When the commander-in-chief sends Americans to fight and die, it should be only to protect our vital national interests, not for his own personal, political gain.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Of course, I think it is legitimate for the Commander-in-Chief to be concerned for the safety of his soldiers.
As Democrats, we have a patriotic duty and political imperative to lay out our ideas for protecting America.
We want the president to act to keep America safe.
The American Dream has been defended, in every generation, by the brave men and women willing to fight and die for America. They are our greatest national treasure. They deserve a serious Commander-in-Chief.
The framers understood that the president, as the head of our armed forces, must defend the nation from imminent threat. But when the mission shifts from defense to offense, congressional approval is essential.
Going to war is a serious matter. And it should be done very carefully and deliberately with clear national interests at stake before the United States or our Commander-in-Chief acts.
The decision to use military force should always be one made with the utmost caution, with U.S. interests at stake, and with the consent of Congress.
It is the job of our military to protect America and to hunt down and kill those who would threaten to murder Americans.
We need a Commander-in-Chief, not a Campaigner-in-Chief.
Why should one U.S. airman give up his life when our national security is not in imminent danger?