Election 2008: Chickenhawks and Doves

chicken hawk
n.

Informal A person who favors military force or action to carry out a foreign policy but has never served in the military.

One of the Left's favorite comebacks to slam supporters of the War on Terror, and specifically the war in Iraq, is to cry, "Chickenhawk!"

It's a silly moniker.

Never having served in the military shouldn't prohibit one from having an opinion on foreign policy involving military force.

It's particularly stupid for the Left to rely on the chickenhawk defense since so many of the Democrats have never been in the military.

Accordingly, all those Dems would not be entitled to wield the powers of the presidency. They'd have to forfeit the responsibilities of commander-in-chief.

The Associated Press points out that most of the 2008 presidential candidates lack military service.

WASHINGTON -- The 2008 presidential campaign is long on war rhetoric and short on warriors.

Despite the high-profile roles of the battle against terrorism and conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan in the presidential campaign, few of the candidates can claim military experience on their resumes.

Of the top tier of 2008 candidates, only Republican John McCain has been to war and served in uniform.

Yet, while the demand for a president with a military background might be expected to run high in the post-Sept. 11 era, few see that as a determining factor in the 2008 race.

...Polls indicate that while having a military background can be helpful to presidential candidates, a majority of adults don't see it as essential. Many people say candidates who've served as a governor, member of Congress or business executive are better prepared for the Oval Office than a general or admiral.

More broadly, an AP-Ipsos poll last month indicates leadership traits or experience are far less important to voters than character attributes such as honesty.

The 2008 lineup of candidates also makes clear that a new generation of political leaders has stepped forward, some too young to have been eligible for the Vietnam-era draft. Beyond that, fatigue with the Iraq war may have dulled the appetite for a warrior in the White House.

That doesn't make sense -- "fatigue with the Iraq war may have dulled the appetite for a warrior in the White House."

Fatigue with Iraq wasn't a factor when Bill Clinton was elected.

Fatigue with Iraq didn't play into Bush's 2000 election defeat of Al Gore, a military journalist for five months in Vietnam.

Moreover, I thought Bush wasn't a warrior. Didn't CBS try to concoct evidence to prove that. How can Bush be seen as warrior when the lib media have spent years saying that his military service is irrelevant or nonexistent?

It's clear that people don't think it's necessary for one to have seen combat or have been in a war zone to become president.

Here's a rundown of the 2008 candidates and their military service, or their reasons for not serving:

Of the current Democratic front-runners, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, 45, was too young to have been drafted during the Vietnam War. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, 53, had a draft number that was never called. And, Sen. Hillary Clinton, 59, like most women her age, would not have been expected to serve. Women weren't subject to the draft.

Among the other candidates in the Democratic race, Sen. Chris Dodd, 62, of Connecticut, served in the Army Reserve from 1969 to 1975. Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico received student and medical classifications that probably spared him from service in Vietnam, including one for a deviated septum. Richardson had a draft lottery number of 131 in 1970, a year when men with numbers as high as 195 were called.

Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, 64, and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, 60, also had medical conditions that kept them from serving in Vietnam.

Among the leading Republican candidates, only McCain, 70, has a military record. The Arizona senator spent more than 20 years in the Navy, almost a quarter of it in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp.

Draft deferments kept Giuliani, 62, of out Vietnam while he attended law school. In 1968, as the Vietnam War was escalating, he was classified 1-A, or draft eligible. After going to work for a federal judge, he received an occupational deferment. He was classified 1-A again in 1970, but had a high lottery number.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, 60, received a draft deferment while serving as a Mormon missionary in France during the war. He was eligible for the draft later, but was not selected. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, 50, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, 51, came of age after the draft ended in 1973. Neither has military experience.

Another Republican, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, received student deferments. He was available for service in 1969, but was reclassified in 1970 because of stress-related anxiety.

On the other hand, longshot GOP hopeful Rep. Duncan Hunter 58, who describes himself as "the national security candidate," was an Army paratrooper and Ranger in the Vietnam War and has a personal connection to the Iraq war. His son, a Marine, has completed two tours of duty there.

Obama is too young to have served in Vietnam, but that doesn't mean he couldn't have volunteered to serve his country.

Edwards' draft number was never called. That didn't keep him from volunteering.

As a woman, Hillary Clinton didn't need to dodge the draft the way her husband did. She wasn't expected to serve, but she could have volunteered.

Other candidates had medical excuses or got deferments.

The AP notes:

President George W. Bush's National Guard duty helped keep him out of Vietnam, yet he defeated three veterans of that conflict — McCain in the 2000 GOP primaries, Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 election and Democrat John Kerry in 2004.

Bush didn't go to Vietnam, but he did serve. That's more than what many candidates of his era did. I think that's worth noting.

This chickenhawk thing bugs me.

Libs will say that the chickenhawk label isn't applicable to Obama because he didn't support the war in Iraq. He's not being hypocritical. Some libs give Edwards and Clinton a pass because they've apologized or distanced themselves from the war. They'd be classified as recovering hypocrites, I suppose.

For a moment, let's say that's valid. They aren't chickenhawks because they are pushing a cut and run strategy. They aren't supporting military action in Iraq so there's no disingenuousness there.

Now let's say that one of them (God forbid) did become president and sent troops into battle.

Such a president would by definition be a chickenhawk.

If a president hasn't served in the military, does it follow that he or she cannot fulfill the duties of commander-in-chief and make the difficult decision to send troops into harm's way?

That's what libs suggest, at least when it comes to President Bush and Republicans.

Would a President Obama or Edwards or Hillary Clinton vow to not call the U.S. military into service simply because they never served?

Would they fail to defend liberty and protect the nation because they have no personal military background?

If that's the case, then a prerequisite for running for president would have to be a record of military service.

The bottom line: This chickenhawk crap that the Left has been flinging at President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and others in the administration for years is ridiculous.