I have to admit that I am always pleased to find that such polemics (of which there appear to be distressingly many in American discourse nowadays) usually fail on artistic merits anyhow. When the "message" means more than the actual story, quality has a tendency to get shafted.
The one thing that I did seem to detect is a bias in favour of action instead of determining what action to take.
Interestingly, that is Colin Powell's perspective on the Clinton administration (if you presume that "determining what action to take" was an end in itself). He was then chair of the Joint Chiefs and wrote on it in his autobiography; the "dorm room bull session" approach in policy meetings was not his cup of tea, and he, like most of the military, thought that Clinton's initial picks for defense-related Cabinet posts were less than stellar. Clinton eventually came to the same conclusion after realizing that academics who studied warfare were not quite the same as people who were actually in the military.
no subject
The one thing that I did seem to detect is a bias in favour of action instead of determining what action to take.
Interestingly, that is Colin Powell's perspective on the Clinton administration (if you presume that "determining what action to take" was an end in itself). He was then chair of the Joint Chiefs and wrote on it in his autobiography; the "dorm room bull session" approach in policy meetings was not his cup of tea, and he, like most of the military, thought that Clinton's initial picks for defense-related Cabinet posts were less than stellar. Clinton eventually came to the same conclusion after realizing that academics who studied warfare were not quite the same as people who were actually in the military.
- Madox