Sunday, December 29, 2019

Call Sign Chaos


Book: Call Sign Chaos
Basic Information : Synopsis : Characters : Expectations : Thoughts : Evaluation : Book Group : New Words : Book References : Good Quotes : Table of Contents : References

Basic Information:
Author: Jim Mattis
Edition: ePub on Overdrive from the San Francisco Library
Publisher: Random House
ISBN: 0812996836 (ISBN13: 9780812996838)
Start Date: December 20, 2019
Read Date: December 29, 2019
320 pages
Genre: History, Biography, Leadership
Language Warning: Low
Rated Overall: 4 1/2 out of 5


History: 4 out of 5


Synopsis (Caution: Spoiler Alert-Jump to Thoughts):
This book is divided into three parts, corresponding to Mattis’ time in the Marines.
  • Direct Leadership
  • Executive Leadership
  • Strategic Leadership
He also goes through his lessons learned in command corresponding to each part.


In Direct Leadership he goes through learning to be a leader where he has command over Marines. In Executive Leadership, it is more he is in command over other officers. Finally in Strategic Leadership, he does not have direct war responsibilities, but has to understand how to get ready for future wars and to keep allies on the same page as the United States.


Cast of Characters:
  • James Mattis - Secretary of Defense, author
  • James Kelly - General, fellow officer and at times subordinate

Expectations:
  • Recommendation: NPR Review
  • When: August 2019
  • Date Became Aware of Book: August 28, 2019
  • How come do I want to read this book: Mattis sounds like a straight up type of guy as well as someone whom I might disagree with.
  • What do I think I will get out of it? Lessons on character

Thoughts:


Prologue

Mattis’ general thought is that before we can help others, America needs to get its own house in order. He does not really address in this first section what he feels is the issues which need to be corrected. But he goes on and talks about how he met with President-elect Trump and the discussion was a good one. There were places of agreement and places of disagreement.

Purpose of the book: how the Marines brought Mattis to a point where he was confident he was able to do the job of Secretary of Defense. He wants to pass on the lessons he has learned from serving 40 years.

Lessons from the Marines: adapt, improvise, and overcome. But also to do your homework. This is reflected in the phrase he uses: we weren’t victims--we could always create options.

Book is in three parts:
  • Direct Leadership
  • Executive Leadership
  • Strategic Leadership
He talks about the habit of continual learning. Part of this is after-action reviews. The idea is to get the best answer to a problem they faced, even if it is in hind-sight or not part of the recognized doctrine for the situation.

Two of the most important values Mattis taught were initiative and aggressiveness. This is reflected throughout the book.


Part I: Direct Leadership
Chapter 1: A Carefree Youth Joins the Disciplined Marines

We don’t get to choose when we die, but we do choose how we meet death. While this may not be completely true, a person can learn and can be prepared as much as possible. This preparation can be anything from understanding one's place in creation to making one's life of value in the here and now-my thoughts.

His thoughts on adversity are pretty hard nosed: You make mistakes or life knocks you down: either way, you get up and get on with it. You deal with life. You don’t whine about it. This attitude goes on throughout the book. But Mattis is not an uncaring person. For those he is responsible for, he tries to do right by them. He tries to understand the people in his command, not be their friend, but their commander.

During his teenage years he had been put in jail for underage drinking and basically causing a ruckus. He learnt a lesson in outlook. He was looking through the bars of his cell to the muddy parking lot. But his cellmate looking up out of the cell, saw stars.

When he first joined the Marines, he found it was a very supportive group from the most combat tried veteran to the newest kid. Mattis notes that the support was there; it was his to lose. Fence sitters and bottom feeders were quickly weeded out. No one wants to be rejected or considered worthless. But he was also in the process of making a reputation about what kind of person he was? Was he just as good or better than anybody in his outfit? Did he know his stuff? Was he the type of person they would follow?

He got trained in live artillery fire where he would direct live fire in front of his advancing troops. His final examine was to do this on his own, with his troops advancing. The message he got from this exercise was to have faith in your subordinates after you have trained them.

