'08 Presidential Candidates: Who served & who didn't
POSTED BY: CrevanReaver
UPDATED: Friday, August 25, 2023 18:32
VIEWED: 13523
PAGE 3 of 10
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Here is your position, reduced to its bare-bones structure
military-leader : military :: brake-fixer : -----
What fits there is 'brake'.
Or, in English, to know enough about the military to lead it, you have to have been in the military. To know enough about brakes to fix them you have to have been ....
And that's how your simple-minded concepts fall apart.
I believe I said it was prudent to think the guy fixing your brakes has automotive EXPERIENCE, not that he/she used to be a brake. What if your mechanic is brand new with only classroom EXPERIENCE? What if your mechanic used to work on boats and wanted a career change. You see, the key word is EXPERIENCE. What if your Doctor is a first year resident or you go to see an OBGYN but a ear, nose, and throat specialist is filling in. Do you think it is prudent that the head of FEMA has emergency management EXPERIENCE? Do you not think it prudent that the Commander-in-Chief of the American armed forces has military EXPERIENCE? A simple yes or no will suffice, anything more would probably go right over my head.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think even a yes/no question is too complicated for you. Try this one instead; complete this phrase:
"USA! USA! ...!" (3 letters)
If that's too hard, I can try and create something even more simplistic.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks for your input Simon. Do you have an opinion on the thread's topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What about listing Presidents who served. Now that would be some perspective.
I think you'll find that the distinction between good and bad presidents often has little to do with their having served. Sure, the right service can give you some good Presidential skills. Ike is a good example. But it can also mean very little. Captain Ronald Reagan's World War II moviemaking didn't contribute much to his leadership ability (although if you read what he said, it did give him a fundamental understanding of the value of capitalism to productivity).
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I don't see where it matters. The CinC sets the POLITICAL objectives of the armed forces, and then hands them to the GENERALS to execute.
A President that has killed a man with his own bare hands has got to be a better leader. (rolling eyes)
It's amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Experience in what ?
Deciding what we want to accomplish in a given action ?
I can find four year olds that know how to do that, and believe me, would gladly replace our current CinC with one given how piss poor a job of it he's done.
Any CEO, hell, any Construction Foreman, has sufficient command experience to do the job of CinC, we have generals for the purpose of deciding and planning how best to achieve those objectives - isn't that what we have them for ?
What we pay them for ?
And yes, they screwed it, imop.
If you're going to ignore this basic concept, there's no further point in discussing it.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
A President that has killed a man with his own bare hands has got to be a better leader. (rolling eyes)
Perhaps more restraint would be shown if the President has experience. And since when did military experience mean killing. What about support services, intelligence, medical. Military experience also includes training, following and or giving orders.
I have never stated that military experience is required. My position is that military experience would be prudent for the Commander-in-Chief. The President cannot be all things to all people but he/she should be qualified in most aspects of the job IMHO. I find it hard to believe that no one can agree that the more experienced the boss is the smoother things run. Some Posters are far too polarized IMHO.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
A President that has killed a man with his own bare hands has got to be a better leader. (rolling eyes)
A vote for Hillary?
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
BDN: Perhaps if the President had been a nuclear engineer or a biologist he could have evaluated the WMD threat better. Or, if he had been an actuary he could have come up with a better plan for Social Security. Maybe if he had been an economist he could have halted the flight of manufacturing to China.
My point is that the President is not expected to be an expert on everyhting, or even anything... EXCEPT he must be an expert on hiring and listening to the real experts who know sumpthin' about sumpthin'. And this is where Bush has failed. When experts contradicted his fantasy-scape, they were fired and replaced by political hacks who whispered sweet nothings in his ear. The only people Bush listens to are Cheney and Rove.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree with BDN's post 100%. If your suit needs to be fitted you take it to a person with tailoring EXPERIENCE. Ruse if your dildo stops working, you would most likely bring it to Sig..he has EXPERIENCE. What is wrong with thinking that the commander in chief should have military EXPERIENCE?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME