At the same time, under the guise of urgency and national self-defense, these civilian officials have perpetuated the common presidential practice of repeatedly committing U.S. troops abroad. Circumventing or outmaneuvering Congress in Bosnia is only the most glaring recent example. The result has been a diminution of effective civilian control of the military. While ostensibly accepting nontraditional assignments such as peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance that core true believers consider extraneous and burdensome, and while zealously trumpeting itself as the revolutionary vanguard for new-age cyberwar, the military has remained stubbornly wedded to a hidebound conception of war and self. Peace, always a temporary respite, is a function of one's readiness for war.
War is traditional combat, and victory goes to the party most proficient in managing violence.
The military exists solely to prepare for and wage war. Therefore the profession occupies privileged standing and should be immune from the meddling scrutiny of amateurs. These same beliefs, because they reflect the types of individuals the institution attracts and rewards, also have contributed to incessant institutional disobedience, apparently too subtle for most of us to recognize. They are the outgrowth of an institution that has lost its identity, that no longer has confidence in or respect for those it is supposed to serve. The people, increasingly disenchanted, cynical and alienated, are captive still of the Cold War mentality that convinced them they endanger the republic by knowing too much about their military.