Admiral Harrington stood at the front of the room, arms crossed as she watched students file in. On the board behind her was the following text
( Read more... )
What strength of personality do you think it took for Washington to hold together his Army? Or a nation with two diametrically-opposed, developing political parties? Do you think a leader in the Machiavellian sense would be able to accomplish what Washington accomplished?
Re: Twenty Questionscarter_i_amApril 11 2006, 00:43:06 UTC
"As a soldier, I would much prefer to work under a man like General Washington, who seemed to genuinely care about both his troops and the reason for the fight. However, if I was looking for someone to defend my nation from outside invaders, I'm not sure Machiavelli's way wouldn't be more effective."
Re: Twenty Questionscarter_i_amApril 11 2006, 03:06:38 UTC
"I don't know that that's true," Sam thought about that, "but a certain amount of ruthlessness is necessary if you're going to lead a military force with any kind of effectiveness. Unfortunately, sometimes sacrifices and unpleasant decisions need to be made."
Comments 52
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Which would you prefer to follow?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment