I would actually recommend the opposite: civilian leaders without military service. Civilian leaders seek all means to end a conflict, while our generals seek all means to win a war. That’s the reason why civilian oversight and control is important. And that’s why war monger politicians like Senator Graham are the most dangerous.

If the you’re simply referring to the isolated costs of war, I agree that’s an issue. I recommend reading War is a Racket. Sadly, War has been a Racket since WW1.

That's the point..the wealthy and powerful start wars, and the poor and powerless die fighting them.

A lot of them would not make it through basic training.

I was stationed in Fulda, W. Germany (then) 1/11 Armored Cavalry Regiment which is about 5 km from the East-West border in 1983-84. We were almost sitting on top of a 25kt nuclear landmine, Pershing II missiles all over, radar showing launch warnings that turned out to be a flock of birds, a massive armored force across the border from us. We had deployment emplacements assigned to us, each of us had made small white wooden crosses and placed them at these emplacements because we knew we were going to die if war broke out. There was no if or maybe, we were dead. It's hard for a 19 year old to wrap his head around his own mortality. We were young, we were bullet proof, we were immortal or so we thought because at 18 or 19 who thinks about their own death? At that time I began to dislike our government, some fat guy (who the most he ever felt in danger was when he saw a mouse) ran to a bunker and decided I and our entire Regiment needed to die for an ideaology.
Yeah, they need to have their lives put in danger to experience what it feels like. If you have doubts about my story then check out OP Alpha and the military history at that time. I think we were closer to war then than the cuban missle crisis.
I am a proud member of The Border Legion and forever a Cav Trooper, Allons!!

Old men send young men to die while they stay safe. there is something very wrong with that. they should lead by example.

Not everyone that is capable of running a country is capable of going through boot camp (President Franklin Roosevelt for instance). And then again, not everyone is capable of running a country no matter what the requirements are.

otherwise everyone in congress will have been indoctrinated by the god fearing army. we need a few leaders who have not !!

What does your Constituion say in regard to the requirements to be president? Does it say that a person has to have served in the military? Do you want your congressman to sponser a bill to amend the Constitution?

No DD-214, Not getting My Vote. MY Vote, My Requirement. NO EXCEPTIONS!

I think you're right. Of course that would not happen, esp with our current..people

If not boot camp, perhaps they need to visit a war zone and sit with those who are on the front line where they have been placed in danger by executive decision--then visit the families that are torn apart because they have a son or daughter or husband or wife that is in said danger. Live with each of themfor a week or more and experience the life, as it contrasts with the cushy lifestyle of a career politician who has no clue what the average citizen experiences, much less what military (and Police and Fire Department) families have to live, every day.

I thought boot camp was for computer nerds (like myself).

True.I personally went through boot camp in 1970 in Israel on army base with American and Canadian teenagers. Never forget that experiment. Good idea to have our politicians go through it too.

Trump probably thinks lifting a forkful of chocolate cake is boot camp