<p>Looks like these days you have to be a Naval Academy grad to be named chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff ;)</p>
<p>Go Navy! Beat Army!</p>
<p>'Pete?'</p>
<p>I really liked Gen Pace. Iam sorry he won't be serving a second term. I always thought it to be a good idea for a soldier or marine to be in that position at a time when so many of our military folks are in a land war. Iam sure the Admiral will be fine though. What a tremendous burden people in this position must bear.</p>
<p>Navy officers insist their worldview is uniquely fitted for the current environment, where threats are global and understanding foreign cultures is critical. Because Navy officers must constantly patrol the world's seas and regularly interact with international governments in ports abroad, they argue, the Navy has developed a culture that is more open to a broader view of American power. </p>
<p>...One Navy officer, who asked not to be named when discussing interservice rivalries, said a broader worldview is bred into sailors early in their careers, noting that even relatively junior Navy officers can find themselves commanding a ship alone on the open seas, forced to make quick decisions without aid of superiors. </p>
<p>...The Navy officer noted that even senior Army officers, like a colonel commanding an entire 3,500-soldier brigade, are constrained by other brigades on the battlefield and are trained to be part of a larger war effort, which occasionally inhibits their ability to see the bigger picture.</p>
<p>Sure, but the Army and Marines are still the main effort in the war, which is why shogun thought General Pace was good for the job. This Navy officer you spoke to seems a bit biased. I think Army officers are currently having to make some quick decisions, seeing as though they are the main effort and face combat everyday.</p>
<p>homer09,
My post included quotes from the Los Angeles Times article.</p>
<p>Soldiers do most of the fighting in Iraq, have fewest in high positions </p>
<p>At a time when the Army's soldiers are doing most of the fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, the service's influence in key decision-making positions is waning. </p>
<p>Of the U.S. military's nine combat commands, only two are run by Army generals, and that number will be cut in half when Bryan Brown retires next month as the senior officer at U.S. Special Operations Command. </p>
<p>Inside the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is relying on officers from the maritime services to be his top advisers...</p>
<p>The lack of green-suited four-stars in top jobs is seen partly as an extension of an attitude brought to the Pentagon six years ago by former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. It's also a sign, however, of the successful culmination of a two decade effort to promote the concept of "jointness" within the military. The premise is that properly schooled officers should be able to lead troops regardless of service affiliation. </p>
<p>Retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, former head of the Army War College who holds a Ph.D. in history from Duke University, said he could find no prior period when the Army was so engaged overseas and so underrepresented at top levels. </p>
<p>"It's absolutely extraordinary," he said. "I just can't believe the numbers. It's cultural, it's political, and it's deeply ingrained. I've never seen it to the degree it exists today." </p>
<p>While the Army's presence in the upper ranks of these commands has diminished, the Navy's is growing. Brown, who is ending a 40-year military career in July, will be replaced by Eric Olson, a Navy special warfare officer. Olson's confirmation hearing is Tuesday. </p>
<p>U.S. Central Command, also headquartered at MacDill, oversees military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and is led by Adm. William Fallon. </p>
<p>Once Brown gives way to Olson, Navy admirals will run four of the commands. Air Force generals are in charge of three. Army Gen. Bantz Craddock is the top officer at U.S. European Command. </p>
<p>WASHINGTON (AP) -- Two years after the nation's commando forces were given broad authority to attack terrorist networks, the elite units remain hampered by uncertainty over coordination, says the admiral chosen to head the U.S. Special Operations Command.</p>
<p>Navy Vice Adm. Eric Olson said that while the command has the lead for "synchronizing" the Bush administration's global war on terror, enforcement of that expanded jurisdiction has been difficult.</p>
<p>The command's "ability to drive behavior within (the Defense Department) is limited due to unclear definition of authorities," Olson said in a written response to a question from the Senate Armed Services Committe</p>