You are reading a single comment by @itsbruce and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
If we’re going back centuries for military heads of state
Because Richard III would be so relevant to the contemporary (relatively) democratic history of the two nations. Sounds like you said something without thinking it through and decided not just to double down on it but to print it in 72pt type.
itsbruce
c00ps
So then the link was only 18th-20th C. And has ceased now they are removed from a large proportion of the population being involved with the military. If we’re going back centuries for military heads of state, the British Isles has had plenty. I don’t see that now it’s any more probable for a US president to be ex-military than an UK PM. Their lot are as much career politicians as here.
I’ve given up trying to type and post a better response because I’m on the train and it’s cutting out.