Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No. I said military service experience helps. I did not say it is a requirement.
Op's question is this, "do you feel that Obama would take a different stance if he had ever been in the military and in combat?"
It has NOTHING to do with "any of the 2016"
As a matter of fact, I would argue that The small size of the military relative to the population — well under 1 percent — makes broadening the service base both unnecessary and unlikely. HOWEVER, the choice to take the nation to war is the most important decision a president can make. A commander in chief who has actually served on the battlefield has peerless personal experience and can make that decision with greater empathy.
Congress is the only body that can take the nation to war. The president doesn't have the power to declare war. I know Obama and presidents who have preceeded him have skirted the letter of the law but ipso facto, it takes an act of congress to declare war on another nation.
Some just can't stick with the subject of the posting. It is about Obama, not any of his predecessors no matter how much you try to divert the conversation.
Start another thread if you want to discuss that topic, since you obviously have nothing to add to this discussion.
Oh! I think I get it now. This thread is not a debate about whether a president is more effective as a commander in chief if they have prior military service, it's just another dump on Obama thread and anybody who thinks otherwise must answer to you.
Well, I'm out a here. I don't do mindless dumps on the president based on "what if" postulations with no facts. Makes just as much sense to ask, What if Obama was half white instead of half black? Would he be a more effective leader?.
Thought this was a real thread and it's too late to delete my earlier posts now. Darn.
Some just can't stick with the subject of the posting. It is about Obama, not any of his predecessors no matter how much you try to divert the conversation.
I thought your question was whether a president would take a different stance if he had ever been in the military and in combat.
How do you answer that without looking at how it has affected other presidents?
Congress is the only body that can take the nation to war. The president doesn't have the power to declare war. I know Obama and presidents who have preceeded him have skirted the letter of the law but ipso facto, it takes an act of congress to declare war on another nation.
I said "military service experience HELPS" I never said it is a requirement.
Please take this into consideration, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush all served in uniform during World War II.
To me personally, it doesn't matter if a presidential candidate never served in the military. The matter of the fact is that we are entering an era where the odds of a candidate for political office having served in the military are going to be significantly lower than they have been in the past 60 something years. Who can say this is a good thing or a bad thing?
The actual military experience, to me, matters less than how the candidate handles it. I do believe, however, it says something about the character of a politician who is willing to put on the uniform and go into harm’s way. Having an understanding of military culture is an important preparation for politicians who will make decisions about national security matters.
Oh! I think I get it now. This thread is not a debate about whether a president is more effective as a commander in chief if they have prior military service, it's just another dump on Obama thread and anybody who thinks otherwise must answer to you.
Well, I'm out a here. I don't do mindless dumps on the president based on "what if" postulations with no facts. Makes just as much sense to ask, What if Obama was half white instead of half black? Would he be a more effective leader?.
Thought this was a real thread and it's too late to delete my earlier posts now. Darn.
Reflects badly on you for jumping into a conversation and trying to deflect it to your desires, and then cry about it.
BTW, you do mindlessly support the actions taken by Obama, or should I say the non actions. Kind of makes your previous posts silly, to say the least.
It hasn't helped you. It is clear as you refrained from answering my question. Would you like to retry? Or, did you want to allude to Adolf Hitler and his experience in the military as a benchmark to counter terrorism?
I see. An answer is only acceptable if it meets your beliefs, no thought required.
Just because the answer to your question doesn't meet your preconceived requirements, it doesn't count.
Sorry, it just doesn't work that way, much as you desire that it does.
With the current policy, it is not a fight at all, it is appeasement.
I like you.
You're funny.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
]
