Chain of command

General Robert E. Lee's marching orders were lost on the eve of the great battle of Sharpsburg in 1862. Had this not supplied the enemy with all the information about troop location, the great and bloody contest at Antietam Creek might have resulted in a Confederate rout. Later, in the same war between the states, Jeb Stuart was absent with his cavalry when the battle of Gettysburg was shaping up, and the South was decisively whipped by resurgent union forces.

We should have remembered and known better, when a communication between General McChrystal in Afghanistan and the Commander-in-Chief was waylaid and the top-secret message was published in the Washington Post.

One is astonished that no one has raised any hue and cry over Bob Woodward, who was seen smiling broadly over his journalistic coup. (Of course he can't be court-martialed, but what of the three-star general who let this happen? Nary a word of caution from anyone.) Is the command too tiring for you, sir? We are concerned about the war in Afghanistan -- who/is the enemy? What are our goals? Have we an exit strategy. Are more troops needed -- how many and what is their mission? One is assuming that the appropriate chain of command is being used, and that all elements of secrecy are being observed. Each American service man who is involved and dies for his country is one more unnecessary death that ought to weigh heavily upon all those who command troops.

The writer is a navy combat veteran of World War II, when all matters secret were confined to top military commands and delegated to those junior officers whose duty it was to translate these orders to victory. One is referred to any annals which tell you how close we came to defeat so many times. More discipline is required of those who lead our armed forces. Here or overseas.