The leadership fundamentals:
  • Competence. Know and excel in the basics-go whole hog in that. As you do that, you will advance. Identify your weaknesses and overcome them.
  • Care. Care for those who you are responsible for. Watch out for each of the people. This allows you to be blunt with somebody. No favoritism.-this means leave a social and professional difference. Know them as individuals
  • Conviction. Believe in what you are, do and say. Do not surprise anybody with rule changes or unstated rules.

Chapter 2: Recruit for Attitude, Train for Skill

A project (mission in his parlance) needs definition and responsibility. Make it our mission, not my mission. Make sure the goals are well defined. Instead of Command and Control he is an advocate of Command and Feedback. The feedback is for the subordinates to provide those in command.

Look for exceptions to the rule and grant waivers.

Mattis wanted people who were all the way in. Not one who was just looking for a 9-5 job. Elite organizations do not thrive when problems are ignored. You hold all to the same standard.

Eisenhower: I'll tell you what leadership is. It's persuasion and conciliation, and education, and patience. It’s long, slow, tough work. That’s the only kind of leadership I know...or will practice.


Chapter 3: Battle

A unit adopts the personality of its commander… Mattis’ philosophy was to work with what he had and not whine about what he did not have. He wanted to be prepared for action and to give initiative in all hands within the scope of his intents were.

Mountain Warfare Training Center. I had not realized I had been by it when we went across Sonora Pass to 395.

In order to use his people well he needed to know the people under his command. Who to use in what situation.

To help support other units, use your best people.

Training for battle-nothing can actually replicate your time in battle. But you can train hard, be together with your unit to bond and trust. Then rehearse what to do until everyone knows their place.

Each commander and chief executive officer needs tools to scan the horizon for danger or opportunities. Mattis accomplished this with trusted people who he assigned to be among the troops to hear and understand the condition of his units. Not spies but those who were among them.

Officers who are good understand that they will be ordering people into battle who will be killed. To keep his equilibrium, Mattis did not want to know about casualties unless the mission was jeopardized. One of his people whom he respected got a direct hit. Mattis thought he was dead, but needed to continue with the war. Later on, one of his squads held back from attacking. This was causing problems. When asked why? The person who commanded the squad said that he did not want his men to die. Mattis relieved the person from command.

Ulysses S Grant’s criteria for leadership:
  • Humility
  • Toughness of character
Mattis did everything possible to keep informed without slowing down the troops who were in combat. This was done by utilizing his people who gave him feedback, listening to the radio chatter, and his own staff.

Mattis did not put much stock in how the enemy might react-there was a large build up on the Iraqian Army before the first Gulf War. It was all hype.

He gained insight into what confident troops looked like.


Chapter 4: Broadening
Reading is an honor and a gift from a warrior or historian who-a decade or a thousand decades ago-set aside time to write. He distilled a lifetime of campaigning in order to have a “conversation” with you. …. If you haven’t read hundreds of books, you are functionally illiterate, and you will be incompetent, because your personal experiences alone aren’t broad enough to sustain you. You can concert this to a non-military situation and apply the same thing. Mattis points out that each rank in the Marines has a reading list. And that all ranks are required to study. He particularly likes Roman leaders who showed grace under pressure. In one of the appendices he has a reading list of his favorite books..

Reading fits in with Mattis philosophy of leading. He wants intelligent officers who have a broad understanding of what has been experienced. If he has that with honorable officers, he can give general intent orders and allow innovation. He calls this a shared understanding. He notes that detailed orders are brittle, cause hesitancy rather than an aggressive force which is what he was going after. This intent has only what is necessary to achieve a clearly defined end state: why are you doing something, give only essential details, and clearly state your goals. Your subordinates will supply the how. Of course, they have had the training to take this on.

There is a course taught to Marine generals by retired generals. It is meant to give realism into a general’s situation. The idea is to teach humility and dedication and ethics.


Chapter 5: Rhino

To see things clearly, simplistically and completely is a gift. Only if the mind works in this comprehensive fashion can it achieve the freedom it needs to dominate events and not be dominated by them Agreed. My training was as a programmer, not a manager. Reading this statement I realize why good programmers have a hard time being a good manager. A good programmer is trained to see details and try to resolve them. While a good manager is one who sees the total picture and understands what is not important.

Mastering your chosen vocation means you are ready when opportunity knocks.

