<p>First off, your assumption that my bypassing the chain of command comments were addressed to the chiefs of staff was erroneous. The new Sec Def is definitely in the unified commander’s chain of command and he was also bypassed. No excuse.</p>
<p>Who is in what chain of command? Yes, you are absolutely correct, unified commanders, in the operational control of their units, report directly to the Sec Def (not Gen Keane, again, the Sec Def). However, as you well know, there are many chain of commands; functional, administrative, organizational. etc., etc. etc., and they all overlap. To state that someone is not in ANY chain of command is to imply that he has neither responsibility nor accountability. I doubt if that is the case for a Chief of Staff. What this discussion is about is a change in theater troop strength and the overall resulting effects on readiness. Don’t tell me that the Chief of Staff is not a viable part of this decision making process.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, in January of 2007 he had either already dug past the bureaucratic roadblocks or had given up on them because they had all been replaced. He was working with a clean slate. And he still continued to bypass them. This is my concern.</p>
<p>Let’s not get sidetracked into the irrelevance of who did their job and who didn’t. That is not the issue. The issue is how it was improperly handled.</p>