In WWII all four of FDR's kids were in the military. One of them was a ranger and so much in harms way (one time he was part of a small group that went ashore on a Japanese held island) that FDR did not wonder if he would be killed, but when.
Harry Hopkins, arguably the second most powerful person in Washington after FDR had a son in the military who dies in combat.
George W. Bush, who's father was a senator volunteered. He was so young that he was the youngest fighter pilot in WWII. Again, he was constantly in harms way.
And the list goes on and on.
But where are the children of the elite today? The Neo-cons say this is as critical a war as WWII was. That this is a fight for the soul of civilization. Yet at the same time, not only did the parents almost to a man avoid Vietnam, but their children are avoiding the military now.
I'm not saying that to favor the war you must have children in the army. And I do agree that we are presently in a major clash of civilizations. (I don't say war because I agree with General Pace and others that this is not going to be won primarily on the battlefield).
But to me there is something wrong when none of the country's elite that are backing this war have a child in the military. Yes politicians constantly tell us one thing while believing something else. But the fact that none of their kids have signed up leads me to believe that either in their gut they don't believe this is important enough for their children to put their lives on the line for.
Or even worse, that they figure others can do the dying for them. And if that's the case, that our country's leaders figure that "others" can do the fighting and dying for them, then they have, in my opinion, lost any moral authority to lead this country.
So I ask, why have none of our leaders had their children step up to fight? Not why not this one or that one... but why none?
Is there a single administration official in a policy position who has a child serving in the military?