1849: Breaking Syria Down

[DJQuad]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

i get it. prior military service is great in a candidate for all the reasons listed above--it does and ought hold weight with constituents--, BUT there are enough valid reasons to not mandate it.

I agree. On one hand I don't understand how someone can be a good Commander-in-chief of our military having never been in it, but on the other simply making it through basic training may just mean you didn't want to go to college, couldn't afford it, wanted to blow shit up, or whatever else.

[DJQuad]

Originally Posted by Electric Squirrel

I actually think the military service is a good idea. If the president has actually been in war they would have a better understanding of what their sending their countrymen into. They need to understand the hell their decisions are putting people though so they will only do what is necessary.

You can have the same understanding as someone who just coasted their way through boot camp.

If it were up to John McCain we would have attacked Syria long ago.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by DJQuad

how someone can be a good Commander-in-chief of our military having never been in it

by being well informed and possessing/demonstrating high levels of empathy; acumen at being presented with and understanding highly complex issues. surrounding oneself with the right people; you don't need to know how to do everything if you can seek out and organize well-functioning groups and delegate effectively. government is a collaboration, not a battalion. there's more to the job than being good at RISK.

when we talk about handing the presidency over to a long line of one community of person, we run the risk of forgetting to a hammer everything is a nail. maybe sometimes what we'll really need is a fine grit sandpaper.

[Sparrow]

plus, i do not want elections to become high speed pissing contests. Battlefield Glory and Rank ought not be the deciding factors for the presdency. America wants a winner; Rank will win out every time. if we thought elections were political bullshit before, wooha, have a marine candidate against an army candidate; it'll devolve into cats in a bag every time.

let's not throw branch gasoline on the partisan fire.

[DJQuad]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

surrounding oneself with the right people; you don't need to know how to do everything if you can seek out and organize well-functioning groups and delegate effectively.

Yeah all Presidents do that, and thank goodness they do. Obama and Clinton didn't serve yet they surround themselves with very bright people.

I meant more on a personal level - how someone who has never experienced war and personally been affected by it can really understand what it truly means for our troops (and their families) to go to war.

[Sparrow]

the same way the rest of us do: being involved with the soldiers and their families; having conversations; listening to their stories. respect and appreciation aren't hard. putting yourself in someone else's shoes is also not hard. to not be able to find a connection between a situation outside and unfamiliar to yourself and somewhere else in your mind and heart is rare (and is also what being a sociopath is.) we do that when we read books. it's not crazy to believe someone who hasn't been to war can have an understanding of what that is.

i've never been holocausted, but i can get that it's a whole shit wrack of awful. i don't need to have been tortured to know, respect, and appreciate that. i'm a human. empathy isn't a super power.

[Sparrow]

using that logic, why would we elect a military president with no deep financial background in a time when income inequality is a bigger threat to our people than the minuscule chance of stateside invasion?

why not a teacher? how could someone who hasn't taught be trusted with making educational policy?

the list goes on and on.

[Sparrow]

also, if we're picking our president on the basis of who'd be best at war, we'll never stop having them. hammer needs a nail.

[DJQuad]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

using that logic, why would we elect a military president with no deep financial background in a time when income inequality is a bigger threat to our people than the minuscule chance of stateside invasion?

why not a teacher? how could someone who hasn't taught be trusted with making educational policy?

the list goes on and on.

Yep, and we all know Obama's no doctor nor has ever gone without insurance, yet we have Obamacare.

That's why a military *requirement* is a bad idea. I still can see their point about being personally/physically/mentally affected by it, but that doesn't make it any less of a bad idea.

[Enunciated Piffle]

I would like to see a benevolent dictatorship, (arguably the best form of functioning government) consisting of Knefel-approved ideology.

Followed by a congress solely made up of Chemda and Keith.

Lauren as Attorney General. Danny and a magic marker in control of the new 'Ministry of Love and Music' branch.

And the American Flag replaced with never-ending pics of Hugsy streamed via Twitter.

Also, no nukes. Thems the rules. Define Heaven.