How can the president of the US be female if the president is also the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces?

Question

How can they be the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces if they are not even allowed on the battlefield. Would she even know anything about military strategy.

ncoic- the majority of females in the army are officers?

fiscal year 2005
active duty army 69,829/488,579 14.3% female
11,499 female officers
11499/69829 16% of the females are officers not 51%

brian- so thats what living in the 21st century is about. So if i follow your feminist views i will be a modern man?

Answer 1

Yeah, Clinton knew about military strategy? Carter did? GW? Nixon? DOUBT IT!!!!!!!!!!!

NEXT!!!!!!

Answer 2

Being on the battlefield has nothing to do with being in the military, by the way, women have seen combat in Iraq, and they weren't mysteriously transferred to the infantry right before it happened. So what does that have to do with being the Commander in Chief? (read that as what about Bill Clinton?)

I personnaly feel that if you are to be in charge of the military, then having served in the military should be a pre-requisite.

George Washiington was appointed as a General over the Continental army by the Continental Congress, he was America's first general.

Jimmy Carter served on board nuclear submarines in the navy.

On the other hand, Franklin Roosevelt, due to infirmity, was never in the military.

Answer 3

I am going to attempt answering your question without badgering you. It is an understandable question that can be very confusing. First things first. The United States of American has a military that is ultimately under civilian control. This is one reason you don't see the Commander-In-Chief or the Defense Secretary in Uniform, though I think Bush would look funny in a beret.

The point is the rules about combat don't apply to them. Specifically the one you are alluding to that bars female from joining a combat MOS. Which we also have to take a look at.

I hold three MOSs. One 42A, combat service support,(open to both genders), One 54B, combat service, open to both; though when I was in I was L5 (recon) and in the cavalry and while females could be 54Bs they couldn't be in the recon platoon, though I think that has since changed. My current MOS 14J, combat arms, was at one time closed to females but now is open.

Now, besides all that there is nothing that says females can't be in combat units or on the battlefield. Females have fought, been captured and died on the battlefield.

The Department of Defense, The Joint Chiefs and other agencies exist to provide Presidents, those both with and without military experience, with military strategic advice.

Answer 4

Well somebody got up on the wrong side of the cave dis-morning! How many non military presidents have we had like Ronald Reagan,Clinton,Jefferson. I am sure their are many more these are the ones that come to mind. Their are many woman combatants whether the official policy admits it or not is quite irrelevant as Iraq has shown the policy is for all practical purposes unenforceable and in the pentagon itself the policy of woman combatants is under review. In any case there are many military people who would guide a woman president just like they would guide a non-military man as president. Time to catch up to the 21st century.

Answer 5

Remember always that you are speaking of title not person. The President of the United States is a title and not a person per se. The President is the highest civilian authority over the military. It has to be that way to keep the military in check. Or at least that's the way it's suppose to work.

Answer 6

a lifeless ringer for no human being can make a missile out of a jetliner? because he calls the images. What might want to you call the guy who receives to push the button or deliver troops into warfare (ignore about congress for a second)? I wanna hee a sparkling identify, it truly is vitally stuffy. next, who might want to you want to be in fee of each of the protection stress? Congress might want to take too lengthy to do something. someone appointed by congress might want to have a good number of partison dependence, etc. Why not someone...elected by the human beings? being commander in chief is area of being president. (they actually have a warfare Room, a cupboard, a load of generals and a Pentagonal construction complete of techies to assist the President. Its not a identify you get, its pastime you should do and be responible for. Thats why its significant to %. someone who might want to have adventure, who might want to be able to wield the skill of the U. S. military. those who do not evaluate the CIC area of the presidential candidate's pastime description might want to be making a huge mistake.Say if someone conventional change into elected because of their acceptance and do make some strong transformations, yet even as a disaster hits, or something that change into actual not achievable takes position? you want someone who can cope with the forces round then. A president must be nicely rounded to fulfill each of the responsibilities of the Presidency. and they have cabinets that help him/her out with the environmental and economic issues. The president is termed the manager govt for all the different roles of the presidency. Why shouldn't he be CIC? i tried to be purpose. Sorry if it change into style of pointed. Oh! and maximum of what you suggested about "no human being capturing a missile or invade" is real. yet its all a sport noted as MAD. you've missiles not so that you'll blow stuff up or so someone can attack the U. S. (thats a very, extremely stupid idea). Its the danger of it. its a device of leverage. we are saying we desire sanctions placed on international places that are construction nukes, yet we are able to not attack them in the journey that they have got the guns because they are going to shoot them. We use are protection stress as a huge stick, and they (the ambiguous "they") use them as insurance. truthfully, if a adverse usa is incaded by th US, what might want to they probably lose by capturing off a farewell bomb at us? they're toast besides.

Answer 7

Im sure a female has the tools to run our country, but its not only our country that she must deal with. Many countries, to this day, look down upon women, make their women subjects, and even force them to be second class citizens. How will these countries look upon us with a woman in charge? And think of the countries that we are dealing with now. How do you think they would react to a woman president? Im not knocking on women and their ability to lead, but am just reminding you that we are not the only country on the planet.

Answer 8

I don't know about the other branches, but 25% of the ARMY is women (and the Majority are officers).

Answer 9

Commander-in-Chief is a propaganda term, before Mr Bush anyone in charge of a division or so was colloqially commander-in-chief.

Doesn't matter, the President is the head of the military during war and outranks everyone else, regardless what you call him/her. During peace time this isn't so, of course.

Answer 10

By your logic then every President should also be a CPA, a lawyer, a doctor, an agriculturist, etc. Not everyone can be an expert, or even familiar, with every subject. That's why they have a tons of advisers.

Answer 11

Wow, "Dane" is not too bright. "Commander-in-Chief" is a contitutional position and title. Article II, Section 2.