Quote:
|
Originally Posted by airbornediver
I know people want to say "hey you're not SF focus on that before focusing on other things". And in part, I have to agree with that. However, I think that knowing (or at least intelligently) discussing the potential ramifications of a change in presidential and congressiona administrations on teams deployed and teams gearing for deployment to OIF/OEF is essential SA.
Without violating OPSEC, I can say that over here, the beauracracy that limits us is definately a pain in the arse. I know that we are wondering what's going to happen in the nov. elections, and are going to be watching it as closely as we would anything else. The effects of having too many "lets pull out in 6 months or less" people in charge would seriously screw some stuff up here.
Voting is being stressed throughout higher, as it should be in all of the Army, SOF and CF; and we are all watching to see what changes will be made and if there will be more restrictions put upon us.
I'm not trying to piss anyone off or tell others how to think, just offering up the suggestion that knowing how a potential change in leadership at the excutive and congressional level would effect operations on the ground is something very important, and should be watched closely.
|
I disagree.
You need to understand the political environment as it pertains to your mission and follow all lawful orders given you by the chain of command. Period.
I only served in SF in three decades, but IMHO, if you work to the best of your abilities to accomplish your assigned mission, perform your duties to the best of your abilities, and take care of your people as well as you can, you have done all that can be asked of you, regardless of who is in Congress or the White House. As noted above, SF has good years and bad years. Right now, everybody wants to be SF. If you are not willing to be here and to do your best when the bloom is off the rose and Groups are being stood down, I do not want you in my force. We survived Carter and Clinton, and they employed SF as much or more than the more military oriented presidents.
The original question strikes me as a bit of trolling for a political food fight, or an attempt to find something to start a thread about.
If you want to be SF, that decision should not be affected by who is in the White House or Congress. If it is, you probably do not have what we are looking for. That is the long and short of it.
If you do not like your civilian leadership, you may do two things about it. Vote against them in the next election, or resign/ETS/retire at your next opportunity. You do not have a choice beyond that. You sign the contract and suborn yourself to the desires of the Army and the needs of the nation, under whatever elected and appointed leadership our people choose.
We have civilian leadership of the military in this country, that is good and is the way the Fathers intended it. If you only want to serve under a specific party, you need to try another country which has a dictatorship, a military government, or a single party system.
Good luck.
TR