Doctrine is the last refuge of the unimaginative. He goes on and says this is a guide not a straitjacket. I think what he calls doctrine would not be the same as religious doctrine. Religious doctrine are things which are true. While I think what he is talking about is more ways which things get done and accepted orders of battle.

Mattis rather works with those who are where he is at rather than go up the ladder waiting to receive instruction. Both plus and minus-it allows him to operate faster, but maybe without the understanding or blessings of those who are over him. He calls this skip-echelon.

Mattis wants to focus on issues which are at his level, not at above or below. Decisions were communicated to the appropriate people.

Memo to young officers: I can appear brilliant if I fight enemy leaders dumber than a bucket of rocks. I felt a similar thought. I wanted to come after one of two types of people. Those who were supremely organized-I can follow someone else’s organization. Or someone who was disastrous in their effect. It is easy to look good afterwards.

The other thing which I noticed is that even though Mattis had a pretty good position, he still was doing hands on stuff, such as recognize in a plane. He did not let a subordinate do this. He wanted to know for himself.

Mattis differed in how he thought the war in Afghanistan should be fought. He felt that he wanted to make sure he was in the position to wipe out the enemy. From Mattis’ description, his superiors were more concerned with not getting their own people hurt. Mattis does not look at this as a Presidential issue, rather that Mattis did not spend the time to effectively communicate to his superiors. So the superiors did not have an understanding of the benefits vs risk of the situation.


Part II: Executive Leadership
Chapter 6: The March Up

Mattis wants his commanders to be restless-that learning is contagious. Also he wanted them alert and looking to figure out what has been overlooked.

He also wanted his commanders to be pushing him. Also what bothered them at night. The value of good ideas.

He had people who were assigned to study the commanders of the enemy. What is their background? What is said about them? What weaknesses do they have? Would they take initiative?

The call sign of CHAOS was really a double meaning. The CHAOS also stood for Colonel Has Another Outstanding Suggestion.

To win a dog fight, four things (OODA):
  • Observe what is going on
  • Orient yourself
  • Decide what to
  • Act before your opponent can do the same as you are doing
You never know an enemy until you fight him.

Uncertainty runs riot if you don’t keep cool. True-if a person knew exactly what would happen because of a decision, decision making would be easier. One of my things is that I wanted to have every last bit of information before making a decision. This is unreasonable. A person has to make a decision based upon the criticalness of time and the information on hand.

Mattis points out that the more trust there is within a group, the more strain that the unit can tolerate.

Never think that you’re impotent. Choose how you respond.


Chapter 7: A Division in Its Prime

Interesting about when one of his commanders was hesitant in exposing his men to injury or death, Mattis relieved the commander. In this case it was not exhaustion, but concern. Mattis says that You cannot order someone to abandon a spiritual burden they’re wrestling with. I think that is true. At best, you will tear the person apart. At worst, you will have a person making poor choices.

Mattis observes that under Saddam Hussein, the only way people could get certain jobs, such as police, was through joining the Bath party. The American’s kicked out all of those who belonged to the party, causing a deficiency in qualified people. Mattis thought that you needed to depoliticize the forces rather than disband it. Not sure how Mattis would have accomplished that.
He quotes a British strategist, BH Liddel Hart being that the object of war is to produce a better state of peace. I do not think you can achieve a better peace through war. You can overthrow an order, but you are usually left with people who hate rather than being relieved at your presence.


Chapter 8: Incoherence

I like what Mattis says about Homer’s teachings: only when the strongest nations and armies respect the dignity of the weakest is when civilizations progress. We could use some of that now. He goes on and says that great nations don’t get angry; military action should be undertaken only to achieve specific strategic effects.


Chapter 9: Cascading Consequences

Mattis’ view of the press is that they have a role to play and it is better to have them around and be reporting with the ability to interpret what is happening than to leave it to the press to try to figure out the various interpretations. He also feels that the press has no obligations to be right or accurate in their reporting. I wonder how to interpret this statement. It could be that the press can report what people said and let the public pick through what is correct, or it could mean that the press does not need to wait to sort through information and report, but then later on fill corrections, or it could mean that the press can say whatever they want, even if they know it is not true. I hope Mattis thinks one of the first two options.

