Do you Think Presidential Candidates?

Should have served in the military?

nope — some of our best presidents never served a day in the military — lincoln was one!!!

Be nice if we went long enough without wars to have no presidents that had served but such is not the case. I think the problem could be if a candidate had a major problem with the military either way . After all, he is supposed to be the Commander in Chief, and if the person was unwilling to use the military for protection or defense, then why was he voted in. Defense our the citizens is one of the “real” reasons for having a president and Government.

Lincoln did serve in the militia during the Black Hawk wars but never was involved in “action”, but that particular “war”was about 4-5 months long.

I believe experience gained by serving in the military has made some of our good presidents great presidents. I also believe that the experience gained by serving in the military was never detrimental to any person that has also served as our President. However, I do not believe that military service should be a qualifier for any one to be elected or serve as our President. I do believe that the person elected to hold the highest office in the land should be without reproach and that he should be eager to honor this country and the men and women who have sacrificed so much to enable him to serve as the President of The United states of America. I hope and pray that we, the people, will have the wisdom to elect a leader that is wise and that is a Christian.

Having served in the military doesn’t mean that they were a proud American. Having been an Air Force wife for years I can say many rebels and hard to discipline types are in the military. It doesn’t necessarily give you an appreciation or understanding of the military either, you can only get out of the military what you put into it. So no, having served does not mean they’d be a better president.

Throughout our history our best presidents were military men. True some were scroundrels, but each did something to attempt to help. I served in the Marines and would have highly disliked having a Commander and Chief who was a cilivilian.
Firstly, they know nothing of military life, #2, If they don’t know, they don’t have the ability to know what to do in certain situations. I may be old fashioned, but I also believe that if the president declares war, he should lead the troops into battle!

Well it’s a double edge sword, on the down side if they did,

they could always use it as negative leverage against a

canidate in a campain who didn’t serve, on the up side

if they didn’t then there less likey to advocate for it less

there were no alternitive, but even then they would opt

for a peaceful negotiation first if possible, what i do think

were a war to break out while a president was in office,

the presidents of the 2 countries in disagreement should

be made to fight it out not sending innocent men and women

into harms way, cause when you consider the misues of

goverment and the corruption between countries not to

mention the bed hopping between politicians with foreign

goverments, presidents included, they should be charged

with high treason, and imediately impeeched . . .

peace instead of peices . . .

No, I don’t think it necessary to serve in the military to have great knowledge of the military….and that is what advisors are for. The trick is selecting the advisors!
I do not think that having been a POW is a requirement to be President either, and I do not think it is something to be played upon.
Personally, I want a leader who is savy in Global affairs, Global societies, Global markets, Global finances..we are no longer an isolated nation, for there is no such thing in today’s world. I want a leader who can inspire us to be better than we have been. I want a leader who has the intelligence to gather the cream of the crop about him/her to guide our nation into times of security….we do not have that leader at the moment.

Good question, Wick. Love and Peace, Goldwing

It would be a plus if they did. Military culture is way different then civilian life and runs a different path. When I was in the service, we placed our nation (The Good Ole USA) as priority number one. Her security and her freedoms.
Someone that hasn’t served might not see that.
But allow me this opinion. Lawyers should not be allowed to serve in politics at any level.

I think four or eight years as our President is serving in our Military. They are serving our Country in a different way is all !!!

not necessarily, Eisenhower , did feel or and think he would not make a good president, or something like that, and several other generals have refused to be president because they felt their job was to be a solider, i think Sherman refused to accept a nomination for president,

but, it lends more to the picture if such a candidate has that experience to their credit. but who knows, does it influence for good or bad, there have been many presidents who did not have military experience, they made a good show, the country and people were different, in those days

depends upon what other qualifications a presidential candidate has along with the lack of or having been in the service.

as an aside the answerer who said Lincoln never served in the military was wrong because he did. Abraham Lincoln’s Military Service
During the Black Hawk War, 1832—

An Introduction.
By Robert A. Braun

©November, 2002, revised March, 2003
by Robert A. Braun. All rights reserved.

During the Black Hawk War, Abraham Lincoln of New Salem, Illinois served three enlistments. Each enrollment lasted for approximately 30 days.

His first enlistment was as elected captain of a company in the 4th Regiment of Mounted Volunteers, of Gen. Samuel Whiteside’s Brigade. Lincoln enrolled on April 21, 1832, and mustered out with his company at Fort Johnson (Ottawa) on May 27, 1832. The company served at Beardstown, and reportedly Lincoln’s company helped bury the dead of “Stillman’s Run”— although this occurrence is still under investigation. Along with the muster-out of Lincoln’s company was the general muster-out of what became known as the “First Army” of Illinois. While a new army was being raised and organized, Illinois enlisted and mustered in a 20-day interim regiment (the so-called “Second Army”) and the only defense the State of Illinois had until the so-called “Third Army” could be brought into the field.

Lincoln re-enlisted on the same day he mustered out of his old company, and was mustered in on May 29 as a private in Captain Elijah Ises’ Company, Twenty-Day Interim Regiment. He actively served with the company when General Henry Atkinson detached Captain Iles’ command to ride north from Ottawa along the Kellogg Trail and reopen communications with Galena– which had been out of touch with the rest of the world since the Felix St. Vrain Massacre. As part of this movement, Iles’ company (including Lincoln) spent an overnight at Apple River Fort… about a week before Black Hawk’s attack against that strongpoint later in June. Once this ride was completed, the service of Iles’ company was essentially at an end. On June 16, Lincoln was mustered out.

Lincoln’s third enlistment was as a private in Captain Jacob M. Early’s “Spy Company.” This unit mustered in approximately June 20, 1832, and served as part of General Atkinson’s army as it moved north through present-day Beloit, Janesvilles, the Storr’s Lake encampment (west of present-day Milton, Rock County, Wisconsin) and on to the “Trembling Lands” east of present-day Fort Atkinson, Jefferson County, Wisconsin. Atkinson’s food supply dwindled, and his solution was to muster out most of his militia. Accordingly, Early’s company (along with Lincoln) was mustered out and discharged on July 10, 1832 near present-day Coldspring, Jefferson County, Wisconsin. The story goes that Lincoln had his horse stolen, so he and companion George Harrison (not the Beatle) reportedly walked and canoed several hundred miles back to New Salem.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *