The Uniform Doesn’t Make the Man…or Woman

Received in email today, accompanied by a picture of an American flag:

Dear Fellow Americans and Military Veterans,

As a supporter of veterans’ issues, you surely know, America today faces threats like none ever faced in previous generations. We are in the midst of a war that could take several more years to complete honorably. Russia has grown dangerously aggressive, recently invading a key U.S. ally. Iran and North Korea both pose serious threats to world peace. The Middle East remains in perilous turmoil.

Article 2 of the Constitution states that, among other duties, the President of the United States “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.”

In our nation’s history, very infrequently (mostly in non-turbulent times of peace) have we had a Commander-in-Chief who did not have some military exposure. It is difficult to envision a Commander-in-Chief heading our Armed Forces who has never experienced military service. Our Commander-in-Chief absolutely should have this essential experience, the training it provides, and the capacity for leadership it bestows. Too much is at stake.

I joined the U.S. Navy in 1942 during World War II as a Seaman 2nd class and went on to become a Naval Aviator, flying fighter aircraft and dive bombers. So you may understand when I say that military experience has influenced me profoundly throughout my adult life. I believe it was crucial for me, and will be crucial for our next President.

I have written this letter and have paid personally to send this message to a select list of people who are influential in their communities. I would appreciate any thoughts or ideas, pro or con, on this matter from each of you in this important group. Do you believe that a Commander-in-Chief who has never been in the service should be making decisions about sending our young men into combat?

I would like to pursue this matter further, contacting as many as ten million veterans. Is there anything more you would suggest that we say to these veterans about the importance of military service? If you agree, would you help get this message out to your friends and family? I have made arrangements to receive your comments at jikislak@gmail.com.

I am eager to hear from you with any thoughts or ideas about this important issue. In addition, to help defray the cost of reaching ten million more veterans, if you wish to make a voluntary contribution, please click here. In any event, I’m anxious to hear your comments on whether, and how, I should proceed with this project. Please e-mail me at jikislak@gmail.com.

Fraternally yours,

Jay I. Kislak, Lt. (jg), USNR Ret

What an incendiary, erroneous, misleading load of crap! According to retired Lieutenant (junior grade) Kislak, because I’m a veteran it is my responsibility – nay, my patriotic duty to elect the guy with a dusty uniform in the back of his closet, regardless of his qualifications. Is he trying to sell this as an intelligent, logical argument or was I just supposed to weep a bit at the flag cartoon and forward it to fifteen friends?

Frankly I’m insulted at Kislak’s assumption that because I’m former military I’ve allowed blind, fanatical patriotism replace my capacity to reason out my own choice on Election Day. The holes in the foundation of his argument are big enough to drive a tour bus through. Let’s examine!

Let’s just say for argument’s sake that John McCain is an over-the-hill, erratic sycophant working hand-in-hand with a female whack-job who wants to set feminism (among other things) back a couple dozen decades. And let’s pretend (again, strictly for argument’s sake) that Barack Obama is a socially-responsible, compassionate (okay, bleeding-heart liberal), intelligent, educated guy who was smart enough to finance and run his own life all by himself, thankyouverymuch. By some heroic leap of logic, the author of that letter tells me that eight weeks of boot camp, five years of prison and however many years of being told how exactly to wipe his ass and wash his feet makes McCain a better candidate for President than Obama?

That might wash with the Fox-fed conservatives who’d support an alleged thief if he turned out to be a soldier, but I’ve served in the military and I can tell you Kislak’s argument doesn’t hold spit. First, being military doesn’t automatically make you honorable, or brave, or smart. I could point you to several dozen examples in both the officer and enlisted ranks who prove that point quite neatly. Even an honorable discharge doesn’t mean you’re the moral police. I’ve watched some of the military’s finest steal, toke, screw, puff, guzzle, puke, lie and cheat themselves silly, and that’s just one Saturday night at the local barracks.

Second, serving in the military doesn’t make you a patriot. Those who join solely because they want to serve and protect their country are a minority. Take away the guaranteed paycheck, enlistment bonuses, 2.5 days+ holidays off every month, medical care, free education and tax-free allowances for clothing, food, and housing but keep the hazardous working conditions, long duty days, lack of personal space and months on end in a combat zone, and our military might would be quickly and significantly reduced. We’re all patriots until we can’t pay the bills.

Third, serving in the military doesn’t make you compassionate to the plight of other soldiers, sailors, Airmen or Marines. An officer’s uniform doesn’t produce capable leadership any more than a chef’s hat produces a five-star meal. I have fallen victim to so much lousy, incompetent, vindictive ‘leadership’ during my enlistments that at the end I was relieved to be relieved of duty. From the new NCO to the seasoned four-star there are almost no real, working safeguards in place to ensure that a leadership position is filled by a qualified leader. If there were, General Moseley would never have been asked to step down because he never would have gotten that far in the first place.

Finally, what kind of Mickey Mouse logic is this ‘only the military can lead’ anyway? Not only is it insulting to the hundreds of non-military leaders who are doing a pretty damn decent job, it’s also an intellectually insulting error in reason. Postulating that one leader is better qualified solely on the basis of his military service is like saying since men can’t have babies they can’t change a diaper (you wish, guys). There is a great deal more to running a country than micromanaging the men you hired to run the country’s defenses (anyone heard of Secretary Gates? Admiral McMullen? General Petraeus?) and if the American public doesn’t quickly recognize that, we’re going to be sorry sooner than later.

I am not belittling John McCain’s service, nor his honor evidenced while a Prisoner of War. I am not suggesting that McCain is a lousy leader or that Obama is a great one. I don’t know that for sure because there’s a lot more to examine in choosing a President than their obvious military service or lack thereof. What I am saying is that it is a mistake to assume military service – even that which

is characterized by courage and honor – makes a man qualified to run a country. We are at war now, but we will not be so forever.

My only patriotic duty, Mr. Kislak, is to elect a man who is capable of leading us in more than the wars we wage.

Because I post here, I don’t really have anything to post here. I might try someday anyway. . I don’t accept notes, but that doesn’t mean you can’t comment.