Do you think the person needs to serve in the military to be president

[Lovebears65]

I mean he is the commander and chief of the military. Dont you think he should know something about the military before signing any orders to send our troops off to war??? And yes Bush served in the National guards before you liberal asses say anything

 

[IHBF]

Although I don't think it should be required, I feel a Commander-in-Cheif would be more qualified with even a nominal amount of military experience.

 

[Truthmatters]

No

 

[Auxous]

And yes Bush served in the National guards before you liberal asses say anything

With all of his experience, he turned out to be one of the worst CiC in US history.

If you have a problem with someone being President who wasn't in the military, then you are going to have to change the Constitution. Perhaps, you should be making less posts about this and be writing to your Congress person.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I mean he is the commander and chief of the military. Dont you think he should know something about the military before signing any orders to send our troops off to war??? And yes Bush served in the National guards before you liberal asses say anything

The FEW....The CODDLED....The RICH!!!

The Champagne Unit!!!

*

Love them CHICKENHAWKShttp://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html....

.....do ya', Lovebears65??????

 

[oreo]

I mean he is the commander and chief of the military. Dont you think he should know something about the military before signing any orders to send our troops off to war??? And yes Bush served in the National guards before you liberal asses say anything

No--I do not believe it should be a mandatory requirement to serve in the military for President. We have had great Presidents in this nation that never did do any military time.

However, unlike the clown we have in the oval office right now--our prior President's actually recognized who our enemies were.

 

[bodecea]

I mean he is the commander and chief of the military. Dont you think he should know something about the military before signing any orders to send our troops off to war??? And yes Bush served in the National guards before you liberal asses say anything

There are only three requirements for President...everything else is just the voter's preferences.

 

[Caroljo]

No

Of course you don't.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Although I don't think it should be required, I feel a Commander-in-Cheif would be more qualified with even a nominal amount of military experience.

....As if present-day Republicans are (even) CONCERNED about....

....military experience!!!!

 

[Political Junky]

Our founders wanted a civilian to be commander in chief. FDR did a hell of a job in WW2.

 

[Caroljo]

Yes i do think they should...if they're going to send our kids off to possibly get killed, i want him or her to know what they're doing and have experienced it. But i know that's impossible especially since we haven't had a draft in so many years, many people haven't served.

 

[California Girl]

Our founders wanted a civilian to be commander in chief. FDR did a hell of a job in WW2.

The OP didn't say serving military, dumbass.

Personally, I would probably consider favorably someone with military experience. It is not a prerequisite for me, but it certainly is worthwhile experience for a CiC.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I mean he is the commander and chief of the military. Dont you think he should know something about the military before signing any orders to send our troops off to war??? And yes Bush served in the National guards before you liberal asses say anything

No--I do not believe it should be a mandatory requirement to serve in the military for President. We have had great Presidents in this nation that never did do any military time.

However, unlike the clown we have in the oval office right now--our prior President's actually recognized who our enemies were.

Yeah....

CORPORATE AMERICA!!!!

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY]Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex. - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[Political Junky]

Although I don't think it should be required, I feel a Commander-in-Cheif would be more qualified with even a nominal amount of military experience.

....As if present-day Republicans are (even) CONCERNED about....

....military experience!!!!

Thanks for pointing out Eisenhower's speech, warning of the Military Industrial Complex.

 

[tonystewart1]

It would not hurt.

 

[ginscpy]

No.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I mean he is the commander and chief of the military. Dont you think he should know something about the military before signing any orders to send our troops off to war??? And yes Bush served in the National guards before you liberal asses say anything

You have 200 plus years of presidents some of whom served, some of whom didn't, to analyse and figure out if there's any measurable difference in the quality of presidential service, veterans vs. non-veterans.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No, of course not.

 

[masquerade]

Although I don't think it should be required, I feel a Commander-in-Cheif would be more qualified with even a nominal amount of military experience.

Agreed. A degree in economics or accounting or business management wouldn't be bad either.

 

[Douger]

Of course not. Rich kids seldom serve. You assholes won't vote for anyone but fatcats.