I read it on the Internet

[E_just_E]

Well... more american presidents served than did not serve. Here is a complete breakdown alphabetically:

Served during war time

Chester A. Arthur, Civil War (quartermaster General NY Militia; Elected Col 9th NY Vol but declined)
James Buchanan, 1812, (Private PA state Militia)
George H. W. Bush, WWII,(Lieutenant USNR)
George W. Bush, Vietnam (First Lieutenant, Texas Air National Guard)
Jimmy Carter, WWII, (Lieutenant, USNR)
Dwight Eisenhower, WWII (General of the Army *****)
Millard Fillmore, Mexican, ACW (Major, NY Militia)
Gerald Ford, WWII (Lieut. Commander, USNR)
James A. Garfield, Civil (Major General **)
U.S. Grant, Mexican, ACW (General of the Army ****)
Benjamin Harrison, ACW (Brigadeer General *)
William Harrison, 1812, Nortwest Indian (Major General **)
Rutherford B. Hayes, Civil (Major General **)
Andrew Jackson, Revolutionary, Creek, 1812, 1st Seminole (Major General **)
Andrew Johnson, Civil War (military governor of TN, with rank of Brig. General)
Lyndon B. Johnson, WWII (Commander, USNR)
John F. Kennedy, WWII, (Lieutenant, USNR)
Abraham Lincoln, Black Hawk (Private, IL State Militia)
James Madison, Revolutionary War (Colonel, VA militia)
William McKinley, ACW (Brevet Major)
James Monroe, Revolutionary War (Major)
Richard Nixon, WWII (Commander, USNR)
Franklin Pierce, Mexican (Brigadeer General *)
Ronald Reagan, WWII, Captain (USAR)
Theodore Roosevelt, Spanish American (Colonel, 1st US Cav)
Zachary Taylor, 1812, Black Hawk, Second Seminole, Mexican (Major General **)
Harry S. Truman WWI (Colonel)
John Tyler, 1812 (Captain)
George Washington, Revolutionary, French & Indian (General of the Army)


Served in the military but not during a war:


Thomas Jefferson (Col, Virginia Militia)
James Polk (Col, TN Militia)


Did not serve:

John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Grover Cleveland (Drafted during ACW but paid for sub)
Bill Clinton
Calvin Coolidge
Warren G. Harding
Herbert Hoover
Barack Obama
Franklin D. Roosevelt (but Assistant Secretary of War, WWI)
William H. Taft
Martin Van Buren
Woodrow Wilson

 

[FarawayFriend]

Wow, that's an interesting list, thank you! How long did it take you to compile it?

 

[E_just_E]

Wow, that's an interesting list, thank you! How long did it take you to compile it?

Not that much. Had it around for a while. There has not been a new president for a while

 

[thomas aagaard]

In the US the requirements for being a veteran are pretty low so most of you presidents are veterans...
Some on your first list like George W. Bush was not near any combat... others had combat experience.

So how do the list look if we are talking actual experience with warfare?


(here in Denmark you have to have been deployed to a conflict zone be a veteran... I spent 2½ years in our army (and is at 11 for the homeguard) but that don't make me a veteran... a knee injury in a soccer match got in the way of my deployment to Afghanistan)

 

[ole]

Wasn't Grant, Mckinley, Truman, Jackson also under fire?

None were sitting presidents at the time they were under fire.

 

[E_just_E]

In the US the requirements for being a veteran are pretty low so most of you presidents are veterans...
Some on your first list like George W. Bush was not near any combat... others had combat experience.

So how do the list look if we are talking actual experience with warfare?


(here in Denmark you have to have been deployed to a conflict zone be a veteran... I spent 2½ years in our army (and is at 11 for the homeguard) but that don't make me a veteran... a knee injury in a soccer match got in the way of my deployment to Afghanistan)

Define what you mean by that, and then we can talk. For example, would someone who served in an aircraft carrier, deployed to the Gulf and was way far away from any incoming fire, have actual experience with warfare? How about someone who was burying battlefield dead? (Lincoln actually did that in the Black Hawk War). If you serve during a War, you could be called to fight any minute. So, as far as I am concerned, serving during wartime is enough for me.

 

[Nathanb1]

None were sitting presidents at the time they were under fire.

Ah, let's quibble over some rhetoric..... Seems McKinley, Garfield, Kennedy, Reagan, Theodore Roosevelt, and...let's see.....(Ford?) all came under fire as sitting presidents. Bwahahahahahaha!

I may have left out a couple, but you get the drift. Of course, I can't remember if T.R. beat the **** out of his assailant before the guy fired--or not, so I might be wrong on him. We could make that potential fire, I guess.

