Brilliant article. I find the current conservative push to model the US military after Russia dispiriting, particularly as one only has to look to Ukraine to see how the "warrior ethos" and "commander knows best" attitude has faired in combat. This attempt is also clumsy and seems intended to generate friction not just within the institution but within the individuals hearing these commands. One can only hope it does not leave a corrosive mark in the long term should this ethos be passing.
If I may, I'd like to add a phrase to your repertoire. In the first para, you talk about the desire of Cynical Publius' to enforce Soviet-style political correctness, but MAGA's own style.
There is a superior term for the Right's version: patriotic correctness.
On the subject of "lethality" being a poor strategy and beneath any commander in chief worthy of the name is think the Vietnam war is very illustrative. If I remember, and understand, correctly, US strategy in the war largely amounted to killing as many of the enemy as possible while limiting our own casualties. And by that metric the war was going swimmingly. Hundreds of north Vietnamese and Vietcong for each Amerivan casualty. Even the (in)famous "Tet offensive" was a spectacular tactical victory with American forces successfully holding all major objectives and slaughtering vast numbers of enemy combatants. And yet, the war was lost.
More importantly, there was no actual plan for converting these tactical succes into strategic outcomes. As far as I can tell the strategy on the ground really did amount to nothing more than killing the enemy until they gave up. Amy time some fool says that lethality is the most important metric for the US military they should be directed to the spectacular failure of this policy in Vietnam.
Unfortunately, I suspect that Cynical Publius' insistence that the people who best know how to educate future generals are officers in the captain-to-colonel space will prove irresistibly flattering to Hegseth, who ended his military career as a major.
The Prussian army before Clausewitz had these type of officers the author from X seems to like. Didn't Leopold I, Prince of Anhalt-Dessau actually make a bit of a human experiment and had one of his sons educated only in military matters?😅
Brilliant article. I find the current conservative push to model the US military after Russia dispiriting, particularly as one only has to look to Ukraine to see how the "warrior ethos" and "commander knows best" attitude has faired in combat. This attempt is also clumsy and seems intended to generate friction not just within the institution but within the individuals hearing these commands. One can only hope it does not leave a corrosive mark in the long term should this ethos be passing.
Excellent!
If I may, I'd like to add a phrase to your repertoire. In the first para, you talk about the desire of Cynical Publius' to enforce Soviet-style political correctness, but MAGA's own style.
There is a superior term for the Right's version: patriotic correctness.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/right-has-its-own-version-political-correctness-its-just-stifling#
https://www.routledge.com/Patriotic-Correctness-Academic-Freedom-and-Its-Enemies/Wilson/p/book/9781594511943
But of course, its only always only patriotism to the Confederacy, the segregationist South, and the Lost Cause.
Everything else is woke and therefore treason.
Excellent analysis and use of Clausewitz!
On the subject of "lethality" being a poor strategy and beneath any commander in chief worthy of the name is think the Vietnam war is very illustrative. If I remember, and understand, correctly, US strategy in the war largely amounted to killing as many of the enemy as possible while limiting our own casualties. And by that metric the war was going swimmingly. Hundreds of north Vietnamese and Vietcong for each Amerivan casualty. Even the (in)famous "Tet offensive" was a spectacular tactical victory with American forces successfully holding all major objectives and slaughtering vast numbers of enemy combatants. And yet, the war was lost.
More importantly, there was no actual plan for converting these tactical succes into strategic outcomes. As far as I can tell the strategy on the ground really did amount to nothing more than killing the enemy until they gave up. Amy time some fool says that lethality is the most important metric for the US military they should be directed to the spectacular failure of this policy in Vietnam.
Glad to see Decoding Clausewitz quoted. It is one of my favorite Clausewitz books.
Hope someone brings this to Hegseth's attention!
Unfortunately, I suspect that Cynical Publius' insistence that the people who best know how to educate future generals are officers in the captain-to-colonel space will prove irresistibly flattering to Hegseth, who ended his military career as a major.
The Prussian army before Clausewitz had these type of officers the author from X seems to like. Didn't Leopold I, Prince of Anhalt-Dessau actually make a bit of a human experiment and had one of his sons educated only in military matters?😅