deganawida Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 Di, something like what Hienlein had in Starship Troopers?
~Di Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 Er... *blush*... I'm sorry, I'm Starship Trooper illiterate. You'll have to translate your question into Old-Person-Language for me.
deganawida Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 Well, the basic premise is that full citizenship (that is, citizenship with voting rights) is only accorded to those who have served in the military. Other citizens have rights, they just can't vote. The idea behind this rule is that only those individuals who are willing to face maiming and death, who demonstrate their love of country and dedication of its ideals by being willing to fight and die for it, are the only individuals who should have the right to vote, as they have already proven themselves to be responsible and dedicated. Also, active military personnel aren't allowed to be in public office (so it isn't a military dictatorship disguised as democracy). Oh, and you aren't old, Di!
~Di Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 LOL, "old" is relative. To a pompous 12 year old, 22 is positively ancient. (Er, I WISH I was still 22.... heh!) Thanks for the translation. No, that isn't what I'd support. I believe in the constitution, which means that even those who are physically unable to serve in the military, the peace corps, or whatever, or have been deferred due to family hardship still should always have their citizenship priveleges. I just seriously believe that mandatory service to one's country for a couple of years would be beneficial to most people, beneficial to the country, and give a broader understanding of the world as a whole to our citizenry. But it isn't gonna happen, LOL, so 'tis all just the musings of a somewhat menial mind.
Oerwinde Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 Well, the basic premise is that full citizenship (that is, citizenship with voting rights) is only accorded to those who have served in the military. Other citizens have rights, they just can't vote. The idea behind this rule is that only those individuals who are willing to face maiming and death, who demonstrate their love of country and dedication of its ideals by being willing to fight and die for it, are the only individuals who should have the right to vote, as they have already proven themselves to be responsible and dedicated. Also, active military personnel aren't allowed to be in public office (so it isn't a military dictatorship disguised as democracy). Oh, and you aren't old, Di! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I've only seen the movie, so I'm guessing either they portrayed it wrong in the movie, or theres more to it. I'm guessing theres more ways to become a citizen, its just that military service is the easiest. Kind of like the roman empire. The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity.
DemonKing Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 congress actually has a higher precentage of children in the military than the rest of the US population... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ...yes but what's the actual total number? 1, if Michael Moore is to be believed. In any case, I'm not against some form of mandatory military/civil service (they do it here in Germany and you can choose between the two) but I am against people being drafted to die in a completely senseless and unnecessary war of aggression (ie. Iraq IMHO), although if a country was under threat of imminent invasion by a hostile power, that's a different story.
taks Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 no, it was several... the percentage worked out to twice as much as the overall US average... keep in mind, only about 1 in 200 are in the US... that means congress only needs to have 4 children to double the average. michael moore did not research this part very well apparently. taks comrade taks... just because.
tripleRRR Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 I'm beginning to be all for the draft, frankly. Too many generations with no expectations put upon them, and they feel absolutely no duty to anything or anyone but themselves. If a country is to thrive, then it needs people who consider themselves part of society and feel a duty to that society. Any country that becomes top-heavy with selfish, me-first and damn-every-one-else mentality citizens is doomed. A couple of years of required service to one's country for all citizens, male and female, would grow some of these selfish whelps up. I don't care if the required service is military or some other form, just shoving young people out into the world to broaden their horizons and teach them a modicum of self-discipline would help. Of course every generation says this about every younger generation. So take it with a grain of salt. That said, I don't see a return of the draft unless the country is in imminent danger from another world war or similar catastrophy. The current "draft legislation" is simply a political ploy by the far-far left to make a partisian statement. Nobody takes it seriously. Not even the so-called sponsors of the bill. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I actually wouldn't mind seeing something like this implemented. I doubt it will ever happen though. Too many bleeding hearts in congress. TripleRRR Using a gamepad to control an FPS is like trying to fight evil through maple syrup.
Gromnir Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 no, it was several... the percentage worked out to twice as much as the overall US average... keep in mind, only about 1 in 200 are in the US... that means congress only needs to have 4 children to double the average. michael moore did not research this part very well apparently. taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ... aren't you just a mindless american who isn't 'posed to be able to think for himself? HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
Volourn Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 "A couple of years of required service to one's country for all citizens, male and female, would grow some of these selfish whelps up. I don't care if the required service is military or some other form, just shoving young people out into the world to broaden their horizons and teach them a modicum of self-discipline would help." I didn't know you believed in slavery... DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Whitemithrandir Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 A draft is good fun! Sail along the seven seas... Get shot in the head... Word economics To express my vast wisdom I speak in haiku's.
Arkan Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 A draft is good fun!Sail along the seven seas... Get shot in the head... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If there were a draft, I would enlist in the Navy probably...so I could stay on a boat. That is, if I don't have an unfortunate accident that breaks a leg beforehand. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta
taks Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 aren't you just a mindless american who isn't 'posed to be able to think for himself? HA! Good Fun! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> according to mr. moore, yes. i am. dammit! huh? taks comrade taks... just because.
Dakoth Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 Taks the only question I have for you is what positions do they fill in the military. It has been shown in the past that politicians children are shown preferencial treatment in regards to what jobs they get and where they are stationed. I will say it again if they want to be called war heros put them on the front line with the rest of us to be shot at and killed. As far as the miltary service I wish I had joined when I was younger. It would have helped me as much as it would help everyone else.
taks Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 the report i read had several positions filled... one guy was actually an enlisted man (sergeant i think) who was in iraq at the time... the others are spread about doing i don't know what. nothing unusual, typical jobs. a couple were officers, btw. either way, irrelevant, the post wasn't designed to argue against moore particularly, more of a subtle jab. politicians' children ARE shown preferential treatment, no doubt, but not all accept it. some see their duty as a duty and treat it accordingly. not everyone in the world is out for themselves, not even politicians' children. taks comrade taks... just because.
Dakoth Posted September 15, 2004 Posted September 15, 2004 the report i read had several positions filled... one guy was actually an enlisted man (sergeant i think) who was in iraq at the time... the others are spread about doing i don't know what. nothing unusual, typical jobs. a couple were officers, btw. either way, irrelevant, the post wasn't designed to argue against moore particularly, more of a subtle jab. politicians' children ARE shown preferential treatment, no doubt, but not all accept it. some see their duty as a duty and treat it accordingly. not everyone in the world is out for themselves, not even politicians' children. taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> While I never said all of them did it just goes to show reports can only be taken at face value.
kumquatq3 Posted September 16, 2004 Posted September 16, 2004 no, it was several... the percentage worked out to twice as much as the overall US average... keep in mind, only about 1 in 200 are in the US... that means congress only needs to have 4 children to double the average. michael moore did not research this part very well apparently. taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yea, but how many are anywhere that could be considered "in harms way"
deganawida Posted September 16, 2004 Posted September 16, 2004 At least one, in Iraq, according to taks' source.
Dakoth Posted September 16, 2004 Posted September 16, 2004 At least one, in Iraq, according to taks' source. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1 out of how many are in? I am sure the number in harms way is fairly small.
Product of the Cosmos Posted September 16, 2004 Author Posted September 16, 2004 At least one, in Iraq, according to taks' source. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As Moore said.. 1 is fighting in Iraq. As he was trying to get politicians kids to sign up for the war. And they all looked at him like he was the devil or something. I would feel disgraced if I had a young one in the war by the looks on their faces. The looks on their faces were like: *O_O WHAT! GO IN HARMS WAY FOR THE IRAQ WAR?! YA RIGHT* The looks on their faces were like the look onmy friends face when I ask him if it was true ihis religion(Islam) was formed by disgraced and banished Jews(like some Jew told me). lol. Not very happy.
DemonKing Posted September 16, 2004 Posted September 16, 2004 As Moore said.. 1 is fighting in Iraq. As he was trying to get politicians kids to sign up for the war. And they all looked at him like he was the devil or something. I would feel disgraced if I had a young one in the war by the looks on their faces. I don't know if I approve of all of Moore's "journalistic techniques" but it was pretty funny to see him go up to guys who were quite happy to send lots of other people's children to Iraq but when he suggested they send their own the look was like : "Are you mad? No sane person would want their kids there!". :D
Monte Carlo Posted September 17, 2004 Posted September 17, 2004 Heinlein wrote Starship Troopers in the 1950's, Sport Fans. It is required reading for any aging reactionary like myself, and Heinlein was roundly condemned for being a crypto-fascist by pro-Commie fellow travellers/ useful idiots of the day. Cheers MC
Product of the Cosmos Posted September 17, 2004 Author Posted September 17, 2004 "Heinlein was roundly condemned... [by the] useful idiots of the day. LMAO, those useful idiots of the day I tell ya. I've heard the book is like 10x better then the movie. Is that true?
Hiro Protagonist Posted September 17, 2004 Posted September 17, 2004 Due to the growing situation in Iraq, which from people I know serving in Iraq convey to me, we are not doing as well as the media is showing over there. Personally I think a draft possibility is very high in the near future no matter who gets elected. As IMO Kerry as well as Bush, are now obligated after the poor managament of our country the Bush admin has led us with in the Iraq situation. See for yourSelf I provide a search link because one site doesn't really sum it up, as well as all the sites. lol. As the saying goes, hope for the best, prepare for the worst. And I wouldn't like to see my fellow Americans blindsided by a draft, as niether candidate will dare talk about it until after the election. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> more meat for the grinder in Iraq. I'm sure Bush and his arm chair generals are happy, safe and sound back home.
Recommended Posts