He points out that decisions are made in a very short amount of time. As an example admiral in WWII took two minutes to launch a risky strike on the Japanese fleet which changed the outcome of the war in the Pacific. In Mattis’ cause, there was an uproar about issuing a strike at a camp. The press narrative was that a wedding party took place, but an investigation found that it was a camp where there were no females and a lot of weapons. Mattis took 30 seconds to decide. People still refer to it as a wedding party instead of an enemy-occupied camp. He quotes Churchill as saying A lie gets halfway around the world before truth gets its pants on.

Mattis quotes The Paratrooper’s Prayer by Andre Zirnheld when he left Iraq to his troops.


Chapter 10: Fighting While Transforming

All leaders should have the heart of a coach.

They played simulation games to simulate conditions on patrol or in battle. Such as throwing rocks at a tank, looking at a scene and then describing what is out of place, to seeing a market and ask who the newcomer was.

There are statements which seem out of place. Such as being fun to shoot men who slap women.

War doctrine-a written guide based upon historical precedents of the best practices. Always gather what can be done better.

Without credible military force, our diplomacy is toothless. Does this mean that we always need a hammer to go with carrots? To me this is the working of sin. Is there any hope on this side of heaven for a peaceful world? As long as there is the means for force, there will be force. Sort of a despondent take off.

He does make the case for backing our friends for the need for a substantial military force.

We are the weakest where we are overconfident. Mattis feels this is in the area of communications. Will our forces know how to fight if they lose touch with each other? Opportunities appear and disappear rapidly on the battlefield.

Operations occur at the speed of trust. He goes on to say that commanders need to trust their subordinates. If not, then there is failure even before the battle begins. The chain of command is not the only way to bring things to your attention.


Chapter 11: Hold the Line

A leader’s role is problem solving. If you don’t like problems, stay out of leadership.

Interesting quote that we are too old to be surprised. Adjust to it.

When reading reports, be aware of the tone and the viewpoint of the report. How is one side’s deaths/casualties reported versus the other side’s.

Men who take up arms against another in public war do not cease in this account to be moral beings, responsible for one another and to God. Abraham Lincoln Lieber Code of April 24, 1863. Wow! Most things I read which Lincoln decreed were so far ahead of his time.


Mattis goes through what the process of court-martial, including visiting the site of the offense.

Difference between mistakes and lack of discipline. Mistakes occur when you try to carry out an intent and you muck up. While lack of discipline needs to be held accountable.


Chapter 12: Essential NATO

When Mattis moved up the ranks and now had been given a high NATO post, he was no longer responsible ground tactics, but coordination and relationship with other military forces within NATO. He notes that an ambassador said that the European nations were impressed with the US when NATO started because of the willingness of the US to make major sacrifices for the common good.

Military history is no longer taught in almost all schools. There is a lack of understanding among civilians how to think diplomatically and militarily.. To stay on top you have to be able to identify specific problems and understand how to tackle them. Wars do not wait until you are ready.

You cannot allow your passion for excellence to destroy your compassion for them as human beings. Interesting. I always had thought that the military was more a person needs to fit into the military style rather than a dance to find the fit for both.

Large organizations get into a rut. He points out that every few months, maybe once a quarter, a leader needs to step back and question why things are done in a certain way.


Chapter 13: Disbanding Bureaucracy

Enemies adapt to any maneuver which is made. Mattis sets to cause chaos in the enemies thinking, such as using deception. Also he wants to be faster than the enemy can adapt. He quotes General William Tecumseh Sherman’s Memoirs, Chapter XXV: Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster. This does not sound very encouraging. In some ways, what I am reading of Sherman is the more brutal you make war, the better chance of success you have.

General George C Marshall: The leader must learn to cut to the heart of a situation, recognize its decisive elements and base his course of action on these. He then goes on to say that training and anticipation is foremost to making these decisions. You need to be familiar with the art of clear, logical thinking. Mattis says that PowerPoint is the scourge of critical thinking. He went on. He establishes a protocol for attacking problems:
  • Define the problem
  • Propose value-added solutions
  • Express things with clarity
Any President gets the advice he desires and deserves.

To do our jobs well, we should not want our job too much. Secretary George Shultz.


