- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I have zero military experience so I am perhaps speaking out of turn. But I find the requirement that the president have a minimum two-year military term to not have much value.
But imagine a president who has had active duty in a war zone. Perhaps then s/he would be less zealous to send in the troops and the constituency would be more trusting of the motives behind the action. It seems most who come back from war do not push the glorious aspect most WWI and WWII movies try to push on us. More likely to hear "war is hell"...
GWB is an imperialist seeking glory and who the hell knows what else. Maybe if he had participated in combat, instead of whatever he claims he did he, wouldn't be so excited to go on the offensive.
Or am I giving him too much credit?
(I do see the impracticality in this as a requirement, but an interesting discussion, perhaps.)
