The only thing that you have contributed to the discussion is to bring up the interservice rivalry angle, which is something most of us civilians know little to nothing about. Your conclusions about Wes Clark, however are, in my opinion, quite absurd. Your suggestion that Clark's legitimate questions about McCain's qualifications for the presidency signal some deep-rooted grunt jealousy of the flyboy's success in the presidential race is a red herring. First, you can glean nothing from the two men's comparative success in the presidential campaign sphere. The majority of voters, I'm sad to say, are just not that intelligent in choosing leaders. Need we only look to the man who has occupied the White House for the last 7 years? The fact that, in this age of orange terror alerts, Republicans will blindly prostrate before a war hero regardless of his actual qualifications? (Clark ran on the Democratic side, remember, which tends to be a more scrutizining audience--though not by much, as Hillary Clinton's campaign success demonstrates.) The fact that Obama and Edwards are called elitist and homosexual because they happen to be educated and think and speak coherently and intelligently? Success as a politician signals only that you somehow got people to vote for you. It is not a bellwether of actual competence. Second, why is it so difficult to consider the possibility that Wes Clark was simply asking a legitimate question about a candidate who has made his military service his primary national security qualification? Third, if anyone would know the qualifications that one gets from actual command responsibility in war, it would be Wes Clark. I think it's time the military folks out there stop gasping at his "dishonor" and "disrespect" and acknowledge that the man has a point!