Let's face it; this term came about because of an unpopular war, during which we had a draft system that simply wasn't fair. If it weren't for that, we wouldn't be having this discussion; we be arguing over something else instead. I suppose we can continue to have it, unless we pass a constitutional amendment that would make military service a requirement for holding the office of president-that would narrow the pool considerably, and is probably not the best idea. Hell, look at Vietnam; LBJ served; he also sent us to Vietnam, based on an"incident" that HE knew (but we didn't for a long time) NEVER REALLY HAPPENED. Beyond that, what's the qualification for NOT being called "chickenhawk" for a president that has to send our troops in harm's way? What about the guy who was drafted during Vietnam, and spent his service assigned as a file clerk, stateside? He DID serve, didn't he? What about the man who enlisted, and was assigned a non-combat MOS? What about the guy who was turned down, because of a medical problem? I have a friend, who was opposed to the Vietnam war, but wanted to serve anyway. he tried to enlist as a combat medic, and they were going to take him-until they found he had a chronic kidney ailment he had no idea he had. I'm a combat vet, and for the life of me, I can't look at any of those I just mentioned as somehow less than I am, or say they did not try to do the right thing.
Vietnam, and the controversy around it, has poisoned my generation. Some still hate the vets who fought there; some of us vets still hate the people who abused us for it. The recriminations over who did right and who did wrong are still flying, along with the insults, the venom and the epithets. 58,000 dead, so many more broken in body and mind, and now, forty years of this, and still it goes on, and on, and on. What a legacy, and now another generation that never saw the place, has taken up the bitterness of it. It's too late for us, but you younger ones, let it die with us...please.