White House Strategy Defeats US Military Tactics

Mark Moyar of the Hoover Institute exposes seven ways white house strategy has overridden and defeated US military tactics.  It's the president's prerogative to define strategy.  The article is the best review I've seen and covers Bush (43) and Obama's years. "Theories on democratization made Bush and Obama overly optimistic about the prospects for intervention in certain countries. " Missing only is the genius to explain how the White House should make better calls.

"When a country enjoys tactical military success as consistently as the United States, responsibility for strategic success must rest primarily with those who make strategy. The American military could be held culpable for recent strategic setbacks were it highly influential in the crafting of strategy. But its influence under the Bush administration was much more limited, and under the Obama administration its strategic advice has largely been ignored.

A review of America’s military interventions since 2001 reveals that seven broad errors account for America’s inability to turn tactical successes into strategic victories. These errors are described below. In every instance, the error was the direct result of presidential decisions on policy or strategy. Some of those decisions ran in direct contradiction of the military’s advice. The military can be faulted for some significant tactical errors, such as ignorance of counterinsurgency in the early years of the Iraq war and excessive reliance on population-centric counterinsurgency doctrine in the middle years of the Afghan war. But the military eventually corrected its major tactical problems, and none of those problems thwarted strategic success."