000			01980cam a2200313 a 4500
003			LIBRIS
005			20120809143727.0
008			080222s2008 pau b f000 0 eng c
020			_a9781584873419
020			_a1584873418
040			_aAWC _dGPO _dAFQ _dSipr
041			_aeng
090			_c35580 _d35580
100	1		_aSnider, Don M., _d1940-
245	1	0	_aDissent and strategic leadership of the military professions _cDon M. Snider
260			_aCarlisle, PA _bStrategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College _c[2008]
300			_aviii, 38 p.
500			_a"February 2008."
509			_aAlso available on the Internet
520			_aOne of the central difficulties to a right understanding of American civil-military relations is the nature of the U.S. military. Are our armed forces just obedient bureaucracies like most of the Executive branch, or are they vocational professions granted significant autonomy and a unique role in these relationships because of their expert knowledge and their expertise to apply it in the defense of America? To large measure, the answer to this question should determine the behavior of the strategic leaders of these professions, including the uncommon behavior of public dissent. Using the "Revolt of the Generals" in 2006 as stimulus, the author develops from the study of military professions the critical trust relationships that should have informed their individual decisions to dissent. After doing so, he makes recommendations for the restoration of the professions' ethic in this critical area of behavior by the senior officers who are the professions' strategic leaders.
650		0	_acivil-military relations _zUSA
651		7	_aUSA _xarmed forces _xethics _xleadership
653			_adissenters
710	2		_aUS Army War College. _bStrategic Studies Institute, SSI
856	4	1	_uhttp://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB849.pdf
942			_cREP
946			_aSIP0807
999			_c35470 _d35470