i'm a firm believer that who ever decides to send people to war goes with them....obviously those leaders don't feel the same. so who was the last president to go with his soldiers and fight?
2007-03-17 05:34:32 · 24 answers · asked by Hailstorm 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
obviously alot of people didn't understand my question. i am asking who is the last president that went to war fighting beside his soldier WHILE in office. and yes Washington was one of those presidents and if something happened to the president that is what the vice president is for, if something happens to him they go down the chain of command from there
2007-03-18 17:29:06 · update #1
umm, none. There are military leaders who go to war with their army who end up being Presidents, but that would make no sense. The United States Military is under civilian control, and the commander in chief is a civilian, therfore a President cannot accompany his troops into war, because he would not be a soldier. Besides, if he dies in combat, whose going to lead the country?
2007-03-17 05:40:24 · answer #1 · answered by arkainisofphoenix 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No SITTING U.S. President has ever gone into combat with the troops AS the President and Commander in Chief. The closest any President ever came was James Madison during the War of 1812 when the White House and just about every other public government building was burned by The British Army. Madison roused the public sentiment against the British and personally oversaw the training of the Army and the planning of some battles, but never EVER was near the actual front lines of the war.
2007-03-17 08:35:48 · answer #2 · answered by CV59StormVet 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The last SERVING PRESIDENT to be WITH the troops during a COMBAT ACTION... doesn't exist !!
Buy the very nature of the OFFICE, the President is the Executive and is to be protected from danger.
Madison fled Washington D.C in 1814 when the British siezed and burned the town... though the First Lady remained in the White House removing historical objects to safety intil the LAST moment.
Lincoln was in DC a mere 30 miles from the First Battle of Bull Run.
Franklin Roosevelt crossed the Atlantic thrice while WWII was going... twice by ship, therefor "being with the sailors".
Truman remained within the USA during WWII and Korea.
Kennedy, Johnson, nor Nixon went to Vietnam as Presidents (Johnson went as vice-president).
George H.W. Bush went to Saudi Arabia Xmas of 1990 to visit the troops prior to the Gulf War.
The President is the Commander in Chief of a civilian-led military... he isn't a General by law OR training, and in my opinion has NO purpose or reason to be up "front".
2007-03-17 07:23:53 · answer #3 · answered by mariner31 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Commanders stopped leading from the front a VERY long time ago when it was realized that the knowledge and experience these people have is invaluable.
This is why we have Lietuenants and why that rank has a higher casualty rate than any other. And as they gain in experience, that is why Lieutenants eventually become Colonels and Generals. ANd sometimes, Presidents.
Commanders do NOT have the freedom to hazard their lives as a common soldier.
The last President to actually go to war WITH his troops? None.
Not one.
Many went to war BEFORE they were President (including Bush Sr, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Teddy Roosevelt, Grant, Jackson, and Washington to pick some highlights), but NONE while they WERE President.
So, let's reprase your question...Which was the last leader of ANY country to actually go to war with his soldiers?
Hmmmmm........HHmmmmm.....Can we count Prince Andrew of the UK? Sure, he's not the leader, but he's at least in the Royal Family and he flew helicopters in the Falklands War. Other than that, we're pretty well outta luck, buddy.
Orion
2007-03-17 06:05:41 · answer #4 · answered by Orion 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, good for you! There has never been ANY President in the history of the country who has gone to war WITH the soldiers he's sent! Can you imagine what would happen if he were captured? Can you imagine how dangerous it would be for the soldiers around him? And exactly how do you think he could run a country while fighting a war? I think the last King of England to go to war with his soldiers was Richard the Lion Hearted and his brother took over the crown and did great damage to the crown's reputation while Richard was gone!
2007-03-17 10:34:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you mean "go to war" while serving as president? The answer would be none. Good leaders know not to micromanage, and presidents have a country to run, not just a war. Napoleon was the last head of state who actually went to war with his army, and you can see where that got him.
However, if you meant to ask who was the last president to serve in a theater of war, then that would be George Bush sr. GW Bush was in the Air National Guard, and Jimmy Carter was a submariner, but neither served in a theater of war.
2007-03-17 05:58:16 · answer #6 · answered by Curtis B 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
While a number of Presidents, starting with Washington were veterans, in many cases former Generals, no sitting president has ever gone to war with the soldiers. The Commander in Chief is too valuable to risk in the field, if he gets killed the effort grinds to a halt until his replacement is in place and restarts the campaign his own way.
2007-03-17 06:09:33 · answer #7 · answered by rich k 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Presidents who have served their country, as a combatant in time of war, but not necessarily when president are: George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Ulysses S. Grant, Theodore Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan. These are the ones that come to mind, but there may be others. Eisenhower was in command of all the allied forces in Europe during WW11.
2007-03-17 05:52:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
that may no longer the Iraq conflict. this is the conflict against terrorism as an entire. The battleground for terrorism is in Iraq suited now. If we pull out, we threat the potential for that battleground shifting to our u . s . or someplace in Europe. The conflict in Iraq ended at as quickly as. We have been given rid of Saddam and his unswerving, corrupt and brutal backers. the folk that are death suited now are Iraqi civilians on the palms of alternative Iraqis. we'd desire to be there to assist stabilize those tensions. regrettably, cutting-area conflict and morality have weakened the be sure and ability of our militia. We use to supply warnings and say in case you get in the way, we can kill you. Now, this is all approximately centred bombing and going into properties, colleges and mosques to discover the terrorists. this might final consistently so some distance as i'm worried. the only thank you to win is to declare "each and every person this is a chum of the U. S., clean out of this area" and then bomb the hell out of that city. we can never try this and subsequently, will never stabilize the region.
2016-10-18 22:23:14 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I get your question right: none.
The times when leaders went to to war with the army
were long over before the U.S. even existed. There were
various presidents who were soliders in a war before they became president though. I think Napoleon was one of the
last leaders who actually went to war with the army while
he was in charge.
2007-03-17 07:33:24 · answer #10 · answered by Alex S 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