John McCain and GOP Shock the Nation!

[Scott1]

I don't think so. Just because someone is a great baseball player, doesn't make him a good manager. (Same is true in basketball - See Isiah Thomas) At this point, we should be looking at a persons foreign policy to gage how the military would be used and whether or not we approve of it being used that way.

Good points all.... but I don't agree.... you don't serve as a leader in combat without being a good "manager" for very long... no offense to baseball or basketball coaches out there, but it's a different "playing field" if you catch my drift.

Obviously I'm a little biased.... when you have friends and brothers with their lives on the line... the thought of someone without any tactical proficiency being in charge scares the crap outa me.

 

[Father Heathen]

the thought of someone without any tactical proficiency being in charge scares the crap outa me.

Then you must've been a nervous wreck the last 8 years.

 

[Scott1]

Then you must've been a nervous wreck the last 8 years.

Amen... especially when I served under the bufoon.

 

[McBell]

Good points all.... but I don't agree.... you don't serve as a leader in combat without being a good "manager" for very long... no offense to baseball or basketball coaches out there, but it's a different "playing field" if you catch my drift.

Obviously I'm a little biased.... when you have friends and brothers with their lives on the line... the thought of someone without any tactical proficiency being in charge scares the crap outa me.

Does the same military service requirement also hold for congress?
Since it is CONGRESS who is to declare war?

 

[Scott1]

Does the same military service requirement also hold for congress?
Since it is CONGRESS who is to declare war?

What military service requirement?

 

[Runt]

What military service requirement?

The one that is an expectation of a large constituency of Americans, even though it is not actually a law. I know many people will NOT vote for a candidate who does not have military experience... for them, there IS a military service requirement that they expect candidates they will vote for to have met.

If we generally assume that people who are in a position to make military decisions should have military experience, then shouldn't members of Congress---due to their ability to declare war as well as draft and pass bills involving issues like veteran's benefits---also have military experience?

 

[McBell]

What military service requirement?

How quickly you forget:

Ummmm... does anyone else agree that military service might be of crucial importance for a potential Commander in Chief of our armed forces.... especially while we are bogged down on two fronts?

​

So again I ask:

Does the same military service requirement also hold for congress?
Since it is CONGRESS who is to declare war?
​

 

[Scuba Pete]

Ummmm... does anyone else agree that military service might be of crucial importance for a potential Commander in Chief of our armed forces.... especially while we are bogged down on two fronts?

I think that FAR more important than the questions regarding the separation of Church and State is the doctrine of the separation of politics and the military. It has always been the earmark of our country that the citizens have been in control of our peace. Sure, we have had former generals and other former military personell in the Whitehouse, but we NEVER EVER want the running our wars. That is best left up to professionals who are not going to invade a country just to get votes. The propensity for abuse here is not only alarming: it's obvious in the current conflict.

 

[Smoke]

I think military experience might be useful to a president, provided that it's high-level, strategic military experience. That is, George Washington, Dwight Eisenhower and Colin Powell definitely had the kind of experience that might be helpful to the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. A foot soldier or a naval airman doesn't really have any useful experience.

Balanced against the usefulness of high-level military experience is the fact that the president has greater duties than just being commander-in-chief of the armed forces. If he's proficient as commander-in-chief, but not at his other duties, he'll still be a failure and a disaster as president. Ulysses S. Grant was one of our greatest generals, but turned out to be one of our worst presidents.

So while military experience might be useful, it's not the most important quality in a president. It may not be important at all, if the president is able to grasp strategic matters and consult responsibly with his senior officers.

On the other hand, if you get a president whose military experience is limited to occasionally showing up for National Guard duty when and if he felt like it; who doesn't have the mental discipline to understand, much less plan, strategy; and who is unable to take advice from his generals, then nothing but disaster will result.

 

[Scuba Pete]

On the other hand, if you get a president whose military experience is limited to occasionally showing up for National Guard duty when and if he felt like it; who doesn't have the mental discipline to understand, much less plan, strategy; and who is unable to take advice from his generals, then nothing but disaster will result.

Amen bro! Truer words are seldom spoken! Frubals on your Head for that one!

 

[doppelganger]

On the other hand, if you get a president whose military experience is limited to occasionally showing up for National Guard duty when and if he felt like it; who doesn't have the mental discipline to understand, much less plan, strategy; and who is unable to take advice from his generals, then nothing but disaster will result.

But he does take advice from his generals. He just fires them until he gets one to give him advice he wants to take.

 

[Scott1]

How quickly you forget:

Read it again.... "crucial importantce" is not translate to "requirement".'

Does the same military service requirement also hold for congress?


Since it is CONGRESS who is to declare war?

I answer this, sans strawman.....

No... the declaration of war is a political decision, and I have no problem with that.... but the Commander in Chief has a bit more influence on troops on the ground... and so I believe it is IMPORTANT (fyi: that does not mean "requirement" either) that the President have military experience.... or I guess some sort of national security backround.