<p>Perhaps a little too ‘thoughtful’ for you. I will attempt to explain.</p>
<p>First off, as stated in the initial post, my premise is based on the assumption that the article is correct. Woodward initially states that the surge was NOT NECESSARY:
</p>
<p>Therefore, if Woodward is correct and the surge was not responsible for our successes and therefore not necessary, then the entire ad hoc Bush-Patraeus back door “chain of command” was also wrong. I don’t know what kind of chain of command you folks in the Army have but in the Navy we have one to which we adhere and people are held accountable. If we cannot follow it or change it, we resign. Note Adm Fallon’s actions. More should have followed him.</p>
<p>So, again assuming Woodward was correct, the established chain of command was also correct in their views. Enter the renegade, Keane. When he donned a uniform, he became a part of the Army. He had a chain of command to which to answer, not to pretend to ignore the Army COS upon a chance meeting at Walter Reed. He subverted this. In my book, this is treason. In wartime, treason is punishable by death.</p>