Republicans or Democrats during war time?

Question

My husband and I disagree who should be in power during wars. I think that Democrats are better in war times because they let the General's run the war, where Rupublicans want to run it from Washington. I think that is why we won WWII (FDR/Truman - Dem) and lost Vietnam (Nixon - Rep) and are losing this war. Anyone have any other intellegent arguments as to who is better in war time?

Answer 1

I notice youre getting some thumbs downs for your question, even tho there is not one thing wrong with asking it.

Typically, I would have chosen a Republican president, especially if he inherits the war in question. I decided this because I always believed they would choose the right men for the job, to "procecute the war". If you'll remember, in 1990, our current President's father also fought a war in that part of the world, you if don't remember it, that's ok, it was over in a blink. He chose to only liberate Kuwait (which, to be fair, was the mission) not to go get Saddam, he did what he needed to do and we left. BAM. Done. He did, however, truly and deeply piss off the revolutionary factions in Iraq, the ones who had been told to get in there and revolt against Saddam and US forces would be right behind them. Sort of like the Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba, it didnt happen. The US left the rebels horribly vunerable, after they had already attacked and shown Saddam's forces where their allegiances were.

The rebels were, of course, slaughtered. So were their families. So were people in other parts of Iraq whose names SOUNDED like the rebels' names. And of course, Saddam ordered his forces to do what they did; even if they were too extreme in how they persecuted, by not arresting and trying the ones who conducted the slaughter, he in effect condoned it. But how much blame does the US share in this?
Frankly, it is insane foreign policies from both Democrats and Republicans (who arent thinking about whats best for America, theyre thinking about whats best for Big Oil, without which America cant run) which has fostered most Anti American feelings among those who feel threatened and oppressed enough to strap explosives to themselves and go running into a crowd of women and kids. They know its not about America "spreading freedom", its for the oil, so they quite naturally see ALL Americans as hypocrits.

Do I feel sorry for suicide bombers or consider them martyrs? Of course not; they're deluded young men being fed a bunch of rhetoric, being sent off to fight on the basis of lies and the flimsiest of excuses... wait I forgot who I was talking about there... Bush or the mullahs...

I believe no President may be Commander in Chief, who has not served in a branch of this countrys Armed Services, Since we dont always elect veterans, he should have the option of appointing a veteran to the post of Sect of Defense, but ONLY A VETERAN and one who has commanded troops. They have to know the pain they're going to be causing untold numbers of human beings. by going to war"He tried to kill my daddy", is not a reason for MY kids to fight... YOU go fight him!

Thats my criteria, Democrat or Republican. Know what the hell you're fighting when you go to war.

Answer 2

Mel M,that poster was correct about Truman and Vietnam. Ike continued what Truman did (aid and advisors).

"July 26, 1950 - United States military involvement in Vietnam begins as President Harry Truman authorizes $15 million in military aid to the French.

American military advisors will accompany the flow of U.S. tanks, planes, artillery and other supplies to Vietnam. Over the next four years, the U.S. will spend $3 Billion on the French war and by 1954 will provide 80 percent of all war supplies used by the French."

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/vietnam/index-1945.html

Answer 3

As Kurt Vonnegut said on Imus this morning, "a dumb President makes a dumb country."

Why would this even be up for debate? Democrats & liberals have a proven track record of success in our nations history of conflicts. From the Revolution, liberals were patriots, conservatives loyalist, to the Civil War and the great liberal Lincoln, to Wilson in WW1 and FDR/Truman in WWII, and beyond.

Answer 4

First of all heehee is wrong. Eisenhower got us into Vietnam with advisers Not Truman (Eisenhower also planned out the bay of pigs fiasco). Second, I think the Dems have a better track record with WW2 (FDR, Truman) as well as WW1 (Wilson) on war.
But to be fair, LBJ as well as Nixon botched up Vietnam.

