Why is it controversial to suggest that someone who is a member of a foreign military should not hold public office in the United States?
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M
Couple of things. Is Oz likely to have access to any meaningful defense or security info? Doubtful.
Second, based on his service 40 years ago if that was the metric you would bar basically any American who immigrated from the European continent since most of Europe has had conscription for decades if not centuries.
Also there is no evidence he is a security risk. Most people don't flee dictators because they think the strong man in the old country is awesome.
I mean two friends of mine served in the French Foreign legion but that hardly means they would sell secrets to Paris.
Second, based on his service 40 years ago if that was the metric you would bar basically any American who immigrated from the European continent since most of Europe has had conscription for decades if not centuries.
Also there is no evidence he is a security risk. Most people don't flee dictators because they think the strong man in the old country is awesome.
I mean two friends of mine served in the French Foreign legion but that hardly means they would sell secrets to Paris.
View 3 more replies »
PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M
@LordShadowfire If you have the opportunity I don't see anything wrong with trying to change the old country for the better.
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Hmmm...
PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M
@LordShadowfire Sure beats people in Boston who had never set foot in Ireland dumping guns and money into Northern Ireland out of some bizarre sense of duty which incidentally illustrates you have American born citizens with divided loyalties.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
It's not controversial and it should not be allowed out of an abundance of caution. If someone is engaged in foreign military efforts, they can't extend their unbiased loyalty to the USA (or any host country for that matter). That's just common sense.
BackyardShaman · 61-69, M
Would this cover a Russian spy,?
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
@BackyardShaman I'd say yes, but I posted this about a certain doctor with Turkish citizenship.
SW-User
Viktor Orban for president!
SW-User
Are they actually still a current member or was this for two years in the early 1980s as a compulsory means of retaining their dual-citizenship (being born in the US to parents who were born in the second country)?
If they are still an active member of a foreign military and not solely someone with dual-citizenship, then yes, they should be disqualified.
And possibly if they were a past member in the military of an actual enemy country like North Korea, then current-vs-past considerations would not apply, they would always be banned.
If Natalie Portman were running for US office as a liberal (and was qualified to hold the office in terms of expertise), and HAD actually served the mandatory minimum period in the Israeli military that all Israeli-born people are required to serve (somehow she avoided this), that would not bother me.
As an American, if I were able to obtain dual-citizenship in a European country, I would probably still want to retain US citizenship as well, if for no other reason than it would make it easier to travel back to the country I was born in.
I get thinking that Dr. Oz is a crackhead (he is), but Turkey is not our enemy, even if Erdogan himself is also a crackhead, and this military service was nearly 40 years ago and a temporary technicality, it's not like he was their 007 or even capable of being their 007. He should be disqualified or defeated in the US simply for being a crackhead. If he was a Russian who had been in the Russian military 40 years ago, then we could disqualify him. This should like be handled on a country-by-country basis and the actual depth of the individuals past military career in the foreign non-enemy military (so if Portman had been in the Israeli military for many years and ascended many ranks, then maybe it is becoming more questionable as to whether she is a Mossad asset looking for our current Dassault Mirage, er, I mean F-22 blueprints).
I dunno, eff it, maybe make a blanket US constitutional amendment to block them all, even the low threat past military micro-career variants. But getting 2/3 of red and blue states to ratify ANY constitutional amendment these days seems unlikely for the remainder of the existence of the US. State constitutional amendments might be easier, but may not yield bans across the US.
If they are still an active member of a foreign military and not solely someone with dual-citizenship, then yes, they should be disqualified.
And possibly if they were a past member in the military of an actual enemy country like North Korea, then current-vs-past considerations would not apply, they would always be banned.
If Natalie Portman were running for US office as a liberal (and was qualified to hold the office in terms of expertise), and HAD actually served the mandatory minimum period in the Israeli military that all Israeli-born people are required to serve (somehow she avoided this), that would not bother me.
As an American, if I were able to obtain dual-citizenship in a European country, I would probably still want to retain US citizenship as well, if for no other reason than it would make it easier to travel back to the country I was born in.
I get thinking that Dr. Oz is a crackhead (he is), but Turkey is not our enemy, even if Erdogan himself is also a crackhead, and this military service was nearly 40 years ago and a temporary technicality, it's not like he was their 007 or even capable of being their 007. He should be disqualified or defeated in the US simply for being a crackhead. If he was a Russian who had been in the Russian military 40 years ago, then we could disqualify him. This should like be handled on a country-by-country basis and the actual depth of the individuals past military career in the foreign non-enemy military (so if Portman had been in the Israeli military for many years and ascended many ranks, then maybe it is becoming more questionable as to whether she is a Mossad asset looking for our current Dassault Mirage, er, I mean F-22 blueprints).
I dunno, eff it, maybe make a blanket US constitutional amendment to block them all, even the low threat past military micro-career variants. But getting 2/3 of red and blue states to ratify ANY constitutional amendment these days seems unlikely for the remainder of the existence of the US. State constitutional amendments might be easier, but may not yield bans across the US.
PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M
