General Frank McKenzie oversaw some of the most important—and controversial operations in modern US military history. The Melting Point has three themes. The first one is the importance of the primacy of civilian control of the military. It has become widely perceived that this control has been eroded over the years. General McKenzie doesn't believe that to be the case, arguing that the civ-mil relationship isn't perfect, but it doesn't have to be. It is, however, more durable than many believe, and is supported and embraced by the military. The second theme is the uniqueness of being a combatant commander. Combatant commanders participate in the development of policy, as junior partners. They are also responsible for the execution of policy—very different than the role of a service chief, or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. None of these officers are in the chain of command, and they have no ultimate, mortal responsibility or authority for execution. Only the combatant commander stands astride the boundary of decision-making and execution. Finally, the third theme that McKenzie argues is that leaders matter, and the decisions they make have a profound effect on what happens on the battlefield. McKenzie provides an honest assessment of his time in command—describing decisions that were sound, as well as some outcomes he wishes were different.

General Frank McKenzie oversaw some of the most important—and controversial operations in modern US military history. The Melting Point has three themes. The first one is the importance of the primacy of civilian control of the military. It has become widely perceived that this control has been eroded over the years. General McKenzie doesn't believe that to be the case, arguing that the civ-mil relationship isn't perfect, but it doesn't have to be. It is, however, more durable than many believe, and is supported and embraced by the military. The second theme is the uniqueness of being a combatant commander. Combatant commanders participate in the development of policy, as junior partners. They are also responsible for the execution of policy—very different than the role of a service chief, or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. None of these officers are in the chain of command, and they have no ultimate, mortal responsibility or authority for execution. Only the combatant commander stands astride the boundary of decision-making and execution. Finally, the third theme that McKenzie argues is that leaders matter, and the decisions they make have a profound effect on what happens on the battlefield. McKenzie provides an honest assessment of his time in command—describing decisions that were sound, as well as some outcomes he wishes were different.