HAMMER: In that chapter Proud Legions the Doolittle board and their effect on the Army’s ability to create disciplined units able to fight. Officers and NCOs were ‘stripped’ of their power. How are we still feeling the effects of those changes? What tools do we have now to overcome this? Are they effective? Later on in that chapter he states “…the public demanded that the Army be changed to conform with decent, liberal society.” Some could argue that this is going on right now. Is this for the betterment of the Army/Nation? What are the positives/negatives of such movement?

To this day many NCOs believe that their ability to train and instill discipline in their soldiers is minimized by the handcuffs that are placed on them by the insitution. Some bad things have been avoided. The “Hazing” incidents have been a hot button issue and commands seek to avoid drawing the public ire because of similar siutations. The pendulum seems to have swung to far the other way. Throughout history there has been a consistent rythym in the military, a draw down followed by a shocking realization that the war cannot be won with the men the way they are, followed by a slow hardening of experience that takes place over the conlfict, only to see the experience leave when the war is over and the contraction begins again.

The Doolittle Board was called a “gripe board”. Juniors don’t always understand the decisions that are made for them, and while it is natural to seek comfort over discomfort it does not ameliorate the on going discipline problems seen after the policy changes went in to effect knowing that indiviudals were more comfortable. The individuals sought the democracy they saw at home, where each individual’s opinion carries equal weight. Unfortunatley the military is not a democracy, and individuals’ opinions do not carry equal weight. The rank structure exists for a reason, and while it is not perfect it’s at least better than the other systems.