Read on Twitter
No one serious is arguing that senior military officers who have not been retired for a minimum of 7 years "are single-minded killing machines that have to be controlled by more erudite and sensitive people." https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/10/dennis-blair-lloyd-austin-civilian-control/
The debate is about experience, expertise, partisan and national and inter-branch political skills, and the risks of (further) politicizing the military. It is absolutely not about the integrity or prestige of women and men who serve in uniform.
The American people overwhelmingly indicate in survey after survey that they have enormous faith in the integrity and trustworthiness of the military as a profession and an institution. That is not at issue here.
We can also have this debate without denigrating civilian service to the country. It is also honorable. It also confers skills, knowledge, and leadership abilities.
I welcome a debate about whether the Secretary of Defense should have a mostly military or mostly civilian background. In 1947 Congress decided it should be the latter. We seem to be changing our minds. But lets think it through in good faith. We all want national security. Fin.
