Saw some discussion about military personnel as appointed/elected public officials in US history & in ref to Pakistan.
I don’t want to tag/RT/QT people here as some do not like discussing anything that confronts/contradicts their POV. Nonetheless here is some interesting facts:
I don’t want to tag/RT/QT people here as some do not like discussing anything that confronts/contradicts their POV. Nonetheless here is some interesting facts:
Of America's 46 presidents, 12 have been former generals, eight of Republican persuasion and three of Democrat backing. Pres George Washington transcended political parties. Only 3 were committed lifetime career soldiers. All others had left military long before entering politics
The last time Democrats nominated a general for President was good century and a half ago. Most of these Generals, at least the ones who were recently active military personnel came into office directly after winning wars though. Washington after winning War of Independence.
Andrew Jackson after defeating British at Battle of New Orleans. Ulysses Grant after making Confederate armies to surrender. Eisenhower post Germany’s defeat in WW II. Most others had been out of military for some time &their military career did not contributed to their election
The policy document that guides this is not the constitution but Department of Defence Directive whereby Military is seen as apolitical organization that swears an oath to the Constitution of the US, not an individual/a party/a branch of government.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
