This would be the ideal leader for Democrats, articulate, a veteran, a family man, and attractive. John F. Kennedy is a good example. Prince Harry is a good example but he’s not a US citizen. Of course, this is ideal. The candidate might only have some of the qualities. Democrats should try recruiting Jonny Kim to run for office. Andy Beshear might be a possible leader.
The Korean War would qualify as a war of defense. The war in Afghanistan was to keep the Taliban from taking over. That would qualify as a war of defense.
I assume you’re talking about Prince Harry. He fought in Afghanistan as a co-pilot and gunner aboard an Apache helicopter. Killing an enemy soldier in combat is not considered murder.
I’m talking about veterans in general. They’re murderers, just allowed to get away with it cause they did it for the government instead of for personal reasons. Unless we’re gonna be fine with people committing murder then I better not see more libs talk about how murdering conservatives and the rich as “too radical”.
The cornerstone of the law governing combatant status is the principle of distinction. Customary international humanitarian law requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish at all times between civilians and combatants and to direct operations only against combatants and other lawful military objectives.
This would be the ideal leader for Democrats, articulate, a veteran, a family man, and attractive. John F. Kennedy is a good example. Prince Harry is a good example but he’s not a US citizen. Of course, this is ideal. The candidate might only have some of the qualities. Democrats should try recruiting Jonny Kim to run for office. Andy Beshear might be a possible leader.
Why a ‘veteran’?
It indicates service to one’s country. A war veteran would even be better. It would indicate courage.
The usa never did a war of defense since world war 2. Being a “veteran” in the usa highly could mean you participated in killing civilians
The Korean War would qualify as a war of defense. The war in Afghanistan was to keep the Taliban from taking over. That would qualify as a war of defense.
Why would we want a murderer as a leader?
I assume you’re talking about Prince Harry. He fought in Afghanistan as a co-pilot and gunner aboard an Apache helicopter. Killing an enemy soldier in combat is not considered murder.
I’m talking about veterans in general. They’re murderers, just allowed to get away with it cause they did it for the government instead of for personal reasons. Unless we’re gonna be fine with people committing murder then I better not see more libs talk about how murdering conservatives and the rich as “too radical”.
You’re talking about war veterans. Killing an enemy combatant is not murder. From https://www.military.com/feature/2025/12/13/who-counts-combatant-law-governing-lawful-military-targets.html
The cornerstone of the law governing combatant status is the principle of distinction. Customary international humanitarian law requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish at all times between civilians and combatants and to direct operations only against combatants and other lawful military objectives.
They’re humans with families who, just like many over here, got forced into this by people who will never fight alongside them.
Yes, but nevertheless, they are shooting at you.
So are cops, but libs love to say you should never shoot back at police, especially at protests, cause we have to keep things “peaceful”.