What do litigators and soldiers have in common?

[Roguish Lawyer]

You have politicians/civilians controlling your actions, and we have clients.

While we both have control over operations/activities while they are underway for the most part, we both seem to be constrained by the fact that we can make recommendations and outline risks and benefits of various courses of action, but ultimately don't make the final decision. This is incredibly frustrating, because I sometimes think my clients are unwise, but this is just how it works. I'm just a tool, and my effectiveness depends on how I am used (including how much freedom I am given to operate).

I have to call witnesses or not call witnesses, file motions or not file motions, or take positions or not take positions, when clients make decisions against my best judgment. Sometimes, when there is a bad result after doing something I did not want to do (or not doing something I wanted to do), the client blames me anyway. And the attorney-client privilege, like a soldier's confidentiality obligations, often prevents me from explaining to third-party observers what really happened and why. So I too can get "hung out to dry," although obviously not with the same consequences.

Anyway, not sure why I was thinking about this stuff, but there you have it.