Chickendove

MCELVEEN: Talk about the understanding of the military. And let’s go to you, Speaker Gingrich. Recently, Dr. Paul referred to you as a chicken hawk because you didn’t serve.

 

SAWYER: Congressman Paul, would you say that again? Would you -- would you use that phrase again?

 

PAUL: Yeah. I -- I think people who don’t serve when they could and they get three or four or even five deferments aren’t -- they -- they have no right to send our kids off to war, and -- and not be even against the wars that we have. I’m trying to stop the wars, but at least, you know, I went when they called me up.

 

PAUL: I need one quick follow-up. When I was drafted, I was married and had two kids, and I went.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/2012-abcyahoowmur-new-hampshire-gop-primary-debate-transcript/2012/01/07/gIQAk2AAiP_blog.html

Since the chickenhawk charge comes up periodically in debates over national security, it’s worth addressing:

i) For all I know, Gingrich may be a chickenhawk.

ii) All things being equal, I think it would be good if presidential candidates had some military experience.

At the same time, that has to be balanced against other considerations when we size up a candidate.

iii) Military experience is not a Constitutional requirement to be POTUS. So it’s ironic that a “Constitutionalist” like Ron Paul would resort to an unconstitutional objection.

iv) Ron Paul’s objection generates a paradox. On the one hand he seems to think the POTUS ought to have military experience. On the other hand he promotes a noninterventionist policy which would vastly curtail opportunities for active duty military experience.

What if Rand Paul runs for POTUS some day? Does his lack of military experience disqualify him from being Commander-in-Chief?

v) It might seem intuitively obvious that veterans look out for fellow veterans. We’d expect soldiers to be sympathetic to the plight of their comrades.

But in a fallen world, that presumption is questionable. Take the Walter Reed scandal. Military officers were in charge of the hospital. Yet they were derelict. It was a civilian (Robert Gates) who had to clean house.

vi) We’re not “sending kids off to war.” At present we have a volunteer army. Soldiers are adults. Soldiers can vote.

vii) Ron Paul was drafted. It doesn’t take courage to be drafted. Draftees can do courageous things on the battlefield, but it wasn’t a courageous act for Ron Paul to be drafted. And it wasn’t courageous for Ron Paul to go when he was called up. If anything, it would take more courage to break the law and face the consequences.

viii) To my knowledge, Ron Paul didn’t have a very dangerous assignment.

ix) Why is Ron Paul bragging about his military service, anyway? Doesn’t he think Viet Nam was an illegal,
“meddlesome,” war? Given his point of view, wasn’t it dishonorable for Ron Paul to contribute to the war effort?

Why wasn’t he a war protester like Jane Fonda? Seems like Ron Paul only opposes war at a safe distance. When it doesn’t cost him anything politically or professionally. If Gingrich is a chickenhawk, what is Paul–a chickendove?