Do we really want a veteran as POTUS?

SSG Warren Swan — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:28:08 -0400

I was reading the new this morning when John McCain's name came up. He ran against Obama and in the article was only seven points behind. That doesn't sound like a lot, and might be close to the margin of error. So I ask: Do we really want a veteran as POTUS or are we blowing smoke unless we find our "kind" of veteran? Patton would've been an early Trump, except intelligent and knowledgeable.

Response by SSG Ed Mikus made Apr 1 at 2016 8:30 AM

SSG Ed Mikus — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:30:19 -0400

Being a Vet is generally a desirable quality however, being a politician is generally a bad one. I would vote for any Veteran just as i would anyone else, based on their honor and integrity and how i feel about their ability to lead this nation where i feel it should be going.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Apr 1 at 2016 8:33 AM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:33:08 -0400

Yes, I really do. Vets, especially those who have experienced war, are LESS likely to run headlong into war. They understand the idea behind peace through strength.

Response by CW3(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 8:34 AM

CW3(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:34:34 -0400

I always thought whoever was to be president should have been in some branch of the military hence "commander-in-chief" most politicians never commanded anything. So they act like

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 8:34 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:34:54 -0400

I would vote for any random member of the Dysfunctional Veterans facebook page in a heartbeat.

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Apr 1 at 2016 8:35 AM

Capt Walter Miller — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:35:00 -0400

Patton didn't even like the New Deal. Since he was wealthy and his wife's family was mega wealthy, President Roosevelt was "that man in the white house," to him, as he was to many of the wealthy of the day.

Patton never harbored any political ambitions, although he clearly saw that Ike did.

Walt

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Apr 1 at 2016 9:00 AM

SSG Gerhard S. — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:00:15 -0400

Military service is no guarantee of good leadership, or of Constitutional fealty. Leadership wise, as far as Veterans go, we have Pres Reagan as a successes story.... And Pres Carter... Not so much so. It's a crap shoot if Military service is ones only consideration. Is it something I look at? Yes, but it's policy, and character, that drive my Presidential choices.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Apr 1 at 2016 9:09 AM

SrA Edward Vong — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:09:05 -0400

I like a very balanced and well rounded person. A veteran does not automatically give the candidate my vote. Someone with a career in military will definitely not get my vote as that may be all that they know. Someone with some military experience will get brownie points with me as that shows that you have some military experienced. It really depends on the situation.

I am more willing to vote for one who has a background in politics and law, and no military experience as opposed to a veteran who has served his whole life. (Again depends on the person, I am just making a generalization.)

Response by SGT Dave Tracy made Apr 1 at 2016 9:15 AM

SGT Dave Tracy — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:15:56 -0400

I think being a veteran provides a good knowledge base for a well-rounded Commander-in-Chief, (more so than the permanent civilian population that get's their military knowledge from Hollywood) but in and of itself, military experience does not guarantee a great CIC.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 9:41 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:41:40 -0400

Yes. Military service should be required to qualify for President in my opinion. Don't care if you did two years in the Guard or 30 on AD; you should have to wear the uniform before the people you may send to their deaths call you Commander in Chief.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Apr 1 at 2016 9:46 AM

CPT Jack Durish — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:46:48 -0400

Why not?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 9:47 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:47:42 -0400

Hi, SSG Swan.

Is it ok for a President to have served? Sure. Should it be a requirement to hold the office? No.

Response by PO3 Donald Murphy made Apr 1 at 2016 10:04 AM

PO3 Donald Murphy — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:04:44 -0400

Veteran doesn't necessarily mean "suitable." After all, look at the military failure decisions made by USAF pilot George Bush. Compare those to the brilliant decisions made by civilian Ronald Reagan.

Response by LTC Thomas Tennant made Apr 1 at 2016 10:08 AM

LTC Thomas Tennant — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:08:25 -0400

You cause me to blow the dust off my two volume edition of "THE PATTON PAPERS" and leafing through them ... well I agree with you. Living just 10 miles from the "Patton Museum" on Fort Knox, I have seen the exhibits which underlies your observation. The trouble is the American political establishment is afraid of a Patton or a Trump because they could not control the man. In some ways I would even say they were at best happy that Patton die (at worst had a hand in his death) and may secretly wish the same for Trump. Ironically, Trump is almost the same age as Patton at his death.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Apr 1 at 2016 10:24 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:24:25 -0400

A Vet is a good quality, but John McCain needs to retire and stay put away. He had his chance and gave it away. Look at what he's done in Congress? Why would he do any better now?

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Apr 1 at 2016 10:28 AM

CSM Charles Hayden — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:28:39 -0400

SSG Warren Swan Former Defense Secretary Hagel had the credentials - and got chewed by the White House crowd!

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Apr 1 at 2016 10:29 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:29:29 -0400

Depends. I'd like to measure the man, not the label.

There are some folks I served with that I wouldn't trust with a fork that didn't have a cork on the end of it. You couldn't send them to the head without a buddy shadowing them. They weren't bad guys, they just were on the far left of the Bell Curve.

There are other folks I would give a "Hell yes" to without even knowing their political inclinations, because I trusted them that much. That's whether they served or not.

But when it really boils down to it, it's not a Constitutional Requirement. I'm not a big fan of adding requirements that aren't in B&W, because then we take Objective Standards and turn them into Subjective Standards. We've all had folks do that to us in the past and it sucks.

When WE say he needs to be a VET, someone else is saying he needs to be a SHE, or to have worked fast food, or have been in a union, or be a lawyer, or served in Congress, or have been a Governor, or so forth. It gets out of control really quick for a "minority of the population" and we are minority of the population. We're not any more special than any other minority.

Response by PO2 Robert Aitchison made Apr 1 at 2016 10:42 AM

PO2 Robert Aitchison — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:42:53 -0400

In general I think the Commander in Chief should have some military service. That said our last "veteran" President was George W. Bush and he wasn't amazing.

George H.W. Bush was an accomplished naval aviator and Jimmy Carter was a submariner, I think Reagan was nominally in the Army doing promotional work.

John McCain is obviously a war hero and I'm glad he's on the Senate Armed Service Committee. He had a tough task ahead of him in 2008 because he was (pretty accurately) seen as more of the same (as in similar to George W. Bush) which is not what the country wanted and he really hurt himself choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate. Especially since McCain was old even then the notion of President Palin was enough to get some people to vote for Obama. I think the same John McCain who ran against Bush in 2000 paired with a strong centrist running mate could have easily beat Obama but that's not how it played out.

Response by SFC J Fullerton made Apr 1 at 2016 11:15 AM

SFC J Fullerton — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 11:15:08 -0400

I think the era of a career officer/General going straight from the military to running for POTUS is long gone. While his expertise in defense and national security may be top-notch, he would have a difficult time overcoming the perception of lack of expertise in other areas more important to the electorate. Not saying that is my opinion, just looking at it objectively. Wesley Clark was the last one to run, in '04, and failed miserably in the primaries. However, I do agree that a distinguished veteran, who further distinguishes his/her self in public office after the military, would offer another degree of creditability to successfully run for POTUS.

Response by SFC Familia Gonzalez made Apr 1 at 2016 11:24 AM

SFC Familia Gonzalez — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 11:24:00 -0400

I'm sure someone has already said this, but my position is no... Just as long as he listens to his Joint Chiefs of Staff... Some of our best POTUS never served. This coming from a retired grunt, hence it may or may not be a valid point. TGIF!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 11:39 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 11:39:59 -0400

I would say yes - Some past POTUS who served in uniform, performed well as Commander in Chief and were wise in their decisions, others maybe not so much. America needs a strong leader and a Congress who will uphold the Constitution and are selfless in their convictions.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 12:20 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 12:20:05 -0400

YES , someone that can lead people and do it right.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 1:01 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 13:01:14 -0400

good question, if the potus had millitary experience hell yes but with that said does he or she have the knowledge to do the job

Response by SSG(P) D. Wright Downs made Apr 1 at 2016 1:48 PM

SSG(P) D. Wright Downs — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 13:48:44 -0400

McCain sealed his death in Presidental politics when he chose Sarah as his running mate. It was not clearly McCain vs Obama. Most voters, who are serious voters and who have a couple of years on them, look at the second person, too. I didn't want Sarah as the person in charge for even a minute...remember that McCain had surgery on the growth on his mouth, may have been subject to Agent Orange, and there were other heath issues regarding Viet Nam veterans. Being of that generation, many of us looked there, too. Obama had Joe Biden as his second. Joe was a good person , who many of the eclectorate thought could have/should have been the nominee. So, we were not dealing with Apples and Apple but Apples and oranges. There are many voters who are Independent voters who, not being tied to one party or another, vote their concience not a party line or dogma. Being one of those, I go for a third party rather than feeling I must vote for the lesser of the 2 evils as some do. Many of us opt for a third party.

Response by 1SG Nick Baker made Apr 1 at 2016 4:34 PM

1SG Nick Baker — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 16:34:53 -0400

I have some questions. How many wars were we in with a civilian (no military service)? What was the death toll or cost?
A war veteran knows the real cost of deploying youth.
In my opinion Patton would have not taken us to war after WW2. Everyone would have thought twice. Reagan was feared.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Apr 1 at 2016 5:45 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 17:45:37 -0400

President Obama has proven quite adept at using Military Intelligence and Special Forces. No I don't think Military Experience is Necessary. Just a Sharp Mind.

Response by SrA Matthew Knight made Apr 1 at 2016 8:22 PM

SrA Matthew Knight — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 20:22:34 -0400

It depends on the veteran and their experience and values. If someone like General Mattis ran I think I'd vote for them in a heart beat. If Private Snuffy ran after they got the boot 2 years in than probably not. There's more than military service that I would say a leader of the country should have. It would be nice to have more veteran's in the running though.

Response by LTJG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 11:13 PM

LTJG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 23:13:16 -0400

"I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
I would think it would be great to have a veteran as POTUS. Maybe then they wouldn't be so eager to sacrifice our lives.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 2 at 2016 2:49 AM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 02:49:17 -0400

I most certainly do. A politically-incorrect, battle-hardened, high 'n' tight Marine four-star like James "Hoss" Carwright would suit me to a "T." Not that he was PInC, but he surely wouldn't take crap off the Media or ass-kissing politicians.

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Apr 3 at 2016 8:16 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Sun, 03 Apr 2016 20:16:38 -0400

The vast majority of presidents have been veterans. Something like 90%.

Response by LTC John Griscom made May 10 at 2023 11:49 AM

LTC John Griscom — Wed, 10 May 2023 11:49:59 -0400

Great question. There would be so much more involved than just being a veteran.