is always a career enhancing plum. The other guys you put in to replace you in those managament jobs agree to take care of you on your follow-on assignment, and you take care of the guy before you.
The commands are critical, and must be top blocks from a guy with a good senior rater profile. To do this, you either take risks and always come out right (rare), or you minimize exposure and make sure that your rater and senior rater love you. The best way to do this is to read their support forms and make their goals your own. We tend to like people who look like us. For that reason, you need to cut your hair like your boss, shave your face like your boss, and think like your boss. Risk avoidance is probably a good idea.
Your company command must be successful, with max credit reflected on your boss. After that, you need to be an S-3 or XO. To make LTC, you must have been Resident for CGSC (or the current comparable), and it helps to have senior level S-3 or XO time. Most BN COs have few, if any center of mass reports in their files today. To make COL, you must have a Battalion command, and it helps to be a War College graduate. To make BG, it must have been a successful BDE command and you probably have a below the zone promotion or two. Never ever disagree with your boss at this point. If you are not selected for BN Command, you are on the way out, quit the first time you get a bad assignment and you have 20 in. To make BG, you need a successful BDE command, and to be Joint qualified. You are probably 100% above center of mass reports. If you are on the fast track, you do not need to worry about the Joint tour, Branch will get you one, or find constructive credit for one in a previous assignment. To make MG, your BDE command must be successful, and there must be NO blemishes on your record. People eligible for BG and MG have been non-selected for spouse's behavioral issues.
This can all be derailed in the Post-Board Screening Process by your restricted file or IG, MP, or CCF records. All of the above selections require review by those three organizations, and you should be squeaky clean. You can be selected with issues there, but not significant ones unless you have a very powerful mentor. Even then, Congress must approve the list. They are looking for troublemakers, and a lack of qualified minorities selected. You can be bumped off the list because minority candidates had to be reviewed again and put ahead of you.
This leads to a system where taking risks is discouraged, and people are selected as GOs largely because they make their bosses happy and look good in a photograph.
Or you can do it your way, and retire as a MAJ, LTC, or if you are good and very lucky, COL.
Just my impressions based on 25 years of service. YMMV.
TR
x-factor
04-27-2007, 15:51
I always find it a little curious to hear military guys complain about their leaders, because the military officers and NCOs I've worked with have been head and shoulders above most of the "leaders" (I use the term incredibly loosely) in my home organization. I wish my own organization would take such a self-critical approach.
[To be fair, my views are probably slanted because I work almost exclusively with SOCOM units. ]
X-Factor,
The self critical approach is drilled into us by constant AAR's after training or operations (where everyone is supposed to be thick skinned). But sometimes a boss can fall in love with his plan, and then isn't so thick skinned in these AAR's.
Something from Victor Davis Hanson that I think is applicable in reference to disciplining Generals:
"The senior officer in charge, the naturally cautious Nicias, was in poor health and had been against the expedition from the beginning. Thus for the next two years he fought only haphazardly and always in fear of being charged back home with dereliction. Such was the peculiar nature of Athenian command that sometimes generals who did not approve of expeditions were put in charge of them."
I guess what I am getting at is that generals make mistakes, and if the charges back home are going to be so severe, who will be general, and what kind of Army will we have?
Monsoon65
04-27-2007, 17:34
I rememeber at DLI having a Captain explain to me the very steps that TR just spelled out. I was shocked at the time (remember, I was only an E-3 then) about the spouse being an important factor in an officers promotion to GO. (I later heard the same from a Generals Aide while in FL).
I vaguely remember the AF toying with the idea of keeping pilots that really don't care if they ever make COL or GO in the cockpits flying. A lot of them out there would rather spend their careers in the flying squadrons and not getting blocks checked at HQ AF. Don't blame them, either.
Or you can do it your way, and retire as a MAJ, LTC, or if you are good and very lucky, COL.well, at least you can look in the mirror to shave...
everyone from Larteguy to LTC Yingling has a better idea...unfortunately, there seems to be an insatiable need for synchophants at echelons above any rank i held...
Any bets against LTC Yingling having a humanities/social science degree and a 2/2 or higher in a foreign language?
Article yesterday from the WSJ.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118306191403551931-lMyQjAxMDE3ODIzOTAyNjkxWj.html
There's also some links to related articles like the 2006 "counterinsurgency doctrine".