Fox news poll

Dear leader is down to 33% on the Fox poll. That’s right the Fox News poll.

The scariest part of this poll is the question 8. Who do you think should have the final say in US military matters? Fifty four percent think the military leaders. WTF. There are countries where the military leaders have final say in military matters. We call them military dictatorships.

Granted, but it’s not a very good question. “Final Say” and “Military Matters” are too vague. Better questions would be “Who should determine national policy regarding use of the military?” and “who should be responsible for ground-level military decisions during an engagement?”


Dear lord, we don’t want that. Countires under the yoke of military dictatorships tend to be debt-ridden, authoratorian, violate the civil rights of their own people, are looked down upon with disdain by the world community, are in constant military conflict and in general have ineffective policies with corrupt politicians.

Can you just imagine what the US would look then…

Agreed. I don’t believe the framers (or anyone else, for that matter) believes that the President should make military decisions. He makes strategic and policy decisions, then tells the military to go here and kill the bad guy; then he lets them prosecute the war.

Most of the military dissent I’ve read about Iraq has been exactly because Rummy and other civilians are making military decisions instead of letting the generals run it.

I-fucking-dentical to Vietnam, I’m not ashamed to add.


Section 2.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States…

Delegate nothing!

Trust no one!

You might not know this, but the first president was also an important general. Some might say the US owes its independance to the military decisions of that man. Perhaps the framers were unaware of Geroge Washington’s murky history when they wrote the Constitution?

Yes that was my thought too check out the list of presidents and their military service here:

The President is commander in chief and the skills they would have as a commander of troops should be a consideration when they are elected. That’s why the service records of Bush and Kerry were such a big issue in the last election.

Just as an extreme example; What if a general proposed using tactical nukes as the best way to win a battle? Should the President give “final say” to the general?

Kindly stow the ‘commander in chief’ crap. The president is not a pilot or a captain or a commander or a ninja or anything cool like that. He’s a manager (in the literal sense of that word) at best - a servant at most. It is insane to gift that much responsibility or power to one person, simply because no one person could do it effectively or well.

I’m sure I could, though!

66% of Republicans still approve of Bush.


What kind of RETARDS have we been electing? Were there no NINJAS on the ballot?

I’m fairly sure Gore was a zombie. Maybe with a little training he could run again as a zombie pirate. Because that would be awesome.

They’re not real Republicans, they’re just social conservatives who think they’re Republicans.

On the latter, that’s not scary, its expected: the news is all about Rumsfeld and generals saying he’s screwed up Iraq. That’s what people are thinking about, tactical and strategic military decisions, not political policy

So the fear is that the Democrats will look at these numbers and say “cool, we don’t have to do anything, which is what we’re best at” and lose a golden opportunity.

I especially like those guys whom hate taxes, big government, down with commie liberal Democrats, ect., yet whom have modest enough income that they get a giant tax rebate every year. There is such cognative dissonance in the Republican party right now it’s dumbfounding.

I’m not saying anyone with military history shouldn’t be President, I’m saying that civilians are put in charge at the very top for exactly the reason T-Rex DX gives: as a manager. But you only go down a couple of people and you’re at the level of the Joint Chiefs, who are all military.

Absolutely. In fact, keeping “the button” out of control of the military is an excellent check-and-balance. But all the President has is “final say” (to use your term); he doesn’t pick the targets, choose the missiles and warheads, scramble planes, etc. He makes policy decisions, not implementation decisions. He could, but he shouldn’t. The current administration has, thus the monumental fuckup that is our current sitch in Iraq.