Why do republicans always say Democrats are weak on Defense?

Question

Almost EVERY prominent Dem. served
in the military, (MANY have seen combat),
yet VERY FEW prominent in the GOP
have ever served their country.

And THEY are the BRAVE LEADERS?

Whats more Patriotic, serving in the military
or getting a deferment (or 4) to "skip" the war?

its easy to act tough when you
don't know what war is like.

Answer 1

It isn't that democrats are weak on defense but they aren't willing to spend $$$ that republicans demand we put into defense but all of this over-spending hasn't made us any safer. More money does not equal a stronger defense considering republicans throw the money into totally useless and irrelevant military projects that do not counter today's threats.
The fact of the matter is that 3,000 Americans died on Bush's watch and hundreds of marines were slaughtered in Lebanon during Reagan and these administrations were supposedly "tough" on defense just because they spent more. However history said otherwise.

Answer 2

You make a good point about one thing and that is that many Democrats have served for their country but does that make a strong pro military President? In most cases no. For example Carter could not resolve the issue with Iran and that hostage situation. As soon as Regan (who did not serve in the military) came into office he made no bones that he was going to see to it that those people got set free and he did, in no time. After a twenty-one year carrier in the military I can tell you for a fact that the Presidents that gave us the best pay raises where republicans and so you vote your pocket book. Another interesting point is, just because we serve does not mean that we all think alike. For example, I have many ex-friends who served as long or longer than I did, got out and grew their hair out thinking and acting like old liberal hippies from the 60's. Why this is I do not know but the point to that last statement is, if it happens to some of us regular guys then the liberal bend can happen to those who will one day run for office. Anyway those are my thoughts.

Answer 3

Well I have served in combat, and I don't much care if a politician has or not, just so he understands & respects the militray and its complex needs.

In fact I think a lot of vetrans from the Vietnam era (no offense to those people personlly) were damaged by that war. They served bravely in a limited war that was lost by politicans instead of a shorter total war run generals. They were disgracefully betrayed by both parties in Washington & because of our surrender their blood was wasted. Many of those same people as politicians or in the public today are gunshy about using force or sacrificing blood to change the world. I don't care if you agree with this war or not, or how you feel about the President, once a war starts you go balls in for the durration until you accomplish the mission or there is no America left to fight. You make the judgement about how much it will cost & if you're willing to spend that before you pull the trigger, after it's pulled you can't ever stop no matter what. There is no loss with honor & there is no half way. If you think this war is taking too long or costing too much, then you send more troops & combat power, you bring total war to your enemy & leave when he can never get up again. I wouldn't worry about it though, we're doing okay in Iraq & will be out soon enough. There are a lot of other places that are exploding right now though & you need to be looking at this global war on terror like World War II was seen by Americans. You need to see militant extremist Islam (not just al Qeada or Bin Laden) just as we saw the Nazis cause they aren't much different & they are a lot more dangerous if we don't stop them now. Don't let us make the mistakes of Vietnam, or of Chamberlan with Hitler, again just because you don't like the cost. Trust me, some of that cost has been friends of mine & I don't like the cost, but don't make it wasted & more costly when this evil recovers if we walk away now. That would be why I say democrats are weak on defense. They are scared of sacrifice when a little blood now will save a lot later. They listen to public outcry about what troops need instead of what the guys on the ground are asking for.

Answer 4

Thumping your Chest saying you are a Vet does not translate into leadership or political savvy. It does not take brains to catch a bullet. Surrender is not an option. I am a Vet. I was called a Hero but I just determined to live. Combat by itself does not make you commander. You are not GOP so you have no clue to how many Medal of Honor winners are GOP.
The Dem position is surrender, a minority are true patriots. They voted accordingly, I bet you may find a vet or two in the minority of the party. But then Dems have Ho Chi Minh dreams anyway
John Kerry was a Hero who authored his own heroisim and served in Vietnam. Duke Cunningham shot down Vietnams best ace and had film to prove it. He is in jail now. One wants surrender the other Victory. I'd rather win.

Answer 5

Clinton was a draft dogger, he went to study in England while brave men died in Vietnam. And what does Jimmy Carter do for him? Pardon him... how wonderful Your Dems are when it comes to the Military.

To City Girl, Kerry was in the "NAVY" not the army. And what do you mean by real army? Do you mean that he didn't even finish a full tour in Vietnam? Do you mean the John Kerry that went above his superior officer the get his medals because his superior didn't think that he deserved one? Our when he got back he threw his medals over the fence lawns of the white house but then he "flip-flopped" and said he only threw the ribbons of the medals.. Yes what an admirable man...

Answer 6

The Republican Party is on the take and can afford the best spin doctors money can buy and The Bush administration can't and will never admit they were wrong...George W Bush has strong convictions as long as someone elses blood is being shed! I would much rather our tax dollars be spent on protecting our country than wasted in a lost cause and our Armed Services Men & Women protecting us here and not being sitting ducks for the muslim idiots in Iraq!

Answer 7

definite; per threat no longer controlled by potential of the phobia, even yet it is going to proceed to be a attention in nationwide elections. curiously, for some years, it advance into the Republicans who have been accused of being gentle on nationwide protection. Roosevelt had great concern convincing people that Germany & Japan have been threats until Pearl Harbor. Vietnam advance into Johnson's war, and Nixon ran on a promise to end it. ("with honor", he pronounced.) He did no longer; the final troops have been withdrawn below Ford. in spite of claims to the different, all modern-day Presidents have funded protection spending at considerable stages. there have been some help in troop stages, and a few widely used jobs shifted to nationwide look after instruments after the autumn of the Soviet Union, yet spending has constantly remained close to to protection Dept. requests. "cut back and run" accusations are cliches - excuses for questioning.

Answer 8

Dems have this reputation because they almost always cut the defense budget first.
I'd also like to know where you get your information on who has served in the military and who hasn't.

Answer 9

John McCain served in war and was a POW. Bush was in the national guard. They were protecting their country while people like al gore were busy hugging trees

Answer 10

I think their actions answer your question.

What did Clinton do after the world trade center bombing? What did he do after the USS Cole bomb?

NADA!!

-----

citygirl (below) "the real army". Tell that to the familiy member of someone killed in the national guard.

You obviously havn't read up on kerry's service, have you? The people who served DIRECTLY with him dislike him very much. He is a coward, and a traitor.