Part III: Strategic Leadership
Chapter 14: Central command: Trigonometry :Level of Warfare:

Mattis wanted to clear up the military bureaucracy so that the commanders in the field had what they needed. That sounds good. But how? Usually the rules of a bureaucracy were put in place for a reason, not just on a whim-of course there are times that is true. Usually the rules were there to prevent abuses or to enforce a particular chain of command. How do you get rid of the rules governing the bureaucracy without doing away with the reasons why they were put there in the beginning? I do not think Mattis addresses that.

A leader must try to see the overarching pattern, fitting details into the larger situation. I think I did some of that, particularly at the lower levels. But as I moved up I got lost in detail while not looking for the overall picture.


Chapter 15: Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory

There is a danger in thinking we are top-dog, we are invincible. We will deteriorate. We will not see where there are problems and take care of them. Mattis felt this is what was happening. Al-Qaeda was hurt, not dead.

Rules of engagement are what separate principled militaries from barbarians and terrorists. He felt that the military needed to write these rules, not lawyers.

Having said that, Mattis also felt that when engaged, the military should be allowed to destroy the enemy. He also thinks that the forces fighting Al-Qaeda has done the most of any force in history to protect the innocent. I do not think this is as true as what Mattis thinks. At least news reports indicate that the war in Iraq has killed tens of thousands civilians. But thinking about it, I am not sure who it was reported did the killing? The forced for or against Al-Qeada?

Some high sounding goals are unattainable. Such as Bush’s goals of establishing a stable and democratic state in Afghanistan. If this is unattainable, what should the goal be? Something undemocratic? That does not sound American and not worth fighting for. On the other hand, what does the people or the culture of an area want?

Mattis disagrees with setting a timetable for ending engagements. It gives the enemy a timeline which they must endure and then they are free.

Being wired as a can-do spirit has the down side that there is a lack of objectivity about what can be accomplished. Mattis developed a line to people outside of the command chain to report to him objectively on the situation in Afghanistan.

There is a need to have more than one way to accomplish a task.


Chapter 16: Friend or Foe

Mattis analysis of the Arab Spring was more that it was against unjust and unresponsive governments than to bring about democracy to those countries. He notes that when there is a power vacuum, it favors the most organized, not those who are idealistic. Chaos more often leads to tyranny. I like Mattis’ statement: When we go abroad, our noblest instinct-to champion democracy=must be guided by prudence and humility… Goes to the statement in the previous chapter that the culture of a place may not be the best fit for democracy or vica versa. When we are wanting change in culture, we need to be ready to stand by for generations, not months.

He notes that a common refrain is that We love Americans and we hate your foreign policy. He goes on to say that sometimes we get the highest criticisms because we have the highest idea and more is expected of us than anyplace else. Things to think about, if this is true.

Mattis established the rule, not to criticize his leadership, including his President, particularly to foreign leaders.

No nation alone can sustain its security.

Respect dignity, particularly so that the leader does not lose face in public. He says that it is better to have a friend with deep flaws than an adversary with enduring hostility. I wonder how deep those flaws can be tolerated?

American has two fundamental powers:
  • The power of intimidation toward our adversaries and
  • The power of inspiration toward our friends and like-minded people everywhere.
Mattis looks at history as something which people make, not something which is swept away with. He goes on and thinks we need to have a clear head about war-if we are going in, do it to win, overall, not declare victory and act as if there are no problems.


Chapter 17: Reflections

Whatever we learn to do, we learn by actually doing it; men come to be builders, for instance, by building, and harp players by playing the harp. In the same way, by doing just acts we come to be just; by doing self-controlled acts, we come to be self-controlled ; and by doing brave acts, we become brave. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book II Mattis takes this and talks about coaching a team to make them bind together as warriors.

But he goes on and talks about measuring success by how lethal they are. I do understand that as a military, they are paid to kill. But is that really the pinnacle of what we want our fighters to be? Shouldn’t the standard be not how efficiently they kill but how little they have to kill in order to succeed?

He does say that our military is organized to fight. But he says that they are not places to conduct social experiments. I am assuming he means admitting transgender people into the military. But would he be saying the same thing about blacks in the late 1930’s?

Everyone needs a mentor or to be a mentor-and that no one needs a tyrant. He also talks about the need to constantly study to master one’s craft.

