Thread: Dear Mr. Obama

Originally Posted by twelvepbrs

FDR and Abraham Lincoln had no military experience, and they are widely considered our nations best presidents. Each of them led us through a very significant war.

There are the exceptions. However, to be commander in chief, you should have an understanding of that which you are supposed to be commanding.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

Not true! Lincoln commanded infantry militia during the blackhawk wars, FDR was Asst Sect. of the navy WWI.Though being a bureaucrat doesnt make a veteran FDR was not a thorough amatuer.

I did not know that about Lincoln. Learn something new every day if you are not careful.

Matt

Originally Posted by mhailey

Obama has never served in the military, and he is poised to be the commander in chief. If, according to you, we cannot even have an opinion on military issues without first having served in the military, how can you support a person who never served to be the commander in chief?

Matt

The entire point of naming the President Commander in Chief of the armed forces is to ensure civilian control over the military. Further I didn't suggest you could not have an opinion. Please don't try to put words in my mouth.

Mark, I asked you a question. I am guessing by your snotty response that you did serve in the military. Is that correct?

Soldiers are just people, there's no rule saying there smarter then anybody else. My budy that was in marines says there's a lot piece of **** human beings in the military, just like there is everywhere else.

Originally Posted by Ditch Doc

I have two combat tours as an infantryman, I am now discharged because my injuries nearly crippled me (I will probably need a cane to walk by the time I'm 50) and going to college full time and working full time. I vehemently disagree with this video. In essence, he's saying that it's wrong to call Iraq a mistake because that disrespects soldiers. Logic can't get much more flawed than that. I know you guys probably don't need it spelled out for you, but that is like saying all wars are OK, because soldiers sacrifice and are noble. HOGWASH.

Amen and amen.

Originally Posted by icedog

The entire point of naming the President Commander in Chief of the armed forces is to ensure civilian control over the military. Further I didn't suggest you could not have an opinion. Please don't try to put words in my mouth.

Mark, I asked you a question. I am guessing by your snotty response that you did serve in the military. Is that correct?

Sorry Brad! My response was meant in good fun, nothing else intended!
As for my military career...well, we'll just have to wait and see if Obama is elected or not!

Originally Posted by Ditch Doc

Logic can't get much more flawed than that.

Completely agree. And I would note that having served in the military, or not has no bearing on being able to make a logically coherent statement.

As far as whether a commander in chief needs to have understanding of what they command, yes and no. There are many different levels of understanding. A commander doesn't need to understand all the details - there's plenty of military professionals that are responsible for that.
What a commander in chief needs is a good judgment of the overall situation at present and whether a military intervention is necessary.
Most societies are well past the times when the best warrior was also the leader of the society. That's a good thing, because the two positions require different qualifications.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

Not true! Lincoln commanded infantry militia during the blackhawk wars, FDR was Asst Sect. of the navy WWI.Though being a bureaucrat doesnt make a veteran FDR was not a thorough amatuer.

Lincoln was in charge of a militia group for one year that never saw any action. Asst Sect of the Navy is a civilian position. Although FDR's position carried substantial responsibilities, it almost proves my point again. He was appointed by Wilson to the position after being a NY state senator with no military experience, and yet he was fairly successful as one of the Navy's top civilian officers.

Originally Posted by nomed

Soldiers are just people, there's no rule saying there smarter then anybody else. My budy that was in marines says there's a lot piece of **** human beings in the military, just like there is everywhere else.

I agree completely. It's also a fact that not NEARLY all "soldiers" or people involved in the military would ever agree with this lacking video.

If it is so important that the President to have served to be Commander in Chief of the armed forces, then maybe they should change the constitution to include that as a prerequisite.

Until such time, it really doesn't matter if the President served.

The following Presidents did not serve in the military, there are some good and some not so good;

John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
John Quincy Adams
Martin Van Buren
Grover Cleveland
William Taft
Woodrow Wilson
Warren Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Franklin Roosevelt
Bill Clinton

The following served in the Military, just as above, some good and some not so good;

George Washington - Commander in Chief of Continental Army during the American Revolution.
James Monroe - served in American Revolution
Andrew Jackson - American Revolution, War of 1812, First Seminole War
William Henry Harrison - Indian wars in the NW territory, War of 1812
John Tyler - War of 1812
Zachary Taylor - War of 1812, Black Hawk, Second Seminole, and Mexican wars
Franklin Pierce - Mexican War
James Buchanan - War of 1812
Abraham Lincoln - Black Hawk War
Andrew Johnson - Civil War
Ulysses Grant - Mexican War, Civil War
Rutherford Hayes - Civil War
James Garfield - Civil War
Chester Arthur - Civil War
Benjamin Harrison - Civil War
William McKinley - Civil War
Theodore Roosevelt - Spanish-American War
Harry Truman - WWI
Dwight Eisenhower - WWII General
John Kennedy - WWII
Lyndon Johnson - WWII
Richard Nixon - WWII
Gerald Ford - WWII
George Bush - WWII
James Madison
James Polk
Millard Fillmore
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan - kept out of combat due to bad eyesight
George W. Bush

Seeing as the President has other things to do, I find it more troubling that some Secretaries of Defense have no military background (when their whole job revolves around the military and military issues).

Robert Gates- USAF/CIA
Donald Rumsfeld- USN
William Cohen- no military
William Perry- no military
Les Aspin- Army
Dick Cheney- no military
Frank Carlucci- CIA
Caspar Weinberger- Army
Harold Brown- no military
James R. Schlesinger- no military
Elliot Richardson- Army
Melvin R. Laird- USN
Clark Clifford- USN
Robert McNamara- Army
Thomas S. Gates, Jr.- USN
Neil H. McElroy- no military
Charles Erwin Wilson- no military
Robert A. Lovett- USN
George Marshall- Army
Louis A. Johnson- Army
James Forrestal- USN