That classic example is poor. The idea is that congress is forcing the military to buy things that the military doesn't want. We need to question that.
The military follows orders. The president is commander in chief. If the president doesn't want to buy something, then the military doesn't want to buy something.
Given that the date was 2014, saying "the military doesn't want" was exactly equivalent to saying "Obama doesn't want".
Fully retired members of the military, not seeking to gain something like a DoD or cabinet-level position, might be able to speak more freely to congress.
I mean we need to question "military doesn't want", not that we need to question "forcing the military to buy".
We may have a situation where the military really wants the equipment, but isn't permitted to admit it. They follow orders. The orders, coming down from the president, are that the military is to claim that they don't want the equipment.
Example: the military really wanted the F-22, then we got a new president, and suddenly the military isn't interested in the F-22
The military isn't a borg collective, it is full of people trying to get their way, climb the ladder, make money, etc. Those motivations produce behavior counter to what the command structure 'wants'.
The military follows orders. The president is commander in chief. If the president doesn't want to buy something, then the military doesn't want to buy something.
Given that the date was 2014, saying "the military doesn't want" was exactly equivalent to saying "Obama doesn't want".
Fully retired members of the military, not seeking to gain something like a DoD or cabinet-level position, might be able to speak more freely to congress.