He is someone who believes that there are old solutions to new problems. That the way you find these solutions is by reading, intensively reading. Not just a few books, but hundreds of them.

Leadership principles are the same even as an organization grows:
  • Clarity of intent becomes more critical when you have a team of dissimilar experiences.
  • Focus on what can be done rather than what cannot.
  • Sometimes good processes outlive their usefulness-do not let them stump good people.
    • But how do you know when that happens? There is an assumption that all the way up the chain there are good people.
  • Reducing the size of who needs to know speeds up what is done
  • Nurture maverick thinkers.
    • I will admit, I am more of an organizational thinker than a maverick. But how do you integrate their thinking within an organization? Do you throw everything out? The collected wisdom? That seems to be a recipe for chaos.
    • Still there is a need for different thinking else an organization will not grow.
    • Mattis thinks you need to assign a high ranking person to guide the thinking.
  • Leaders must keep within their ranks people who will point out when a decision or direction is not appropriate.
  • Leaders must have a command of themselves.
Mattis pictures that if America has an empire, it is more of an empire of ideas. He says that America has fought alongside allies rather than over allies.

History is determined by choices made.


Epilogue: America as Its Own Ally
Mattis quotes General John Kelly, who lost a son in Afghanistan to say that those who lost their offspring one’s wish is that the loss is not in vain. That the mission be carried out.


Appendix
In one of the appendixes, there is an email from Mattis about the importance of reading. It can be found online.


Evaluation:
 If you are looking for a book about Mattis’ time as Secretary of Defense or why President Trump wanted him out, this is not the book for you. He only touches on his selection as the Secretary of Defense and only acknowledges that at the end of his tenure as Secretary of Defense, Mattis did not agree with President Trump on some substantial items and there are some implicit criticisms of the way the current administration functions. But nothing which will make headlines.

So what is this book about? This is two parts a memoir and one part lessons in leadership Mattis would like to pass on. This book walks through his 30 plus years as a Marine going from a low level officer until he was one of the principal commanders in all of the military, not just the Marines. Eventually he became a four star general. Most of the fighting he was involved with was either Kuwait, Iraq or Afghanistan. These times down memory lane, along with his thoughts on situations, are interesting.

But where he really takes off is in his lessons on leadership. They are broken into three components, intermixed with his memoirs. Consequently they pass through his experiences from Direct Leadership to Executive and finally Strategic. The lessons presented are applicable to non-military situations as well as to the military. So this is a good read for those who are interested in leadership, from the lowest position in an organization to the top person.

While I do not agree with many of the things he holds true, I do respect the man and what he has accomplished. So it is worthwhile reading this book to hear more of his thoughts.

 
Notes from my book group:
(None of my groups are reading this, just questions from my mind)

Mattis’ general thought is that before we can help others, America needs to get its own house in order. What issues does Mattis identify where America needs help? Do you agree?

Mattis starts out the book talking about his life before the Marines, then as a new kid in the Marines. In the Marines he found that it was his reputation for him to lose rather than a reputation to be gained. How do reputations get made or torn down?

Mattis gives lots of lessons on leadership. Which ones resonate with you? When you have been in leadership, what would have worked and what would not have been appropriate? As someone under leadership, how would you react to a leader such as Mattis?

Mattis developed a group which he called his Juliets. What was their purpose? How were these people different than snitches or spies on his own people? Would you trust a person wwho used a Juliet system?

Mattis talks about a shared understanding. What does he mean by that? How does reading, particularly a common set of books and material facilitate that? Does it mean that there will be agreement about a particular course of action? If not, how come?

Generals take a course talk by retired generals. Mattis says that it teaches humility and dedication and ethics. How is this achieved? Is this a good outcome in military personnel?
Why does Mattis day that Doctrine is the last refuge of the unimaginative?

Mattis shoulders a burden of not having adequate communication with his superiors. This led his superiors not being able to convince the President to pursue the Taliban. Do you think Mattis is right? How does communication flow in a command structure? Should his superiors have talked more with Mattis?

Mattis quotes Homer’s teachings: only when the strongest nations and armies respect the dignity of the weakest is when civilizations progress. Is this true? Why not just run over weaker nations? How does America espouse this? In what ways do we need to improve?