Answer 5

Blitzhund is correct. We chose not to win the Vietnam war because it would have brought China directly in to the conflict. The likelihood that would have caused things to escalate to WW3 are very high since two super-powers would have been directly involved opposing each other. USSR would have sided with China (not certain, but likely) and we would have been in a pretty tough place.

Instead we fought to defend South Vietnam. The best we could do was fight to tie and hope that the north and its backers would get tired and go away. Not a very likely outcome, but we were bound by treaty to defend the government of South Vietnam.

Answer 6

Since Democrat combat Vets outnumber GOP's 7-1
Cheney - "I had other priorities at the time" 5 defermants
Richard Perle - Asst Secty of Defense -
very pro Iraq war 3 deferments
Paul Wolfowitz Excused from service for Academic pursuit
(at least Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar)
Remember the Senate race in Virginia
George Allen -R Did not Serve
Jim Webb - D Navy Cross Silver Star 2 Bronze Stars 2 purple Hearts
Other prominents from the GOP
Dennis Hastert - did not serve
Tom delay -dns
Roy Blount house majority whip DNS
Bill Frist dns
Mitch Mconell,Rick Santorum, Trent Lott, Jeb Bush, Karl Rove, George Will, Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity, Bill OReilly, Newt Gingrich
Im gettin tired typin
ALL - DNS
Oh yea Collin Powell served, but Bush gave him the boot for Condoleeza (Wrong on 9/11 and wrong on WMD's) Rice
And John McCain But Bush Smeared him and his record in the 2000 primaries
and in the past election Iraq veterans running for congress
Democrats 10
GOP 2
Meanwhile
Decorated combat Veterans who are Democrats
Bob Kerrey Fmr Sen from Nebraska and 9/11 Commissioner
Medal of Honor winner S Star Bronze Star 3 purple hearts
John Murtha -37 yr career USMC, bronze star 2 purple hearts
Senator Daniel Inoyue Medal of Honor
Charels Rangel B-star purple heart
Fritz Hollings B-star P-heart
and it goes on and on
and just FYI
George McGovern Silver Star, Distinguished Flying Cross
Dozens of missions WW2
Max Cleland - FMr Senator from Georgia, The original sponsor of The Homeland Security Dept Smeared and called traitor by K Rove& co in his Senate campaign opposition flyer with his pic and pics of binladen and Hussein
Silver Star Bronze Star Purple heart
Finally Columnist David Hackworth
9 silver stars 7 bronze Dist Service Cross (2nd only to M of H)
GOP *******!!!

Answer 7

I dont know if it really matters on which party, its more about who is in the party at the time of the war. Right now i cant see either side-democrat or republican being able to wage war against the boy scouts without screwing it up somehow.
But looking back through history, democrats do have a better record of winning major wars - WW2 for instance. Dont know if there is anything to it or maybe just a timing thing. That they were in power at the right time.

Answer 8

At this time, and in this war, neither party is doing an even half-decent job. We are not really at war. We are engaged in an occupation. The war was won years ago. The forces of Saddam Hussein surrendered. The job was done. Occupation is another way of saying imperialism. The martial law that everyday Iraqis live under today is imposed by Washingto D.C.
This is not a war. It is a waste of both American and Iraqi lives.

Answer 9

They have been reversed from what they're immediately. The Republicans needed significant gov't and private administration and the Dems needed State administration. The Republicans then have been the prosperous bankers who did not decide to lose the revenues from the south. the two events began a sluggish swap of ideologies beginning up with FDR. Now the Dems are the prosperous bankers and desire stable significant gov't administration and the Republicans desire extra State and private administration.

Answer 10

Vietnam's perceived loss (which was public favor of the conflict at home) was declared by Johnson (a democrat) when he said that the war was unwinnable.

Conflicts' decisions throughout history have come down to an individual or (s) - not a party

Answer 11

I have to go with the Republicans on this one.

I don't have the confidence in the Democrats to run a succesful war.

Look how the war in Iraq is being run. If Bush could lose his liberal tendencies, then it may have already been over. But there's too much involved with trying to apease or not to offend, etc.

We would have never won WW2 like this.