Can Ramaswamy function as Commander in Chief of the US Military?

I doubt he would do the actual bombing so see no issue here

 

He isn’t my candidate based on his position of selling out Ukraine alone, but this can’t seriously be your argument. Why not start a thread on why India has armed forces at all? What a bunch of hypocrites. They should just be good Hindus and let themselves be invaded, occupied, and colonized again.

 

I could beat up 99% of the Generals I served under. Youth and vigor are not really job requirements for positions like that. You think he’s out there jumping out of planes?

 

Your argument is not much better than his. What percentage of those generals do you assess you could outthink in a matter of strategy?

 

That was my whole point, smarty. Generals and Commanders in Chief can be effective even if they are old and frail.

 

I don't think Swammy could function as POTUS, much less CIC.

 

Dude, generals are in their 50s and early 60s. Now that might not be their peak physically, but they are still sharp mentally. People in their 80s, generally speaking, are not sharp mentally anymore. That is just biology, not politics. I understand what you meant, but it’s a bad comparison.

 

Did you read what I wrote? I said “I” could beat up most of the Generals I served under… meaning at any given time “I” could do it because I was younger and in shape than my Generals. I used that to demonstrate that being “old and frail” isn’t really a problem for a high up command like that. I know you want your criticism of my statement to stick, but it doesn’t. You are saying the same thing I said, yet are arguing with me because you misread my post.

 

Hmmmm

 

Sounds like you shouldn’t have a problem with Ramaswamy then in terms of your initial question. His professed vision for national security consists of building a metaphorical wall around the Western Hemisphere and leaving countries such as Ukraine and Taiwan to their fates at the hand of stronger revisionist powers. Under your clarification of what makes for just war, he is still a good Hindu as long as he uses his presidential power to protect the U.S., its territories, and its possessions only.

/thread

 

I don’t know whether you’re for intervention or not. Wasn’t my point. I only pointed out that the subject of this thread is NOT for intervention, and since you stated that India having an armed force for its own defense does not strictly violate the principles of Hinduism, then your original thesis (that the subject could not be a good Hindu and a President who may need to direct the use of armed force) does not track since the subject opposes the expeditionary use of armed force as an extension of policy. You simply need to go down a different path of attack than his religious hypocrisy in this case.

 

You didn’t say that. I didn’t say you did. I said Ramaswamy professes to be so opposed, which means there is no supposed contradiction with his Hindu faith. I’m not sure I can say it any plainer than that.

 

Come to think of it, I haven’t seen that many generals but of the ones I have seen, I can only think of one who was slim and trim.

Unlike the old days, generals don’t lead the charge anymore.

 

I know some people want to become more isolationist and let the rest of the world take care of itself, but there can be unintended consequences. I’m not saying we should control the world, but if others control it, we will get a world we didn’t necessarily bargain for.

We can discuss the pros and cons of that, but there would be consequences to isolationism.

 

To your first question, I would never automatically assume any President would put their religious principles above their oath. I don’t know much about Ramaswamy personally, but he doesn’t strike me as particularly religious in any case.

To your second question, while I am generally opposed to interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, yes, even when horrific things are happening in them, I am vehemently opposed to kind of isolationism that allows strong countries to prey on weaker ones without the risk of answering to a bigger bully (us). I don’t even like the fact that we have only supported Ukraine in a half-ass, low-risk way. So, no, I am not supporting Ramaswamy or any other candidate who would look on what Russia has done and say, “Meh. Not my problem.”

 

As far as I know there are no candidates, either party, who want to pursue peace in the world.