Commander in Chief?

Constitutionally, the President of the United States is Commander in Chief of the armed forces. The current holder of that seat has wrapped himself in the garb and glory of the military, wearing the title of Commander proudly since the attacks on NYC and the Pentagon in 2001.

But every time the tough issues in Iraq come up, the real decisions that effect American troops and their families, the Commander is deferential, attributing his actions to the “Commanders in the Field.” In so doing, he is shirking his duty as President, just as surely as he shirked his duty in the Texas National Guard.

We elect a President to lead the nation and to command our forces for the benefit of the American people. Huddling down behind the generals in Iraq and following their lead to make vital decisions about how we conduct this war is an abdication of one of a President’s most fundamental duties.

Generals ordered to win a war won’t leave until they’ve won it, regardless of the social, political or international consequences. Had it been left up to the generals, would we still be fighting in Vietnam?