tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post2296542913835778065..comments2024-03-28T16:15:19.319-04:00Comments on Saideman's Semi-Spew: Stupidest Insult (Except for All the Others)Steve Saidemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09881915512311951902noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-91878907503731810552015-09-17T08:28:08.504-04:002015-09-17T08:28:08.504-04:00I always have a moment of hesitation every time I ...I always have a moment of hesitation every time I hear this "In democracies, the civilians rule" because it is only a 'half-truth'. We live in a democratic republic - not a 'pure' democracy - so the citizens don't rule, but they get to pick the guys who do. <br /><br />Why do I mention this? Because a week(ish) ago you made a comment about doing the right thing (pursuing the right policy decision) in the face of political pressure from the people/citizens. (For the Life of me I can't find the quote.) And if you take these two statements in the strict seem incompatible to me.<br /><br />What I see it boils down too is: The people should rule, but the government has a duty to ignore the people if its in their own good. How do you balance that? How do you know what is and is not good for the people? Especially in military conflict where someone can sit down and sift through the economics of military affairs and conclude if we are to meet X military objective the odds are we will lose Y number of good men and women. Doesn't that become a values trade-off? Who should make that call? <br /><br />Can you tell me how these two positions (1. The Citizens Rule, and 2. The government sometimes has a duty pursue policy decisions that are political unpopular) can be balanced? I'm not looking for a perfect political theories doctrine that can be applied in every and all cases, although that would be great, this is blogger and there is only so much time and space. If you had a future institutional suggestions on when to consult these outside expertise, when to listen to the people and when not too listen to the people, the 'types' of expertise that should be taken into account, what happens if these expertise clash with the military, that would already be... enlightening<br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12085546637843344988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-26092157771259758682015-09-15T21:53:45.010-04:002015-09-15T21:53:45.010-04:00"Civ? Of course."
You would think that ..."Civ? Of course."<br /><br />You would think that Truman's relief of MacArthur and the Cuban Missile Crisis (or more recently, the Joint Chiefs' incompetence in Iraq 2003?) would have put this retort to rest quite some time ago. Apparently not.<br /><br />Also, "women shouldn't serve in combat alongside men b/c Band of Brothers" brings me back to the days of DOMA. http://bit.ly/1W1woOJAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com