should it be a requirement?

Question

that the president be a veteran

Answer 1

The president of the USA? No, I don't think so, unless you make military service compulsory for the entire populace, the way Israel and Russia do.

It's a plus as far as I am concerned, but if we had had this requirement in the past, Franklin Roosevelt wouldn't have been eligible.

Also, people with military service tend to be more socially or politically conservative. Not always, of course, but in general. If you make this a requirement, you'll in effect disenfranchise a whole group of our society, since they will find it harder to find a person who represents their point of view. And in my opinion, it's better to keep the radical fringe working within the political system, rather than outside it. That method leads to anarchy, terrorism, and other forms of social unrest.

Answer 2

No. Just because you are a veteran doesn't make you a good president. There are alot of great veterans that would make a great president, and there are veterans that don't. The first George Bush was a vet, yet he was ousted for Bill Clinton who dodged, and Clinton will probably be considered a better president.

Answer 3

I don't think so, necessarily, but it wouold be beneficial for the Commander-In-Chief. I DO however, think that a president should be able to pass a military Top Secret security clearance in order to make it on the ballot-- with results a matter of public record to prevent abuse by opponents. If a presidential hopeful feels like their past is too personal to be a matter of public record, perhaps they are not a good fit.

Jezza, it's been well-documented that Clinton was a draft dodger. At least Bush served in the Texas Guard. Not quite as respectable as doing his time in Vietnam, like Gore, but more than Clinton served.

Answer 4

No. I hope we will continue to have a mix that represents the whole population, and that non-veteran presidents will have excellent military advisors. But to only allow veterans to run a country not composed by almost all veterans doesn't make any more sense that would disallowing them.

Answer 5

I think so; in fact I think everyone who is a senator, congressman, etc., should have served in the military, so they have a true appreciation for what their country stands for(not their party) and have learned to think of their country before themselves or even their district. One exception to this would be in case of some sort of physical incapacity, as someone above noted, if a full requirement had always been in place, FDR wouldn't have been eligible. Also, to Lizardmama, how far into someone's private business should someone be able to go? In the course of the investigation against Clinton, we found out he had a bent piece of anatomy. Sure, there needed to be an investigation into his conduct, but that particular piece of information was TMI, in my opinion.

Answer 6

Not a requirement, but it would lend a LOT of credibility that the Commander In Chief of the most powerful military in the world at least have a military record. And it would gain a lot more of the respect from the troops he sends into harms way.

Answer 7

Veteran of what? Iraq Absolutely Not

Answer 8

I don't think so, but if someone dodges the draft just because he comes from an influential family then that is wrong. Everyone else had to do it so why not Bush? Its a credibility thing.

Answer 9

No, but, if the country is to go to war, someone with real military experience would be a better asset than a spoiled military brat.

Answer 10

NO I don't think so. I mean look at some of our great Prez's who were not military men, like FDR and then look at those who were, like IKE. Who do you think did more for this country as Prez??? The great FDR or the everyday golfer???