| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
080766
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
One of the central difficulties to a right understanding of American civil-military relations is the nature of the U.S. military. Are our armed forces just obedient bureaucracies like most of the Executive branch, or are they vocational professions granted significant autonomy and a unique role in these relationships because of their expert knowledge and their expertise to apply it in the defense of America? To a large measure, the answer to this question should determine the behavior of the strategic leaders of these professions, including the uncommon behavior of public dissent. Using the "Revolt of the Generals" in 2006 as stimulus, the author develops from the study of military professions the critical trust relationships that should have informed their individual decisions to dissent. After doing so, he makes recommendations for the restoration of the professions' ethic in this critical area of behavior by the senior Officers who are the professions' strategic leaders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
151010
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This short article answers the question of whether, in the context of current American civil–military relations, senior military professionals may loyally dissent from a decision by civilian authorities, even including by resignation. Stated another way, can their constitutional duties to obedience to civilian authority ever clash so severely with their responsibilities to their profession and its fiduciary trust with the American people that dissent is obligated. The position offered here is that senior military professionals always retain the moral agency for such dissent. It inheres in their role as a steward of an American military profession exercising the discretionary judgments that are the moral core of their professional work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
017651
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Autumn 2000.
|
| Description |
5-20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
057499
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
136487
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The US Army currently faces challenges not unlike those of the post-Vietnam era and the post-Cold War period. Subsumed within these challenges is a more critical overarching one; simply stated, will the Army that emerges from this transition period in 2025 be an effective and ethical military profession, or just another Abstract: The US Army currently faces challenges not unlike those of the post-Vietnam era and the post-Cold War period. Subsumed within these challenges is a more critical overarching one; simply stated, will the Army that emerges from this transition period in 2025 be an effective and ethical military profession, or just another large government bureaucracy? The former can defend the Republic and its interests abroad, the latter cannot. How to understand and think about this challenge is the topic of this commentary large government bureaucracy? The former can defend the Republic and its interests abroad, the latter cannot. How to understand and think about this challenge is the topic of this commentary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
006128
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Washington DC, Centre for Strategic and International Studies, 1995.
|
| Description |
xv, 224p.
|
| Standard Number |
089206305X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 037586 | 322.50973/SNI 037586 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|