Fred Kagan has an interesting piece up at National Review Online examining the dispute over the surge between the commanders in the field–Odierno and Petraeus–and General Casey, the Army’s chief of staff:
Press reports assert that General George Casey, chief of staff of the Army, and the other chiefs have advised President Bush to reduce forces in Iraq dramatically next year. Casey has publicly questioned the current strategy and stated that the surge will have to end in April because of strains on the Army. Generals David Petraeus and Ray Odierno, the commanders of those forces, have repeatedly indicated that they cannot now commit to a clear timeline for any such reduction, while recognizing the strains on the Army and Marine Corps. The media has been quick to describe this apparent dispute as a battle of the generals: “The chief of staff’s position on the surge reflects a divide in opinion on the Iraq war among the top leadership in the American military,” one article noted. In reality, it is nothing of the sort. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have one job – looking after the institutional well-being of the armed forces. Commanders in the field have another – winning the war. Both must advise the secretary of defense and the president within the scope of their duties, and the nation’s top two civilian commanders must decide how to balance competing priorities.
Go read the whole thing.
