The new Greatest Generation
But this year, the gratitude that they inspire has been heightened, perhaps paradoxically, by the news about David Petraeus, his affair and the mess left behind. I won’t add to the mountain of Petraeus commentary, so much of which has been driven by preexisting attitudes toward Petraeus himself, the wars he led or the matter of how we should deal publicly with sexuality.
What has troubled me is how writing on all sides has aggravated the understandable but disturbing tendency to lay so much stress on the role of famous generals that we forget both the centrality of midlevel military leadership and the daily sacrifices and bravery of those in the enlisted ranks who carry out orders from on high…
[W]e need to recognize the contribution that this new generation of veterans can make to our nation. The character of the “Greatest Generation” that fought World War II was established not by the generals or the admirals but by the officers in the lower ranks and the millions of enlisted men and women who carried into civilian life both the skills and the sense of service and community they learned in the war years.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
That is precisely why the Left hates the military.
OldEnglish on November 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM
Awesome article EJ.
I’ve thought the same thing of some of the kids I’ve worked with during the war. Some of the finest Officers, NCOs and Soldiers in all of our military history.
hawkdriver on November 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM
World War Two experiences did not make them man enough to vote away Social Security if I recall. I know they did not create it, but they certainly were not so patriotic to protect the Constitution by ridding the nation of that monstrosity.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 7:05 PM
You are correct, and neither did England. However, those who did the pushing were, in the main, the unions – and they were mostly exempt from service. Go figure.
OldEnglish on November 22, 2012 at 7:13 PM
I do not think the World War II vets had the numbers to effect much in the electorate. So, I think my statement above was a bit harsh.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 7:16 PM
Agreed, most of the demobbed military just wanted to get back to a quiet life, and not even talk about their recent experiences.
OldEnglish on November 22, 2012 at 7:26 PM
God your an A%%. Get over yourself. Better yet, you put YOUR life on the line in conditions like that.
One thing I can give forgiveness for is if your done your duty to the country and the citizens. Then you earned your right the be a moron at times .
watertown on November 22, 2012 at 8:18 PM
Ah never mind I see you actually saw you were a bit harsh. Happy turkey day.
watertown on November 22, 2012 at 8:18 PM
This may have something to do with it.
“Social Security:
“[F]inally, beginning in 1949. . . you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year. That is the most you will ever pay.”
Mimzey on November 22, 2012 at 8:48 PM
Did EJ Dione really write this? Are we sure?
SuperBunny on November 22, 2012 at 9:32 PM
I’m glad you made your second statement. Conservatives from that generation are no more responsible for failing to stop social security than we are of reelecting obama.
hawkdriver on November 22, 2012 at 9:42 PM