Should the Commander in Chief have an exemplary military record?

Answer 1

Personally, I couldn't vote for a major party candidate unless he did. The last such candidates were Eisenhower and Kennedy. Since then, neither party has fielded a candidate with anything close (in my opinion) to being considered for anything higher than a general discharge. It's a wonder some haven't gotten dishonorable... or at least less than honorable...

I would vote for somebody who was E-8 or E-9, or O-7 or O-8 (unrestricted line officer) BEFORE retirement, and I'd give special consideration to a "mustanger."

Answer 2

No, as a matter of fact we have had good and bad Presidents and Presidents with long and no military record. The funny part is I haven't been able to make any correlation between military experience and the quality of a Commander and Chief.

Ike was a military man and by all accounts had a reasonably successful Presidency.

JFK was a WWII hero and stirred up Vietnam.

Nixon was Navy I believe. Now there was a great President.

Carter was in the Navy, while an extremely moral man he was one of the worst Presidents to hold the office in my life time.

Reagan was an actor and arguably one of the better Presidents to hold the office.

Bush 1 was a military veteran of WWII and had some real trouble in office.

Clinton no military and you probably don't want to hear what I think of the man.

I have 22 years of military experience myself. Just like in civilian life the military harbors all types.

The one thing a President has to have IMO, is leadership skills. Managers are fine but you don't manage people, you manage buildings and vehicles and so forth, you must lead people. No leadership skills and the President is weak and frequently ineffective.

Answer 3

The only military training our Commander in Chief needs to have is a good understanding of the capabilities and limitations of our military. That and a full understanding that the job of fighting a war must be entrusted to professionals. The Commander in Chief's man job is to insure the support of the American people and set limits on the cost of war.

Answer 4

We have had 43 Presidents thus far. Only 18 ever served in the armed forces, including the National Guard. Two of them with no military service at all were in office for most of the time for both World Wars in the 20th Century.
In addition, most career military officers and NCOs don't seek the office because the provisions of Article Two of the Constitution would strip them of their military pension during their term of office as President. Retired military officers can't even serve as members of the Electoral College. They are barred under Title 3 of United States Code.

Answer 5

No. In fact some of the best wartime commanders have had no military experience.

A. Lincoln had only a tiny bit of milita experience, but was brillent in the Civil War. R. Reagan had none, but finished the Cold War very nicely.

Answer 6

No I dont think he needs to.

To be president you must be 45 yrs old. People do crazy things when they are 18 yrs old or so. When they were 18, I imagine being president was the furthest things from their plans. So I am sure they made mistakes.

As long as they have learned from those mistakes and shown they have control and an understanding of the military, and the people agree, then I feel it is ok.

Answer 7

That is entirely up to the people that elect him (us). I don't think it is necessary since the CiC will always have a lot of people with military experience advising him (SecDef, Joint Chiefs, etc.).

Answer 8

I think in time of conflict only a veteran should be allowed to run...sorry Hillary and Osama

Answer 9

No, and some have no former military record.

Answer 10

Are you planning on voting for McCain?

If not - are you a hypocrite?