Talk:Chief of Staff of the United States Army

Military history: North America / United States Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chief of Staff outranked?

This article says that from 14 April 1906 to 21 April 1910 the Chief of Staff of the United States Army was J. Franklin Bell, who was a Major General. However, the article on Arthur MacArthur, Jr. says that he was a Lieutenant General from 1906 to 1909. What's the deal? I thought 10 U.S.C. § 743 said the Chief of Staff of the Army is by default the highest ranking officer in the Army (save the chairman or vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should they be Army officers). And I don't think Arthur MacArthur was the chairman or vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Maybe 10 U.S.C. § 743 didn't take effect until after 1909.

Also, are there any other times that the chief of Staff of the Army wasn't the highest ranking officer in the Army (excluding the chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)? - Shaheenjim 19:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The lieutenant generalcy was originally supposed to go to the ranking officer of the Army; i.e., the senior major general. Ordinarily the ranking officer of the Army would also expect to be named commanding general/chief of staff as a prerogative of his rank, which indeed was the pattern up to 1906. What happened in 1906 was that when Bates retired, it was Corbin's turn to be ranking officer and he accepted the promotion to lieutenant general but declined the position of chief of staff, saying it ought to go to a younger man who could serve a longer term than the few months remaining before Corbin had to retire for age. So Bell became chief of staff as a major general and when Corbin retired later that year, it was Arthur MacArthur's turn to be promoted to lieutenant general. At that point the rank was no longer being awarded to recognize extraordinary wartime leadership, nor to empower the head of the service, but simply to reward longevity in uniform, and Congress terminated all new promotions to lieutenant general in January 1907. The rank expired in 1909 when MacArthur retired for age, having never become chief of staff and chafing at having had to take orders from the lower-ranking Bell. See, for example:

"The Chief of Staff", The New York Times, December 17, 1905

"The New Chief of Staff", The New York Times, February 4, 1906

"Lt. Gen. MacArthur Dies While Speaking: Retired Army Officer Stricken While Addressing Meeting of Veterans in Wisconsin", The New York Times, September 6, 1912

Ironically, the next serving Army officer to outrank the chief of staff was Arthur MacArthur's son Douglas (1948-1951, excluding retired generals of the armies or Army, who technically remained on active duty for life). Morinao 21:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petraeus

Isn't David Petraeus the current Chief of Staffof the US Army? 72.242.166.132 (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Er, no, what on earth would make you think he was? If he were Chief of Staff, what would he be doing in Iraq? -- Zsero (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vacation talk 102.90.79.28 (talk) 17:04, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CSA in the army

CSA 2.26.219.204 (talk) 17:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]