Air Force sacks two commanders in Europe

reply to post by buster2010


I am speculating of course. I don't know. Now that we've cleared that up, and the fact that I wrote-IMO...in my opinion, from the beginning, did anyone read the article?

It said

“It was loss of confidence in the commanders’ abilities to lead their units in the best interest of the Air Force,” spokesman Capt. Brian Maguire said in an e-mail. “This action was more about leadership style and organizational climate than a specific event.”

It does not say scandal and it directly says their leadership style is not what is wanted anymore. It's not like they were just hired and nobody knew what they were getting. The new army wants a new style. Take from that what you will. I take from it, the old ways are out and some new ways are in. I speculate that the new ways come with leadership that aligns with the current administration. I don't think that is a far reach. Is it bad? Time will tell, but I don't think previous administrations have cleaned house nearly as thoroughly. Previous admins seemed to have trusted what was there, and the system that got them there.

All this is, is an FYI. When we track many occurences no matter the subject, we start to see patterns.

It would not be the first time that a commander has been sacked due to either their political beliefs, or their overall belief regarding US military strategy. The most famous case would probably be Truman's release of Macarthur. This was definitely both because of Macarthur's political and military ideology. The guy was a huge part of the reason we won the Korean war in the first place, as the landing at Inchon was a stroke of military brilliance in my opinion, not to mention his actions in WWII. But his beliefs contradicted the Truman administration's beliefs. Couldn't have that. And plus, the general realized that pushing out of Korea altogether, and further north, was the best course of action.

So I offer that as an example, citing it mainly because if someone who is that much of a brilliant military commander can be sacked for their beliefs, then someone who has lesser rank or responsibility could definitely be canned. I am not saying that is what happened in this case, but it is something to consider. With the developments with US-Russian relations, I cannot help but think something is going on here. It would depend on what exactly the responsibilities of these officers were. If they would have a lot of responsibilities during the outbreak of a conflict or war in the region, then they would be more likely to be replaced for their beliefs, if those beliefs could potentially affect their actions in such a situation.

I just realized that they were USAF commanders. This makes a difference, considering their jobs would not entail deploying troops, although they would hold much sway in determining the actions of planes and the allocation of other USAF resources, which are vital to any conflict. Not knocking the air force, considering that is where I served, but I'm just saying their duties are not the same as those of a commander who has many ground assets at their disposal. Although times have changed to the point where air power is more often used than ground forces.