What we miss in today's world: Military commanders as political leaders

I do not care if one calls me far-right, an extremist or whatever. Let me ask you a question: If these scumbag politicians had to actually fight these wars, would they be declared? No. If any of them had to make like Napoleon Bontaparte and March onto Rome, they'd **** their pants.

But because these 'desk commanders' as we can call them are put into elected positions, it is the civilians who must(as soldiers) march onto Rome. And yes, you can extend this to the Russian Invasion. If Putin had to actually fight, he'd think twice.

Sure, many of them vainly chased glory(as if our politicians don't do the same) but they were at least slightly more reserved because they had skin in the game. Failure to them meant death by the enemy. Failure in Washington or Brussels or Moscow is met with a pat on the back and a job well done.

Given the absolutely nil cost of starting or participating in wars, it's easy to commit us to things like the Budapest Memoradum, or the travesty that is Article 5. When SHTF, these guys will be in their bunkers.

But as we saw during the Summer of Love: We're on our own.

 

Let me get this straight. Are you suggesting General Milley or Lloyd Austin types should be in the White House? If so, that's ****ing nuts. Do you want the claws of the Military Industrial Complex to run the country....even more so than it already does?

 

Oh heavens no, the last time they saw the combat zone had to have been ages ago. I mean, to the extent we can find it, someone, anyone who knows about the skin of the cost of warfare and in so doing, the necessity of avoiding it.

Or if heaven forbid that we must go into combat, I want to go into combat with a head of state/government I can believe in. Not these modern day quacks.

 

Those fat bastards have only seen a combat zone from a TV in an air-conditioned office.

 

Exactly what I mean, so I should have been even more specific: The man who warned us about the MIC was General Eisenhower(who, he too may not have entered a war zone, but he is the most underrated general in world history as the one who steered us into the new world after the defeat of the AXIS powers).

Give me Eisenhower-type quality characters, not the air conditioned office losers. Does that show where I'm going with this?

 

I don't believe any Eisenhower types exist. Maybe they do but we've never heard of them. Too much corruption in the military upper ranks.

 

You people do know that nations DO NOT DECLARE WAR anymore don't you?

 

Would we still be electing these people in your scenario?

 

I'd hope so, but I'll be honest, I've become disillusioned with the election process. It's less of a vetting of candidates, and more of a popularity contest. There's nothing stopping us from electing an absolute jerkwad because he's popular(yes, you can insert the orange bad here, but you can also insert the politicians of the late 20th and now early 21st centuries.)

If our choices are the wrong ones, should we be making them? Put in a more benevolent way for you, we humans are more fit to make decisions for ourselves than others, and an election is the ultimate making decision for others.

 

Better yet send their sons and daughters off to war.

 

You had a choice in 2020 between someone’s whose son served and one whose did not.

 

For them a military response is an old and trusted solution to every problem.

 

Just make it a law that all senators, house members, and the president must draw straws and a percentage are chosen at random, and those chosen must ride into any combat on the top of a tank.

It would indeed change everything and bring world peace.