Would you support a law

[Obamanation]

Because serving isn't a prerequisite for understanding the concept of war.

P.S. - I served

 

[Avatar4321]

Typical. Lets just let draft dodgers and hippies send our sons and daughters to war when they were afraid or they cheated their way out of going...makes perfect sense.

There hasnt been a draft for decades. How the heck is anyone dodging a draft?

 

[Avatar4321]

And I wondered why the country was dumb enough to elect Clinton twice,Bush twice and Obama....yeah...not hard to see why...

You looked in the mirror?

 

[Avatar4321]

I was thinking in the context of the idiotic kind of government we have now. Preferably I would want very little to no government over me. I don't see what is so wrong about making sure the people who send boys and girls to die in pointless wars should have served themselves so they know what its like maybe they would not be so quick to do so when they know what its like...but of course....we are dealing with sheeple who don't want a smart law passed...they pass laws restricting the people yet we can't do the same to them....just another reason I recognize no government,no flag,nothing over me...I control my life,my body,my property and home, and my children until they are 18 years old.

When you learn to govern yourself, you might get little to know government over you.

 

[bripat9643]

That bans congress members from voting to send the military into ANY actions unless they themselves had served? Maybe then they would know what its like to go to war and it would stop a good bit of this needless war mongering...yes or no? Why or why not?

No. that's idiotic. Only a small percentage of Americans can possibly serve in the armed forces. That means the military would never be used.

 

[BreezeWood]

isn't there a provision that the military is under civilian control - or would you eliminate that as well.

 

[The Professor]

That bans congress members from voting to send the military into ANY actions unless they themselves had served? Maybe then they would know what its like to go to war and it would stop a good bit of this needless war mongering...yes or no? Why or why not?

The answer is no.

I am not sure that ex-military would have less of a penchant for war. They might think: I served, now let everyone serve.

Nor am a sure that those who have never served would be more inclined to engage troops in battle. After all, it is possible that the REASON they never served is that they did not believe in senseless wars.

The bottom line is that we should pick the best candidates possible. By making prior military service a prerequisite for holding public office, a lot of truly qualified individuals are excluded. Running a government is about a lot more than declaring war. Besides no one person can dictate when and where soldiers fight.

However, if you're merely looking for those who would be the most cautious against the use of warfare, I suggest all candidates be either mothers (preferably of more that one child) or those who served as surgeons in MASH units. Let's get the nurturers and healers into the game.

Edited to add: You didn't really discuss the idea of making prior military service a prerequisite to holding office, just to voting on whether to go to engage in military action. I went beyond the scope of your article, and I apologize.

 

[Dissent]

And I wondered why the country was dumb enough to elect Clinton twice,Bush twice and Obama....yeah...not hard to see why...

You looked in the mirror?

I didn't vote for any of the idiots. I have only voted in 1 presidential election and that was for a 3rd party candidate.

I was thinking in the context of the idiotic kind of government we have now. Preferably I would want very little to no government over me. I don't see what is so wrong about making sure the people who send boys and girls to die in pointless wars should have served themselves so they know what its like maybe they would not be so quick to do so when they know what its like...but of course....we are dealing with sheeple who don't want a smart law passed...they pass laws restricting the people yet we can't do the same to them....just another reason I recognize no government,no flag,nothing over me...I control my life,my body,my property and home, and my children until they are 18 years old.

When you learn to govern yourself, you might get little to know government over you.

You already missed the point. I govern myself how I see fit...no government is going to tell me what or how to do something....You are trying to tell me how to govern myself...some people are just hopeless statists.