Incompetent Generals It is interesting, on the dozens of military forums extant, to read the jumbled sophomoric confusions of hordes of arrogant

ignoramuses alongside a few people who seem to understand war. Yet anyone who studies war should be applauded. One thing that seems to prevail in all forums is the source of the subscriber's information. The source, of course, shapes the subscribers opinions. There are two major types of subscribers, categorized according to preferred informational basis, that present what they consider to be informed opinions on forums. These two categories do not represent all forum participants however, and account for about 80% of them. First I must point out that very few, probably none, of the subscribers to forums are military experts functioning at the intuitive level of operational and strategic art. The source of almost all information on forums is the mass media or the military media. Both slant the so-called information they present to represent a skewed view of reality. The first category of contributing subscriber is the number cruncher. He is fascinated with orders of battle from the standpoint of various performance indices of military machinery. He talks about attrition oriented concepts and argues with the enthusiasm of American sports maven. However, he is superior to American sports maven because he is dealing with reality that can effect the world. While American sports maven merely get drunk, paint their faces and worship, periodically, various African mercenaries who only play games. The second category is the generalist. He knows less about facts than the numbers cruncher and his opinions have been shaped by some form of media. Such a person is a servo-mechanism of international Marxist media and therefore useless. What am I getting at after my tedious introductory comments? It is this: It would be so much more enjoyable if there were more war hobbyists. By hobbyists I mean people who study war, enjoy war and could be categorized as "warlovers." Such people would exhibit a learning curve that would be continuously strengthened to the point that they would become professionals. By professional, I mean an expert that functions at the intuitive level. Among US military generals there are NO expert warriors. However, among the Special Forces Colonels, there are a few professional with expert intuition. Most American generals perceive themselves as diplomats and peace makers in the bureaucratic sense. They love "nation building" and hate war like only the distracted effeminate can. I do not apologize for the above conclusions; after all I share the attitude of Kaiser Wilhelm, who said when he perceived an important member of the German General Staff dancing a transvestite ballet: "This General Staff is a pile of Shit." The first thing that independent frame of of war against which will give an example marks a professional operating at the intuitive level is an reference. That frame of reference describes the key aspects all military baloney and potential genius is measured. (I in my next post).

To leap to what I am promoting in this post...If you want to understand and predict where any military will go and how it will fare in the forthcoming world must know its generals. The war student should make a catalogue of the generals: names, political ideology, religion, experiences in the past, prominent

advocacies and membership in cliques within the military. I will give example from the American military in subsequent posts. In the meantime, there is only one book publisher in the world that offers books about the analysis and behavior of generals. That publisher is also the only one that advances information about how the public can identify incompetent and even traitorous military generals. Please visit and look up the category: Incompetent Generals If you read some of those books, as I have, you will enter a territory that is not on the world's map.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful