Bad argument of the day: "Only those who have military experience should speak of matters concerning war."

This is one of the most disastrous arguments that has been wrought on the melted brains of the average citizen. Really, there is no argument here in the truest sense of being a good argument, it only takes the form of sentence structure necessary for an argument.

Basically, this sentence is affirming that only a person who is involved by experience in some activity — to what degree we do not know but at least professionally it would seem — should speak intelligently on that activity.

This would mean then, by the same logic, that a person would not be able to speak intelligently about the fit and look of his clothing unless he were a past or present tailor. A person would not speak of food unless he were a professional cook. A person would not speak at all unless he were at minimum a paid lecturer.

In the final analysis of this logic, a person would not even form an argument without first being a person of English, Philosophy, Logic, Law, Public Speaking and Rhetoric credentials. Is there such a person?

Intelligent discussion and judgments are found worthy in regard to how accurately they fit the activity they are directed towards, not whether the speaker belongs to a professional association.