You cannot order someone to abandon a spiritual burden they’re wrestling with. Why not? What happens when you do?

In what ways does Mattis support a free press? In what ways is he cynical of it? Should he be? He quotes Churchill as saying A lie gets halfway around the world before truth gets its pants on. How is this a warning about what we should believe is true?

Without credible military force, our diplomacy is toothless. Is this a true statement? Are there alternatives? Does this mean that we always need a hammer to go with carrots? Is there any hope on this side of heaven for a peaceful world?

In 1863, Lincoln formulated how people in war should act: Men who take up arms against another in public war do not cease in this account to be moral beings, responsible for one another and to God. Does this still hold true? What happens if the other side does not honor the same morality?

Secretary George Shultz. Said that To do our jobs well, we should not want our job too much.What does he mean by this? How can we foster this in our civil servants? Shouldn’t a person want to care for his family? Or does this only apply to a rich or single person? Or can only the rich or a single person take such a position?

What is a bureaucracy? Why are the rules made which a bureaucracy run on made? When Mattis says he wants to clear up the bureaucracy, how does he intend to do this? Will he respect the reason why there are the rules?
 
Bush’s goals of establishing a stable and democratic state in Afghanistan. If this is unattainable, what should the goal be? Something undemocratic? That does not sound American and not worth fighting for. On the other hand, what does the people or the culture of an area want?

We as Americans tend to equate that democracy is what each nation needs. Is democracy the goal we should be shooting for each nation we engage in? If not what is? How do we judge what is good for each nation? How long is a reasonable time to assist a nation in changing? Mattis suggests change may happen over many generations. Is this a good assessment? Are we willing to wait that long?

Mattis notes that a common refrain is that We love Americans and we hate your foreign policy. Is this a good analysis? How do other countries hate our foreign policy? Why do they love the people? Mattis pictures that if America has an empire, it is more of an empire of ideas. He says that America has fought alongside allies rather than over allies. Does America have an empire? If so, how do we control this empire? What do you think about Mattis’ statement that our empire is more an empire of ideas? What ideas are these? Democracy? Human rights? Capitalism?

How do we judge the capabilities and abilities of our military? Mattis suggests it is by how lethal it is. How does that resonate with you?

He does say that our military is organized to fight and he says that the military is not the place to conduct social experiments.What does he consider a social experiment? Is he right? Should the military reflect America as a whole? Do you think he is talking about transgenders? Ir something deeper?

Many of these questions are either from or adapted from LitLovers.
  • Why the title of Call Sign Chaos?
  • Does this story work as a biography or leadership book? Does Mattis look at himself critically?
  • Every story and person has a world view. Were you able to identify Mattis’ world view? What was it? How did it affect what he wanted to tell?
  • In what context was religion talked about in this book?
  • Why do you think the author wrote this book?
  • What would you ask the author if you had a chance?
  • What “take aways” did you have from this book?
  • What central ideas does the author present?
    • Are they personal, sociological, global, political, economic, spiritual, or military?
    • What evidence does the author use to support the book's ideas?
      • Is the evidence convincing...definitive or...speculative?
      • Does the author depend on personal opinion, observation, and assessment? Or is the evidence factual—based on science, statistics, historical documents, or quotations from (credible) experts?
    • What implications for you, our nation or the world do these ideas have?
    • Are these idea’s controversial?
      • To whom and why?
  • Are there solutions which the author presents?
    • Do they seem workable? Practable?
    • How would you implement them?
  • Describe the culture talked about in the book.
    • How is the culture described in this book different than where we live?
    • What economic or political situations are described?
    • Does the author examine economics and politics, family traditions, the arts, religious beliefs, language or food?
  • How did this book affect your view of the world?
    • Of how God is viewed?
    • What questions did you ask yourself after reading this book?
  • Talk about specific passages that struck you as significant—or interesting, profound, amusing, illuminating, disturbing, sad...?
    • What was memorable?




