Should All Presidents Be Military Veterans?
Read Robert Heinlein's speculative fiction novel "Starship Troopers" (after you have had the abominable movie hypnotically barricaded away from your memory. It postulates a world where only former military could vote. It does NOT advocate this system ... it is merely a "what if" scenario. (The film had so little to do with it I can't imagine why Virginia Heinlein didn't sue the bastards who made it for libel or something.)
The idea of a Commander in Chief being a civilian took a while for me to comprehend, but then the light bulb went on: If the President is a military person, the military is running the military ... and the nation. That is why the system is set up as it is. This is civilian rule, instead of military rule, and I'm quite comfortable with that.
When it comes to qualifications, there are quite a few. Imagine an illiterate President unable to read more than signs and controls on his/her TV remote! Imagine a President who cannot speak English.
Some qualifications seem "obvious." Every President since at least Eisenhower except one was a veteran, and that one was Citizen Clinton. He is not my idea of a shining example of presidential mettle. And his lack of military experience did not stop him from allowing some military sorties and send "kids" into harm's way. We also had Nixon, who was a vet (Navy, if I recall), and he is the poster child for crappy Presidents.
Being a veteran does not guarantee a president will be good at his civilian post, or that he will be bad at it.
Americans' feelings about the loss of our "kids" make perfect sense to me. I want accountability in public office that we are unlikely to ever see. And when I heard on the radio while driving that Bush the First launched Desert Storm, I thought of the "kids" and cried like a baby. (Silly, middle-aged veteran, proud of having served, and weeping because the best kids America breeds are going into danger to become casualties and killers, all to promote political agendas.)
If I were to use the "Benjamin Franklin T" method of deciding on a president, In the Pro column I would mark "veteran" twice to lend it more clout. Having served can make a world of difference in a man in ANY position. But Nixon's "T" form would still (in hindsight, anyway) come up short on the Pro's.
Requiring military background for a president? No.
But the president should be the man who hands the folded flag on bended knee to every survivor at the graveside.
The idea of a Commander in Chief being a civilian took a while for me to comprehend, but then the light bulb went on: If the President is a military person, the military is running the military ... and the nation. That is why the system is set up as it is. This is civilian rule, instead of military rule, and I'm quite comfortable with that.
When it comes to qualifications, there are quite a few. Imagine an illiterate President unable to read more than signs and controls on his/her TV remote! Imagine a President who cannot speak English.
Some qualifications seem "obvious." Every President since at least Eisenhower except one was a veteran, and that one was Citizen Clinton. He is not my idea of a shining example of presidential mettle. And his lack of military experience did not stop him from allowing some military sorties and send "kids" into harm's way. We also had Nixon, who was a vet (Navy, if I recall), and he is the poster child for crappy Presidents.
Being a veteran does not guarantee a president will be good at his civilian post, or that he will be bad at it.
Americans' feelings about the loss of our "kids" make perfect sense to me. I want accountability in public office that we are unlikely to ever see. And when I heard on the radio while driving that Bush the First launched Desert Storm, I thought of the "kids" and cried like a baby. (Silly, middle-aged veteran, proud of having served, and weeping because the best kids America breeds are going into danger to become casualties and killers, all to promote political agendas.)
If I were to use the "Benjamin Franklin T" method of deciding on a president, In the Pro column I would mark "veteran" twice to lend it more clout. Having served can make a world of difference in a man in ANY position. But Nixon's "T" form would still (in hindsight, anyway) come up short on the Pro's.
Requiring military background for a president? No.
But the president should be the man who hands the folded flag on bended knee to every survivor at the graveside.
posted by Author | 6:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home