 

[Nathanb1]

Define what you mean by that, and then we can talk. For example, would someone who served in an aircraft carrier, deployed to the Gulf and was way far away from any incoming fire, have actual experience with warfare? How about someone who was burying battlefield dead? (Lincoln actually did that in the Black Hawk War). If you serve during a War, you could be called to fight any minute. So, as far as I am concerned, serving during wartime is enough for me.

Say there, folks. Quibbling over semantics is one thing. Getting testy with one another over a silly thread on semantics is another. Cease and desist. Or else.

Posted in Capacity as Moderator

 

[E_just_E]

None were sitting presidents at the time they were under fire.

well... Andrew Jackson, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were under fire while presidents as well. And you can add a few more to the list of "almost" under fire.

 

[Horace Porter]

I believe TR was "under fire" as a candidate in 1912, but as a sitting president? Details, please.

 

[Nathanb1]

True enough even back then. I don't know how many errors in newspapers I've found that have been transmitted and printed in other papers as well. Did you know that Vicksburg was under Federal control in early January 1863? It was in all the papers so it must be true!

Grierson is spinning in his grave as we view this.

 

[Nathanb1]

I believe TR was "under fire" as a candidate in 1912, but as a sitting president? Details, please.

Nope, I'll go with you. I was just goofing off. Couldn't remember the date or anything related. But what I do know is that someone here will always come along with the right information. Thanks!

 

[Nathanb1]

I note we never actually gave poor James Madison credit for his feat, either. Somehow he got changed to Monroe. Darn, I hate it when that happens!

 

[E_just_E]

I believe TR was "under fire" as a candidate in 1912, but as a sitting president? Details, please.

Was actually after he served as President, during an attempt for a second go around. This is a very good writeup. Regardless, he was not in office what faced fire. Mea Culpa

 

[Copperhead-mi]

In the US the requirements for being a veteran are pretty low <remainder snipped for brevity>

Sorry, but that just rubbed me the wrong way. I'll say no more about this.

 

[ole]

Just a short time ago I made a comment that Abe Lincoln was the only sitting President of the United States to be under fire on an actual battlefield.

That is quite clear. "Sitting President" has only one meaning. "Be under fire on an actual battlefield" has only one meaning and it's not assassination attempts or successes. If anyone knows of any other sitting President who stood on battlements while bullets were whizzing around, let him/her present the name or forever hold his/her piece.

John Adams was sitting during the War of 1812. He left Dodge before things got too hot. McKinley was sitting during SpanAm; Wilson during WWI, Roosevelt and Truman during WWII, Truman and Eisenhower, during Korea. Some had been under fire, but not while they were a sitting President.

It remains that Lincoln was the only one.

 

[Nathanb1]

Uh, John Adams wasn't president during the War of 1812.

 

[DanF]

Uh, John Adams wasn't president during the War of 1812.

Well, even if he had been president then he wouldn't have been sitting.

He'd a been runnin.

Yelling, "the british are coming"!

 

[sko2014]

It truly amazes me how much bad information is out there. I am constantly reading accounts that are simply ****. A wise member told me once to use a rule of 3 at minimum. That is find three different sources that confirm the account. I couldn't agree more. What are our children to believe. Many a school child is reading this stuff that is not only limited to the ACW. If it's **** here it is **** everywhere. So they have done what they thought was their homework and believe they know factual information and if not corrected go through life believing a farce. Before CWT I would have never realized just how bad it really is. Just a short time ago I made a comment that Ab Lincoln was the only sitting President of the United States to be under fire on an actual battlefield. I know I read that on the internet and had no reason to disbelieve it. Now I find out it's ****! Those commercials couldn't be more accurate. I read it on the Internet!!!

I was hesitant to join this forum thinking I was just being lazy and should just look up the information I want "on the internet." I am so glad I joined. There is so much combined knowledge here. Everyone has been very helpful.

 

[thomas aagaard]

Sorry, but that just rubbed me the wrong way. I'll say no more about this.

For us, To be a veteran you have to have been deployed outside Denmark. And drills and deployments to locations that we always have maned, like in Greenland naturally do not count.

Just serving in the armed forces during a period where we have soldiers in a warzone do not make you a veteran....
One obvious reason is that we still have conscription on paper.(more volunteer than is needed)
That can force a man to be in the army. But conscripts cannot legally be deployed... you have to volunteer for that after the period as a conscript.. Or naturally be a professional soldier.

The reason I don't use "during wartime" is that the question "is Denmark at war?" is legal question and one that require the parliament to decide so. And because of old laws a yes would make a hole lot of things illegal... to protect us from the Russians... So Denmark have not been at war since 1945... So the question of "veteran" have to be free of that question.

I understand why the status as "veteran" is very important in the US, since you generally praise veterans in a way that we don't... and there is a lot of legal end economic issues for US veterans.
(that are mostly irrelevant here because of a different system for healthcare and education)