They should make presidents lead their troops as kings led their knights on the battlefield.
That may raise the "stock" on diplomacy what is your thoughts
It could never happen. They just don't have the breeding.
The Bigger question - "What you gonna do about it?" Having been behind the curtain a few time, it annoys me that so many people say 'D's and R's are the same' not because its true or not, but because too many folks sit on their hands and bitch. You w
I wouldn't want many presidents or politicians in charge of anyone in battle. Their troops would get slaughtered. I do, however, think they should re-institute a draft, but only for the children of politicians who vote for war. I think that would have the result you mentioned.
would sqy kinow. mos of our leaders have nit served in battle, but it is not the leader but the individual person at war. A man is an individual person who does as he sees right. It is individual courage that is the question here.
Lol. Knights operated under a different code. These Ivy League puppets only want to fight behind a desk. Not behind an army headed to war.
I do agree and for sure presidents won't be so eager to wage war on any country. It is easy to command behind an oval office in the confinement of luxury and safety. It is easy to drone civilians by pressing on a button ignoring the reality of its consequence, it is easy to pretend to be the good one when the mediatized armada deployed all its channels to vilify a third party, I could do it. But the difference between them and I is conscience.
In modern times, I don't see any kings, prime ministers, dictators, presidents, etc. going to war. The better recommendation is just to stop having wars! Like that will ever happen!
The British Royal Family have always fought in the frontline in conflicts. Prince Harry served in Afghanistan, Prince Andrew in The Falklands casmpaign. Prince Philip fought in World War Two and King George Vi served in the Battle of Jutland .
Very true Chris, the Royal men have almost all been in active duty and on the front lines or close.
There have been some strong military men in the Whitehouse as well JFK, Eisenhower, Roosevelt and many others starting, of course with Washington.
@christopheranton, @Borsia - Uh huh. So ... you both DISAGREE with the better recommendation? If Harry and Andrew were my sons, they wouldn't have gone!! Ditto for JFK, Roosevelt and Washington. But that would only be in a perfect world. Right?
I guess the illusion of choice is better then no choice at all. The system in which this country governs is broken. On all levels, when dealing with the federal gov. most systems are broken. Call the Congress for answers? That's almost laughable. But
I saw this and instantly started laughing. That would certainly change a few things. Hitler might have thought twice, but Joan of Arc would have stood fast.
Henry V and Edward III were both fighting at the head of their soldiers during the Hundred Years War. But then they were not presidents. They were kings. There's a difference.
Sorry but Hitler was battle proven in WWI and very brave in combat. He was a runner, one of the most dangerous position there was.
Ah, I always focus on his social skills instead of his combat abilities.
You might be right, some of them would be on some Robo-cop thing but I could def see leaders outside of the core nations suiting up though
Kings never led troupes on the battlefield except in VERY ancient times. Long before knights even existed.
Those are fairy tales.
It still was a time in our history so it was not a fairy tale the difference was they were Kings not presidents.
those were emperors and warlords :3 so there is a technical difference.
Both kings and emperors are monarchs and a warlord is a person with power who has both military and civil control over a subnational area which is the same as a king but they all have to worry about defending his country and taking cities with milita
by Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago
Do you believe that America was much better when the Conservatives ran it or with the Liberalscurrently running it? Why? Why not?
by Randy Godwin 10 months ago
With all of the untruths spouted by, not only the POTUS himself, but several of his closest advisors, I cannot understand how others simply brush the lies aside as if they meant nothing. I never thought I'd see the day when such blatant acts would happen on a daily basis. Not only is the...
by Credence2 3 years ago
To the hard core GOP type conservative/rightwinger: you're ridiculous, yes ridiculous in a Col. Klink, Stalag 13 kind of way.The GOP, hoping to get the youth vote, are attempting to pit the Baby Boomer Generation against those younger people that came afterwardsThis comes from an article in the...
by ledefensetech 8 years ago
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091112/ap_ … fghanistanNice to see the reincarnation of Napoleon is doing so well concerning the course of the war. As much as I dislike FDR, at least he was smart enough to listen to his commanders in the field and let them run the war. FDR's job was...
by gspot911 9 years ago
President Obama promises to make a major reduction of troop in Iraq within the next two years. But how many of us actually belive that this is going to happen. Not me! I was deployed to Iraq when the war first kicked off in 2003 and thats how long ive been hearing the same story about removing...
by Eric Dierker 16 months ago
Is Trump smarter than all of the people going after him?It sure seems to me that this guy has a whole lot of politically astute people and the worlds best investigators going after him. And I think it clear they have been doing so in earnest since about January of 2016. But nothing has stuck?...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|