What perspectives can a Veteran bring to the White House?

SGT Ben Keen — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:38:04 -0400

Some people may be a little let down if you haven't read the Marine Corps Times article that outlined why Gen Mattis will not be running for President. While I think most of us would enjoy seeing his name on the ticket and it could result in a higher Veteran turnout to the polls, sadly we must remain in the land of what-ifs.

Yet, in the article, Gen Mattis made what I think is a great statement. He feels that he doesn't "have a bread enough perspective" and that it's time for younger Veterans to answer the call to continue to serve by running for public office. We already have Veterans serving in Congress and the Senate which is a great start but the question is what are some of the interesting perspectives a Veteran can bring to the White House?

Here's why Mattis says he won't be running for president

Marines have waited long to see Gen. James Mattis behind the desk at the Oval Office. His reputation, success and 'pungent quotations' are what make

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 7:53 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:53:35 -0400

You know, I am honestly not sure how a difference a veteran would make. In the last couple of elections, unprecedented amounts of vets were elected to Congress but not much has changed on a national level yet. As for the white house, I think for sure there would be more reluctance to cut the defense budget. Interesting question to think more on.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jul 16 at 2015 8:14 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 08:14:50 -0400

I will hold out hope on a cabinet appointment should someone of higher character than the current president win. I could see Mattis as SecDef or other such positions.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jul 16 at 2015 8:34 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 08:34:42 -0400

Resolve. I think that's the right word to use.

With a veteran, you get Purpose & Resolve. With a politician, sometimes the willingness to Compromise to accomplish "some of the goal" results in a situation where no one is happy, and things are worse than they were before.

Using General Mattis as an example, I don't think we would have a "Death by a 1000 cuts issue." I don't think he would sacrifice his overarching philosophy to attain "parts" of a goal. That would be a hollow win. If he couldn't accomplish the goal correctly, it wouldn't be worth having.

As a generalization, veterans have a very Black & White outlook ethically. Politicians, tend to apply a more "Situational Ethic" philosophy, which runs counter to our own.

Response by CPT Chase Sanger made Jul 16 at 2015 8:45 AM

CPT Chase Sanger — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 08:45:27 -0400

The classic novel Starship Troopers comes to mind as I read through the question and responses. While an extreme deviation from our society today, the one presented by Heinlein begs the question...would that actually work? A minimum of two years federal service required to serve in office or vote. It was a controversial idea in 1959 when the novel was published and I'm sure just as controversial today.

Response by LTC John Shaw made Jul 16 at 2015 9:25 AM

LTC John Shaw — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 09:25:47 -0400

SGT Ben Keen Eisenhower to me is the Soldier/Veteran/President that best embodies this concept. http://leadership.w9z.org/leadership-according-to-eisenhower/

Leadership According to Eisenhower | Leadership

Leadership: The art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.~Dwight D. Eisenhower

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 16 at 2015 11:24 AM

PO1 John Miller — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 11:24:57 -0400

In my opinion it depends on the veteran. Gen Mattis I could see in the White House, but not somebody like Senator John McCain (US Navy retired).

Response by SN Greg Wright made Jul 16 at 2015 12:47 PM

SN Greg Wright — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 12:47:17 -0400

A lack of bullshit. A lack of pandering. Resolve. A world-view rooted in reality, and not poll statistics. Someone who WOULDN'T out DEVGRU within hours of getting OBL, just for the political capital. Very likely better NASA funding (which, imo, is the single best use of money for the sake of the entire human race as a whole). Someone unafraid to call a spade a spade, and call your bullshit when you call one a heart.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 1:34 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:34:03 -0400

I DO NOT think a Military Veteran is a good option for President. Most Veterans, myself included, tend to automatically favor a veteran preference over the best choice for anything. Congress is a great example of my statement and why Veterans are NOT a good political choice by nature.

Look at any congressman/woman's state in which they represent. Military funding is big in their states compared to the non-veteran states.

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Jul 16 at 2015 2:01 PM

SGM Steve Wettstein — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 14:01:34 -0400

One thing is BTDT so he/she would know how it is to be in the military and hopefully wouldn't forget where they came from.

BTW...Great question SGT Ben Keen.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jul 16 at 2015 3:18 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:18:45 -0400

A fresh perspective on prosecuting and winning wars.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Jul 16 at 2015 6:58 PM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 18:58:00 -0400

I'm hoping (I know it's not realistic) that Jim Webb will be successful. At this point, though, I doubt that anyone can unseat Hillary... A veteran in the White House will be much less likely to get us into needless confrontations. Because they know the meaning of serving, they will tend to value the lives of the troops. We saw this with Bush I and the limited approach to Iraq.

I don't consider GWB a vet. His Guard service gave him no appreciation of the values of the lives of our troops...

Just one guy's thoughts...