New Words:
  • Fratricide (Prologue): the killing of one's brother or sister.
  • Parsimonious (Chp 3): unwilling to spend money or use resources; stingy or frugal.
  • Coup d’oeil (chp 5): glimpse or glance in English. The literal meaning is "stroke of [the] eye"
  • Plenipotentiary (chp 14): a person, especially a diplomat, invested with the full power of independent action on behalf of their government, typically in a foreign country.
Book References:
  • Treasure Island by Robert Louis Stevenson
  • Captains Courageous by Rudyard Kipling
  • The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper
  • The Call of the Wild by Jack London
  • The Swiss Family Robinson by Johann David Wyss
  • Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein
  • The Battle of Okinawa by Unknown
  • Lee’s Lieutenants by Douglas Freeman
  • Strategy by Liddel Hart
  • The Killer Angels by Michael Shaara
  • Inferno by Dante
  • With the Old Breed by E.B. Sledge
  • Defeat into Victory by Viscount Slim
  • The Siege by Russell Braddon
  • Seven Pillars of Wisdom by T.E. Lawrence
  • Meditations by Marcus Aurelius

Good Quotes:
    • First Line: In late November 2016, I was enjoying Thanksgiving break in my hometown on the Columbia River in Washington State when I received an unexpected call from Vice President Elect Pence.
    • Last Line: E pluribus unum.
    • We don’t get to choose when we die, but we do choose how we meet death. Chapter 1: A Carefree Youth Joins the Disciplined Marines
    • Men who are familiarized to danger meet it without shrinking; whereas troops unused to service often apprehend danger where no danger is. George Washington, Letter to the President of Congress (9 February 1776)
    • Reading is an honor and a gift from a warrior or historian who-a decade or a thousand decades ago-set aside time to write. He distilled a lifetime of campaigning in order to have a “conversation” with you. …. If you haven’t read hundreds of books, you are functionally illiterate, and you will be incompetent, because your personal experiences alone aren’t broad enough to sustain you. Chapter 4: Broadening
    • Mastering your chosen vocation means you are ready when opportunity knocks. Chp 5
    • Doctrine is the last refuge of the unimaginative. Chapter 5: Rhino
    • You never know an enemy until you fight him. Chapter 6: The March Up
    • Uncertainty runs riot if you don’t keep cool. Chapter 6: The March Up
    • great nations don’t get angry; military action should be undertaken only to achieve specific strategic effects. Chapter 8: Incoherence
    • A leader’s role is problem solving. If you don’t like problems, stay out of leadership. Chapter 11: Hold the Line
    • Men who take up arms against another in public war do not cease in this account to be moral beings, responsible for one another and to God. Abraham Lincoln Lieber Code of April 24, 1863.
    • You cannot allow your passion for excellence to destroy your compassion for them as human beings. Chapter 12: Essential NATO
    • There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them. Winston Churchill, Chequers Speech, April 1, 1945
    • Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster. General William Tecumseh Sherman’s Memoirs, Chapter XXV
    • Any President gets the advice he desires and deserves. Chapter 13: Disbanding Bureaucracy
    • To do our jobs well, we should not want our job too much. Secretary George Shultz.
    • A leader must try to see the overarching pattern, fitting details into the larger situation. Chapter 14: Central command: Trigonometry :Level of Warfare:
    • Whatever we learn to do, we learn by actually doing it; …. by doing just acts we come to be just; by doing self-controlled acts, we come to be self-controlled; and by doing brave acts, we become brave. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book II
    • History is determined by choices made. Chapter 17: Reflections
      Table of Contents:
      • Prologue
      • Part I: Direct Leadership
        • Chapter 1: A Carefree Youth Joins the Disciplined Marines
        • Chapter 2: Recruit for Attitude, Train for Skill
        • Chapter 3: Battle
        • Chapter 4: Broadening
        • Chapter 5: Rhino
      • Part II: Executive Leadership
        • Chapter 6: The March Up
        • Chapter 7: A Division in Its Prime
        • Chapter 8: Incoherence
        • Chapter 9: Cascading Consequences
        • Chapter 10: Fighting While GTransforming
        • Chapter 11: Hold the Line
        • Chapter 12: Essential NATO
        • Chapter 13: Disbanding Bureaucracy
      • Part III: Strategic Leadership
        • Chapter 14: Central command: Trigonometry :Level of Warfare:
        • Chapter 15: Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory
        • Chapter 16: Friend or Foe
        • Chapter 17: Reflections
      • Epilogue: America as Its Own Ally

      References:


          No comments: