Comments
Good point from Move Forward, though it seems to potentially be a minority position. Personally, I would argue that having GEN Dempsey remain the CSA (given the lauding for his abilities is accurate) would favor the Army due to proximity of effects.
Still, good points and certainly worth considering. They do provide a better outlook than mine.
Has it occurred to anyone that it's the Army's turn? We have had an Air Force, Marine, and Navy CJCS since Oct 1, 2001. General Dempsey is a smart guy from the various interviews/speeches I've seen him make on video...and a pretty good singer, too.:)
Gen Odierno would be a superb Army Chief with his combat and stability ops experience. He also honcho'd Task Force Hawk so he understands the pros/cons of air deployment. Enjoyed his great article in Joint Force Quarterly defending the need for Army direct support UAS for tactical purposes.
My point is this: for quite some time it's been known that the SecDef was going to go, the CSA was going to go, that ADM Mullen would cycle out of the position, and as soon as GEN Petraeus's was moved to ISAF, it was known that he could not be thought of as a long term solution. So, the selections processes have been ongoing for quite some time, for quite a few positions.
Given that there aren't that many people eligible to fill these positions, seems the selection and planning really shouldn't be that difficult.
It's the civilian leadership that drives this process because they control the approval and conformation. That is my problem I guess.
Timing looks suspicious to me because these moves aren't done in haste, are they? It's been a month or less I think, for GEN Dempsey. At this level we're not dealing with military choices alone. Civilians are certainly involved. For things to move and then change so quickly, says to me that something was going on behind the scenes.
Or, maybe I'm overdue for a trip to the PX pharmacy to re-up my paranoia meds.
I too ask what is supposedly suspicious about this process? ADM Mullen has served out what can be considered a normal term for a Chairman and as another commenter said Gen Cartwright fell out of favor for whatever reason. GEN Dempsey is a fine choice but as I said above, it is the Army's loss. GEN Odierno may surprise many as CSA, the Odierno of OIF 1 is far different from the Odierno of MNF-I and USJFCOM, or at least one could make a strong case as such. Regardless, there is wisdom in the words "how you think depends on where you sit".
The Army definitely gets the raw deal on this one. GEN Dempsey is an intelligent, creative thinker who could have pushed some much needed reforms through the Army. He strikes me as a man willing to slay sacred cows, which is exactly what the Army needs.
GEN Odierno, on the other hand, is a fine officer. However, I'm not convinced that he is the innovator that Dempsey is. I see four years under GEN Odeirno as a return to the pre-9/11 Army and the re-embrace, rather than slaying, of sacred cows.
I hope I'm wrong...