On National Security issues, is it wiser for a US President to seek advice from retired Generals or career Diplomats?

That's true... but there's always a dominant tendency... which one do you think it's best?

COL (Join to see) - If that's a constraint, I'll say generals. But it depends on the type of general. American history has several officers who successfully transitioned into diplomatic roles. Marshall, Powell, and even Ike in the way he worked, come to mind. The smart ones understand working in the inter-agency and don't perceive military force as being the only answer. Back to Powell, his doctrine leans heavily on other resources prior to military intervention. However, due to career development, it's practically impossible for a career diplomatic officer to transition into the realm of military leadership. So I'll say lean toward the generals, but not for the reasons many might think.

The clowns that the people of the great Commonwealth vote into office... it's disappointing. I just sit here, 1000 miles away, and shake my head, glad that I don't have to feel the noose that the politicians there are slowly tightening anymore. Even the "conservatives" that they vote for tend to be left of center..