Surprises are a given
When there's a war on, the premium in the armed forces is people who can win battles and/or wars.
Between wars, the military becomes just another bureaucracy: advancement comes to those who do politics and appearances best. White rocks, spiffy uniforms (berets anyone?) and sucking up to congresscritters yield promotion. After some time, all the important positions are held by politicians, not soldiers. The proablem is not alleviated by our practice, since Truman, of using the military as a social experimentation lab. The success -- debatable, according to some of my sources -- of racial integration has led to calls for like integration of gays and women.
Then comes the war, and the military forces are basically congresscritters in nifty suits. We -- the U.S. -- have pretty much a policy of not attacking; this means that whoever we're fighting will have reorganized their military to be more effective prior to the war, so our guys are hopelessly outclassed. Bullets, bombs, claymore mines, etc., are notoriously immune to political infighting. As a result, we start out 'way behind the curve.
"We always sacrifice a few of our comrades to the Liberals," said Gen. Muraschenko (science fiction fans are encouraged to find the original of that).
As the war progresses, the soldiers win and the politicians lose, and the criteria for promotion change -- eventually we start getting Pattons, and the tide turns. The trick is to hold on until the politicians get worked out of the system. It worked in WWII; it may not be possible any more, since it takes time, and by the time the deadwood starts getting piled, the "news cycle" has turned and the whole thing isn't newsworthy. This may mean we can no longer win wars.
Regards,
Ric
