78-10-B7: Difference between revisions
en>Reagan admin (Importing new page for 78-10-B7) |
Reagan admin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2"> | <TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2"> | ||
=== Transcript === | === Transcript === | ||
For more than 200 years our nation has followed a policy of civilian control | |||
over the military. The President is the Commander in Chief; he appoints as | |||
Secretary of Defense a civilian and then come the uniformed Admirals and Generals. | |||
The system was designed to guard against military dictatorship and it has | |||
served us very well. I'm sure no American, including those in uniform, would | |||
want to change it. Presidents have the counsel and advice of top military experts | |||
in the decisions they have to make with regard to our national safety, but | |||
Presidents in the final analysis make the decisions. | |||
Several weeks ago we watched on TV as one Chief of Staff, General Brown, | |||
stepped down. In his farewell remarks the General warned us of danger ahead | |||
if we did not add to and strengthen our military capability. | |||
A short time later on the TV screen we saw the President (who was not present | |||
at the previous ceremony) announce the appointment of a new Chief of Staff. He | |||
made this the occasion for remarks about our defense stature that were contrary | |||
to the warnings of the outgoing Chief. | |||
It is no secret that this President has over-ridden the advice of the Joint | |||
Chiefs of Staff or ignored their opinion on several occasions. What happens if a | |||
President using his command authority appoints as Chiefs of the various services | |||
men who will tell him what he wants to hear rather than their best considered | |||
military opinion? | |||
We have the case of General Singlaub who was transferred for expressing his | |||
opinion against withdrawing American troops from South Korea. Then later when he | |||
expressed a contrary view regarding the Newton war head decision he was -- QUOTE-- | |||
"allowed" --UNQUOTE-- to take early retirement. | |||
In the case of the Korean withdrawal he had been informed that there was | |||
"no announced decision" as yet. Indeed the South Koreans had been told they would | |||
be consulted before any decision was made. In truth they were not. | |||
Now in retirement and free to express himself the General says we weren't | |||
honest with the South Koreans . He also says there was --QUOTE-- "no authentic | |||
military input concerning the decision to withdraw" --UNQUOTE--. North Korea | |||
incidentally has a two-to-one advantage over South Korea in artillery, armor and | |||
combat aircraft. Their military forces are stronger than the combined American | |||
and South Korean forces before we withdraw. | |||
The decision to withhold the Newton weapon was made with no attempt to get | |||
military advice . But most telling with regard to the President's unwillingness | |||
to take or seek advice was the word to the military regarding the Panama Canal | |||
treaties. The Joint Chiefs were told they could feel free to disagree with the | |||
treaties--and resign if they did so. | |||
This is Ronald Reagan. | |||
Thanks for listening. | |||
</TD> | </TD> | ||
| Line 24: | Line 72: | ||
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP"> | <TR><TD VALIGN="TOP"> | ||
===Added Notes=== | ===Added Notes=== | ||
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Chiefs_of_Staff Joint Chiefs of Staff] (''Wikipedia'') | |||
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Scratchley_Brown General George S. Brown] (''Wikipedia'') | |||
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_C._Jones General David C. Jones] (''Wikipedia'') | |||
</TD></TR> | </TD></TR> | ||
</TABLE> | </TABLE> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:46, 11 February 2026
- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1978
| << Previous Broadcast | Next Broadcast >> |
Chiefs of Staff[edit]
Transcript[edit]For more than 200 years our nation has followed a policy of civilian control over the military. The President is the Commander in Chief; he appoints as Secretary of Defense a civilian and then come the uniformed Admirals and Generals. The system was designed to guard against military dictatorship and it has served us very well. I'm sure no American, including those in uniform, would want to change it. Presidents have the counsel and advice of top military experts in the decisions they have to make with regard to our national safety, but Presidents in the final analysis make the decisions. Several weeks ago we watched on TV as one Chief of Staff, General Brown, stepped down. In his farewell remarks the General warned us of danger ahead if we did not add to and strengthen our military capability. A short time later on the TV screen we saw the President (who was not present at the previous ceremony) announce the appointment of a new Chief of Staff. He made this the occasion for remarks about our defense stature that were contrary to the warnings of the outgoing Chief. It is no secret that this President has over-ridden the advice of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or ignored their opinion on several occasions. What happens if a President using his command authority appoints as Chiefs of the various services men who will tell him what he wants to hear rather than their best considered military opinion? We have the case of General Singlaub who was transferred for expressing his opinion against withdrawing American troops from South Korea. Then later when he expressed a contrary view regarding the Newton war head decision he was -- QUOTE-- "allowed" --UNQUOTE-- to take early retirement. In the case of the Korean withdrawal he had been informed that there was "no announced decision" as yet. Indeed the South Koreans had been told they would be consulted before any decision was made. In truth they were not. Now in retirement and free to express himself the General says we weren't honest with the South Koreans . He also says there was --QUOTE-- "no authentic military input concerning the decision to withdraw" --UNQUOTE--. North Korea incidentally has a two-to-one advantage over South Korea in artillery, armor and combat aircraft. Their military forces are stronger than the combined American and South Korean forces before we withdraw. The decision to withhold the Newton weapon was made with no attempt to get military advice . But most telling with regard to the President's unwillingness to take or seek advice was the word to the military regarding the Panama Canal treaties. The Joint Chiefs were told they could feel free to disagree with the treaties--and resign if they did so. This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening. |
Details[edit]
| |||||||||||
Added Notes[edit]
|
