Apr.21.2008
1:39 pm
by Chet
SECDEF Gates honors John Boyd
An unconventional era of warfare requires unconventional thinkers.
It’s a cliché that Boyd would never receive his due from The Establishment. So it is with great pleasure that I can report that the Secretary of Defense, Robert M. Gates, paid a stirring tribute to John today at Maxwell Air Force Base.
Here is the section where he refers to Boyd (the complete text is available from DefenseLink).
Let me illustrate using a historical exemplar, the late Air Force Colonel John Boyd. As a 30-year-old Captain, he rewrote the manual for air to air combat. Boyd and the reformers he inspired would later go on to design and advocate for the F-16 and the A-10.
After retiring, he would develop the principles of maneuver warfare that were credited by a former Marine Corps commandant and a secretary of Defense for the lightning victory in the first Gulf War.
Boyd’s contributions will resonate today. Many of you have studied the concept he developed called the OODA loop, and I understand there’s an OODA Loop Street here at Maxwell, near the B-52.
But in accomplishing all these things, Boyd, who was a brilliant, eccentric and stubborn character, had to overcome a large measure of bureaucratic resistance and institutional hostility.
He had some advice that he used to pass on to his colleagues and subordinates that is worth sharing with you. Boyd would say — and I quote — “One day you will take a fork in the road, and you’re going to have to make a decision about which direction you want to go. If you go one way, you can be somebody. You will have to make compromises, and you will have to turn your back on your friends. But you will be a member of the club, and you will get promoted and get good assignments. Or you can go the other way, and you can do something, something for your country and for your Air Force and for yourself. If you decide to do something, you may not get promoted, and you may not get good assignments, and you certainly will not be a favorite of your superiors, but you won’t have to compromise yourself. To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. That’s when you have to make a decision: to be or to do.”
For the kinds of challenges America faces and will face, the armed forces will need principled, creative, reform-minded leaders, men and women who, as Boyd put it, want to do something, not be somebody.
An unconventional era of warfare requires unconventional thinkers. That is because this era’s range of security challenges, from global terrorism to ethnic conflicts, from rogue nations to rising powers, cannot be overcome by traditional military means alone. Conflict will be fundamentally political in nature and will require the integration of all elements of national power. Success, to a large extent, will depend less on imposing one’s will on the enemy or putting bombs on targets, though we must never lose our ability or our will to unsheathe the sword when necessary. Instead, ultimate success or failure will increasingly depend more on shaping the behavior of others, friends and adversaries, and most importantly, the people in between.
Comments are welcome; please observe our (new, improved) comment policy.
Filed in Boyd and Military Strategy |
12 Responses to “SECDEF Gates honors John Boyd”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
From Why the Air Force Bugs Gates,” by Mark Thompson of Time:
From “Air Force Under Fire From Defense Secretary Robert Gates,” by Peter Spiegel in the LA Times:
“I was stunned,” said Thomas P. Christie,”
All increadible, and so very exciting.
It’s a great thing for Boyd to get some long overdue
recognition, moreover the “reform movement”
got honourable mention by Gates, and that means
those who fought along side him,
and many who carry on the fight in his memory.
However,
In the larger context, I’m not entirely sure what to make of it.
As the US military conducts itself and continues
in an entirely inane manner, one cannont be blamed
for sceptisism. In as much as Boyd and the following
gets more than its share of lip service, almost everywhere
these days, and is parotted amoung a majority who
evidently don’t grasp, much less beleive in the concepts.
Start with General Patreaus, supposidly the
great 4GW expert, and consider what William
Lind ( Friend and close collaberator of Boyd’s )
had to say most recently.
A welcome surprise, uplifting, even shocking,
and coming out of nowhere.
It’s an important milestone, and my opinion of
Mr. Gates has now shifted, but guardedly,
as he still tows the line on the GWOT,
and we have a long, long, way to go.
MaX
Then Gates ruined it by stating “it would be a shame to stop the new tanker”.
The Airbus is fabricated in Toulouse, shipped to in huge chunks by ocean transport to Mobile for final assembly in a Northrop plant yet to be established.
There are numerous more rational approaches to ‘power projection’.
loggie20on 22 Apr 2008 at 6:15 pm 4
Then Gates ruined it by stating “it would be a shame to stop the new tanker”.
That’s a most interesting case.
As DOD aqusitions and programs are in our view all
about Keyenisim, this machine is obstensively forgien
made.
The moral, for us sceptics, could be, so far gone, in its
decent into insanity is USAF procurement policy,
they can’t even get the theme of pure indigenous
pork right anymore.
MaX
Fred Kaplan has a piece on Slate today suggesting that the military’s senior leadership doesn’t have to pay any attention to Gates because they can just wait him out. He cites the cases of Boyd and Army LTC Paul Yingling.
Here’s an excerpt from his section on Boyd:
The full article is “Gates Celebrates Dissent, The Generals Quash It.”
Chet,
The Bush DoD pols are mostly summer help. But do not let them know or they will get you like they got Druyun.
Max,
Rolling on the floor.
The phoney watch dog group: Citizens Against Government Waste just gave Reps Dicks and Tiahrt their ‘pork award’ for wanting to keep the Boeing corp in pork instead of Airbus and EADS.
And the Post Intelligencer reporter did not bother to see their contributors are mostly large corporations, oddly Northrop is not on the published list.
Chet mentions;
“suggesting that the military’s senior leadership doesn’t have to pay any attention to Gates because they can just wait him out.”
Sadly, He makes a good point Chet.
It’s been done before, to a degree, with Les Aspin, Rummy, and even Richard Cheney.
Although as an aside, the latter constitutes an daunting enigma.
All three asked questions, or had plans of one kind or another, and at one time or another, that didn’t particularly bode
well with established and vested interests amoung the upper echelon ranks.
On the larger issue. The reason the American Mil. Ind. Con. Tnk Tank & Services Complex, is so increadibly tough to change, is because of it’s natural process of self perpetuating reward for the status quo.
It feeds on , and perpeuates itself naturally.
Then it’s wrapped in the flag, packaged and sold to the public
in the guise of essential patriotic concience, backed up with a healthy dose of paranioa.
Take the most recent example of General Patreus, being promoted, that is rewarded for towing the line, and mediocracy while supporting his superiors.
It really takes a unique individual while working within the system, to take a position that is essentially contrary.
To bite the hand that feeds you so to speak, to take a different path,
and forsake the path of careerisim and least resistance.
This is not typical, and contrary to most human behaviour.
But the Mil. Complex, is established, predicated, and feeds on what IS expeident, comfortable, stable, secure and normal, for perhaps 95% of the pepole involved, and 95% of the time.
And all that adds up from the broader perspective as a tragidy of epic proportions.
MaX
See the Melian dialog from Thucydides.
Moral argument can only exist between equals.
For others there is a choice: the path of self interest and safety versus the path of honor and justice.
Sad to say that “paying the schilling” and “breaking starch” are where the US military has descended.
Unfortunately, most US generals know Thucydides and don’t remember nor understand the lessons.
James Fallows on the Boyd story:
The final word ?
Excellent article, beutifully written,
Ivan Eland echos many sentiments and frustrations
expressed throughout our forum.
MaX’
http://www.antiwar.com/eland/?articleid=12854
“May 17, 2008
Gates’s Hope to Reform the Pentagon Is Barking at the Moon.”
“despite the embarrassing bungling in counterinsurgency that occurred in Afghanistan and Iraq as the U.S. military”
SNIP
“To put it bluntly, relatively low-tech counterinsurgency warfare is not as profitable as designing and building glitzy high-tech weaponry.” …
” Most Americans think that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) should be…well…defending the United States. Yet despite all the flag waving, the DoD works like any other government agency in redistributing the taxpayer’s dollars to special interests.” …
“So the military keeps building the F-22 fighter, which was designed to fight the Soviet Union, the Future Combat System, designed for ground combat against a conventional foe, and expensive ships and submarines that have little to do with fighting guerrillas on land.”