2007-04-01 02:32:09 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Better than George "I'm going AWOL" W. Bush.
2007-04-01 02:36:28 · answer #1 · answered by j3nny3lf 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋
Having served under Reagan, Bush, and Clinton... President Clinton was certainly the lowest ranking of the THREE. Though I DO give him high marks in the fields of International-Diplomacy and Empathy.
He yanked us out of Somalia... rather than CRUSHING the warlords and feeding the Somali people. That reinforced the world-view that we run when combat gets "rough" under Democrat leadership.
His promises to allow gays in the military while RUNNING for office were nothing but pablum to his liberal base... and then when he became POTUS / CIC... he had to bow to REALITY and enact "Don't Ask Don't Tell". That STILL causes difficulties for the DoD.
President Clinton also made push-button / weak reactions to Iraq's shooting at UN aircraft and to Al Queda and OBL... this all lead to 9-11.
To me, the Balkans were a Diplomatic issue, and he actually stayed OUT of the CIC role and let the Generals run that... except for the timing and extended length... again diplomacy.
Oh, and don't EVER forget he and Al Gore sold (illegally) China missile technology that now threatens our forces in the Persian Gulf.
2007-04-01 03:12:39 · answer #2 · answered by mariner31 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, but during his term in office that didn't seem to matter at all to the libs. Why has Bush's military record been so important to them now? Whatever suits their purpose.
Yes, our past "Commander-in Chief' did a lot to undermine the military, while the libs said nothing.
2007-04-01 02:46:37 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The active military during the Clinton years despised him for that comment he made to his ROTC commanding officer as he was trying to weasel out of his ROTC commitment. That letter he wrote pretty much sums up his whole character. Say anything if it furthers your purpose.
He made a terrible commander in chief and completely ignored the islamo facist menance for 8 yrs while he got us embroiled in a civil war in the Balkans and a cluster F in Somalia.
2007-04-01 03:06:59 · answer #4 · answered by dr_methanegasman 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
No, the military had no respect for the man. You could see it when he arrived or departed aboard Marine One, they would give a short salute and ignore the silly sucker. With Reagan, Bush (both), Nixon and Ford, they held the salute and kept facing the President.
There has been much said about the Clinton's by their secret service protectors, who have told all about these people. Its disgracefully they act like they do, but, that is the liberal way and the way of politicians. You smile and wave to people in public, but become major jerks when the cameras are turned off. You yell and mistreat the people that are there to protect and serve you, but suck up to someone who has deep pockets for campaign funds.
2007-04-01 02:38:52 · answer #5 · answered by bigmikejones 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
He was great.
1. He reigned over a great era of prosperity that had nothing to do with him. It had everything to do with over priced tech stocks.
2. He ignored terrorism and punted it to Bush.
3. He embarrassed the office by sleezing around with women. But with a wife like his, I have to accept that.
4. People felt good around him, but reality was still there.
5. His best accomplishment was leaving the door open for the Contract with America
2007-04-01 11:33:36 · answer #6 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I didn't vote for him, I'm a disabled vet, I'm sitting in a wheelchair watching you young ones laugh it up. I like the way they do it in Israel, mandatory military for two years. How do think that little country has made it since 1948?
2007-04-01 02:42:54 · answer #7 · answered by Chuckles 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. He was a poor commander-in-chief.
2007-04-01 03:19:07 · answer #8 · answered by c1523456 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, he was too worried about cigars, fat girls and polls more than what he was about Bin Laden bombing the WTC the first time,as well as the USS Cole, and countless embassy attacks to be called a good commander in chief.If he was doing his job,9-11 would never of happened..
2007-04-01 02:39:29 · answer #9 · answered by BAARAAACK 5 · 4⤊ 3⤋
He was one reason why I decided to retire from the AF after 23 years. The lack of respect and support we felt from DC severely hurt the military.
2007-04-01 02:36:49 · answer #10 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 8⤊ 2⤋
Does someone who flys over texas during a major conflict (viet nam) make a good commander in chief?
2007-04-01 02:37:02 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