A President's Military Background

[nonamerasian]

Is it important?

[onnihs]

i myself being a veteran, I find that I respect the president a lot more if he has a military background, and moreso if he's a combat veteran. Usually presidential candidates were once officers, who either led men into battle or commanded a significant number of soldiers. This tells me off the bat that the man is a leader, and has already proved that he is competant, able, and strong.

On the flipside, it's also easy to ascertain one's character through their military service.. namely, our President Bush, who's military service is under scrutiny.

[Kuchana]

Or with John Kerry. But nobody's paying particular attention so much to his.

[onnihs]

^ sure they are. i'm sure the GOP has dissected his military records. Kerry is no less than a Vietnam war hero - a Silver Star, a Bronze Star, three Purple Hearts and at least eight other awards that were unit commendations or recognition of his service in Vietnam. Wow.

Last i heard some people were accusing Kerry of "Purple Heart hunting"... there was a policy that allowed servicemembers to go back home from Vietnam after recieving 3 purple hearts. Well, Kerry recieved those three and was discharged - but I hardly believe he had to "hunt" for his purple hearts... he was a PT boat captain in the Mekong Delta. Some of the heaviest and bloodiest battles were fought there.

[Kuchana]

I was referring to how he supposedly threw away his ribbons and/or medals :)

[onnihs]

^ oh... hehe, right.. :)

[Beat180]

I think it does too. Not having had seen combat but I think that if a president has seen combat first hand, they'd be a bit more reluctant to send other troops into a war situation. I think another reason Bush was so willing to go to war was that he really doesn't know what people go through when they see combat and something like that is important to know as "commander and chief". I think that's something Bush is really lacking, a connection to the troops instead of just seeing them as people on tv doing what I tell them to do.

[Faithless]

One issue that is being played-out, maybe a little too much, is this thing about who is more qualified to be Commander in Chief?
Some draft dodger?
Or some grunt?

What does it really take to be Commander in Chief? Is Kerry anymore qualified just because he served? Maybe.

But how did John Kerry serve? Not as as officer (or high ranking officer), right? Certainly, not in a strategy making role.

Shouldn't there be more of a legitimate qualifier for someone to claim they'd make an excellant Commander in Chief?

[bluemonq]

military service of any kind -- or lack thereof -- is irrelevant. as the *president*, the civilian nature of the office comes first, before being the "commander-in-chief". that's why there's a joint chiefs of staff (in my opinion, having a secretary of defense is kinda stupid; the national secruity advisor should encompass that role to some extent, and the rest of it should be taken up by homeland security, state, and the future intelligence [ha!] director) and national security advisor to advise the president on military matters. yes, ideally, with all things being the same, a high-ranking officer might be a little-bit better qualified, with his skills at taking the long view at least somewhat honed. but that isn't the point really...

what i think the dems are having trouble expressing (or don't dare express) is more the personal qualities reflected by their service. the fact that kerry spent time in vietnam instead of getting out of the draft (and you don't have to be from a storried family to do so; see bill clinton [yes, yes conscientious objector, but he got out of the draft, and that's all that matters for my point]) like george w. bush, who was assigned to a unit of the texas air national guard that was termed as "the champagne flight" full of rich kids who were guaranteed to not need to serve in vietnam BUT STILL did not fulfill his commitment (ain't it funny, that a small section of the records were destroyed in a fire, and it just happened that bush's service year fell into the range of years?) casts bush in an unfavorable light. however, if the kerry campaign or its pacs actually came out and said that, then there would be problems for them...

[Emperor_Mike]

A brilliant Major also has the capacity to be a mediocre Colonel or an incompetent General.

[Yeahman]

Kerry was an officer. He had people under his command. That's valuable experience. Also the fact that he saw the horrors of war.
But I don't see this as a make or break criterion. Clinton was a draft dodger and Bush Sr. served honorably.

[SunWuKong]

threads have been merged.

[AngryABCGirl]

It might be very appealing at the moment because America is at war and our current president is at pansy level. I think that's probably one of the big reasons why Kerry got the nomination despite having a lackluster personality, especially in comparsion to his VP.

[Faithless]

threads have been merged.
Sorry. I searched and didn't come with anything.

.
Kerry was an officer. He had people under his command. That's valuable experience. Also the fact that he saw the horrors of war.
But I don't see this as a make or break criterion. Clinton was a draft dodger and Bush Sr. served honorably.
OK. I thought Kerry was just a soldier.

[onnihs]

One issue that is being played-out, maybe a little too much, is this thing about who is more qualified to be Commander in Chief?
Some draft dodger?
Or some grunt?

What does it really take to be Commander in Chief? Is Kerry anymore qualified just because he served? Maybe.

But how did John Kerry serve? Not as as officer (or high ranking officer), right? Certainly, not in a strategy making role.

Shouldn't there be more of a legitimate qualifier for someone to claim they'd make an excellant Commander in Chief?

One of the most important aspects of having a war veteran as the Commander in Chief is that he seriously knows the value of the individual soldier, and in theory, would not put that soldier at risk unless it were absolutely, positively necessary.

Frankly, the president need not be a stout military strategist. He is constantly surrounded by the most brilliant military minds the country has to offer - his judgement need only be his jewel.

[Faithless]

One of the most important aspects of having a war veteran as the Commander in Chief is that he seriously knows the value of the individual soldier, and in theory, would not put that soldier at risk unless it were absolutely, positively necessary.
Yeah, I can see that. But that's not to say that they won't get us involved/continue our involvement in an unnecessary war. Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, LB Johnson.

Frankly, the president need not be a stout military strategist. He is constantly surrounded by the most brilliant military minds the country has to offer - his judgement need only be his jewel.
"His judgement need only be his jewel." Nice saying.

That's a good point. Military strategists, and probably also Intelligence officers.

[Mr.Lum]

Frankly, the president need not be a stout military strategist. He is constantly surrounded by the most brilliant military minds the country has to offer - his judgement need only be his jewel.

He doesn't need to be great at anything really. He just has to be able to smile for the camera.

[onnihs]

He doesn't need to be great at anything really. He just has to be able to smile for the camera.

Dance monkey! DANCE!

[Mr.Lum]

I was referring to how he supposedly threw away his ribbons and/or medals :)

What does that matter?

[nonamerasian]

I think it's somewhat important. Or even a little more than somewhat.

Not that I wouldn't vote for someone because he/she doesn't have military experience, but being that he/she will be vying for the position of Commander in Chief, it's a major plus if there is military leadership and combat experience down on the resume.

[Kuchana]

What does that matter?

While it may not matter to you it sure matters to me. That's where we differ.

[Mr.Lum]

While it may not matter to you it sure matters to me. That's where we differ.
Because he threw off some stupid medal when he was 20 something? I read somewhere that he didn't even throw his own medals, he got someone else's and threw them. LOL.

[deez nuts]

irrelevant.

just like i don't really care about a candidate's stance about gay marriage.