View Poll Results: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

Voters
50. You may not vote on this poll
  • The President-Civilian Control

    26 52.00%
  • The Joint Chiefs-The Military Professionals

    0 0%
  • The President, but the military should decide battlefield tactics.

    24 48.00%
Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 191

Thread: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

  1. #11
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:05 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,568

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Civilian control the military is an absolute necessity in any free society.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  2. #12
    Student 75Greeno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    06-19-13 @ 12:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    266

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    the presisdnet is not supposed to be a military leader some times it is good to have a regular person in control but a military leader needs to decide the tactics to complete the objective because with out that we run in to another bay of piggs

  3. #13
    User KillerAngel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    11-28-09 @ 01:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    129

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The theater commander should have the president's full support when making decisions about tactics and strategy. IOW, if the theater commander says he needs it, the president let's him have it.
    What if the field commander is full of crap? During the beginning of the Civil War, U.S. Generals afraid of their own shadow had approximately triple the strength of the confederates in Virginia, but refused to attack claiming they needed more men. They sat and waited and waited, until Lee made them pay. Had Lincoln ignored them and ordered an attack, the Army of Nothern Virginia could have been crushed right out of the gate. History is full of examples of inept generals.

    There are times when a Commander can simply be wrong. We must not assume they are always correct simply because they have stars on their collar.
    Last edited by KillerAngel; 09-28-09 at 01:56 PM.
    "The union, next to our liberty most dear." John C. Calhoun
    "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." -Tenth Amendment, US Constitution

  4. #14
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Our Constitution confers civilian control over our military by making the President Commander In Chief. Do you think this is a good idea?
    A great idea, and ever better if as a criteria for running for public office that the candidate serve at least two full years in the military, as a young man..

  5. #15
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    07-19-11 @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    205

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by earthworm View Post
    A great idea, and ever better if as a criteria for running for public office that the candidate serve at least two full years in the military, as a young man..
    Why serve in the military as opposed to simply "serving your country." There are more ways to serve the country than to join the military are there not?

  6. #16
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by 75Greeno View Post
    the presisdnet is not supposed to be a military leader some times it is good to have a regular person in control but a military leader needs to decide the tactics to complete the objective because with out that we run in to another bay of piggs
    Try some proper punctuation and spelling, Greeno.

  7. #17
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,461

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerAngel View Post
    What if the field commander is full of crap? During the beginning of the Civil War, U.S. Generals afraid of their own shadow had approximately triple the strength of the confederates in Virginia, but refused to attack claiming they needed more men. They sat and waited and waited, until Lee made them pay. Had Lincoln ignored them and ordered an attack, the Army of Nothern Virginia could have been crushed right out of the gate. History is full of examples of inept generals.

    In that case, he should be relieved and someone who isn't full of crap promoted in his place.

    The military can't be micro-managed by the president, especially a president that has zero military experience, or education.

    Speaking of the Civil War, read up on Fredricksburg and see how political micro-management pressured Burnside into launching a failed assault. Burnside didn't want to attack Maryes Heights head on, but political pressure didn't leave him any choice.

    There are times when a Commander can simply be wrong. We must not assume they are always correct simply because they have stars on their collar.
    True, but it's a question of credibility. Who's strategy would you accept first: a military officer, with 30 years of education and experience, or a politician with a law degree? Generally speaking stupid officers don't become generals.
    Last edited by apdst; 09-28-09 at 02:08 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #18
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlanaganReport View Post
    Why serve in the military as opposed to simply "serving your country." There are more ways to serve the country than to join the military are there not?
    True
    But I'd think that it would be good if a potential Commander in
    Chief had some military experience..

  9. #19
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    07-19-11 @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    205

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by earthworm View Post
    True
    But I'd think that it would be good if a potential Commander in
    Chief had some military experience..
    In theory, would he not then surround himself with some of the most intelligent military minds in the country to help him make decisions?

    I see what you are saying, and I agree in a way, I want the President to have military experience as well, but I would not view it as a 100% must when deciding who to vote for.

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Masschusetts
    Last Seen
    03-01-14 @ 10:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,512

    Re: Who Should Have Final Say On Military Matters?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post

    The military can't be micro-managed by the president, especially a president that has zero military experience, or education.



    Who's strategy would you accept first: a military officer, with 30 years of education and experience, or a politician with a law degree? Generally speaking stupid officers don't become generals.
    I think the founding fathers had it exactly right conferring absolute civilian control over the military. While it's assumed that military officers are more expert in military strategy & tactics, this is not always the case. (Truman fired Gen. MacArthur during the Korean War as MacArthur publicly advocated attacking Red China with atomic weapons, which Truman was against)
    I know people can argue this point, but I agree with this axiom: "War is nothing but a continuation of politics by other means."
    von Clausewitz
    I agree with that theory & since MacArthur was trying to push a political decision (a-bomb attacks against China) he simply overstepped his Constitutional role. Generals are not elected by anyone & therefore are not responsible too the voters, that is why we give ultimate decisions to an elected, civilian President.

    It may be fairly argued that some Presidents (LBJ comes to mind) micro-manage war too much, but it is my belief that no President should take the word of his military men as anything more than professional advise to be considered, along with the advise of all his other (civilian) advisers, who are presumably professionals in their field as well.. (ie Diplomacy, Economics, etc)
    Last edited by Devil505; 09-28-09 at 02:39 PM.

Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •