Is it common for a currently serving general in the American armed forces to write letters praising convicted criminals
? And the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, no less? Seems odd to me, especially when you consider this passage from "The Armed Service Officer" (pdf
In a pragmatic sense, an officer’s career will span that of at least four presidential administrations. Budgets will change, national priorities will run a spectrum, and those politicians who represent the nation will come and go as a reflection of that will. The economy will fluctuate, universities will open and close, and even religions will grow and shrink in emphasis and influence. Nations will come into being and disappear. In short, the business of the planet will continue its checkered progress.
a. The constant in this warp and weave will be the service officer, whose commitment to the Constitution, morals, ethics and the nation is the real shining light of liberty. It is the bedrock that will guarantee the freedom of the American people and the continuance of our nation.
b. The nation can accept nothing less. Armed Forces officers have no right to determine national policy. They must not, as has happened in our nation’s history, distort information to serve the ends of anything other than the Constitution. Any such temptation must be ruthlessly controlled and stopped in its tracks.
Is it just me?