Today in Twitter: Media Impatience and Civ-Mil Relations

Tis early, but I am already engaged on two fronts on twitter.

First, I am pretty annoyed by the media, who seem to think that bombing is a miracle cure that should have led to reversals in ISIS's fortunes.  So, I have been tweeting stuff like this:

Doolittle raid surprises Japan, hitting 13 targets Japan has not yet surrended #IfTwitterExistedInHistory pic.twitter.com/B0BUIz6mwB
— Stephen Saideman (@smsaideman) October 8, 2014

NATO started bombing Serbia last night. Milosevic has not yet surrerended Kosovo. Bombing campaign a failure? #IfTwitterExistedInHistory
— Stephen Saideman (@smsaideman) October 8, 2014

Allied armies land in France. Germans continue to fight on. D-day may be dud-day. #IfTwitterExistedInHistory
— Stephen Saideman (@smsaideman) October 8, 2014

Second, I read a really good piece by Peter Feaver on whether generals should resign in protest. I culled a few key quotes

"the military is not always correct, and so it is not wise policy for the commander-in-chief to simply do whatever the generals say"
— Stephen Saideman (@smsaideman) October 8, 2014

"challenge of command is not deciding whether to listen to generals but deciding which generals best understand the strategic situation"
— Stephen Saideman (@smsaideman) October 8, 2014

"The constitutional fix for bad military policy by the executive branch is better oversight from the congressional branch" #CivMIlWisdom
— Stephen Saideman (@smsaideman) October 8, 2014

and then my response to the classic quote by Clemenceau:

and Civ-mil is too important to be left to just executive branch RT @KTBrushett: War is too important to leave to the generals. Clemenceau
— Stephen Saideman (@smsaideman) October 8, 2014

I guess my timing is good--I submitted yesterday a grant application to study the role of legislatures in the civil-military relations of 21st century democracies.  Now back to an earlier book project that is getting a second life thanks to Putin's irredentism.