Do you look down on people who...

[Judge Hades]

If Bush or any president who re-enstates the draft I would be the first one to encourage all those who are drafted to never pick up a gun and simply walk out on the miliatary. Especially for an unjust war.

[213374U]

I have to be a firefighter to run into a burning building when a woman's screaming about her baby still being inside?    Don't need a uniform for that.

So, you think it's something worth dying for, but you'd rather not do anything about it right now. And still you can't see where you're being a hypocrite? There's always more need for people willing to risk their lives to save others.

 

But hey, I understand. It's much more comfortable to sit in your armchair discussing high morality, than get out and find out what you're really made of. Not to mention safer. You also avoid the risk of not liking what you find. You go man.

 

 

You do, however, need a degree in idiocy.

Why, you offering yours? I recommend you read the guidelines. Advertising is not allowed in these boards.

 

 

And there's a lot I'd die for, just not this particular thing.

Sure thing baby. By the way, did I tell you about the time when I won the Nobel prize of cuisine?

[Llyranor]

I like to actively seek death too!

[LoneWolf16]

I like to actively seek death too!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which is exactly what Mr. 1337 is asking.

 

I said I'd like to die in that way, not that I'd like to die any time soon, or rush out looking for ways to die nobly. Simply meant that, when the time comes, this would be a preferred way of going about it.

 

And really now, why do so many people resort to being a p***k when they don't like something they see on here?

 

If I'm a jerk, by all means, feel free to string me up by the balls, but when I do nothing...it's a little immature.

[Enoch]

If Bush or any president who re-enstates the draft I would be the first one to encourage all those who are drafted to never pick up a gun and simply walk out on the miliatary.  Especially for an unjust war.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which is exactly why the draft is a pretty bad idea. Involuntary soldiers often tend to be pretty lousy soldiers. And lousy soldiers have a way of making the other soldiers around them lousy as well.

[Cantousent]

I'd like to see the link to where Bush made comments about reinstating the draft.

[julianw]

^I thought it was some senator who made the suggestion.

[Enoch]

^I thought it was some senator who made the suggestion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know that Charles Rangel (a house member who represents part of NYC) has brought it up. His argument was that, since going volunteer, recruiting has been concentrated in poorer communities (often minority communities). Thus, it has become easier for the elites running the government to justify sending troops off to war because they don't regularly associate with the type of people who will be most affected. IMO, there's something to his concerns, and they should be discussed, but the draft isn't the answer.

 

As for Bush, I'm sure there's some quote out there where he was directly asked the question and his response was less than a flat-out promise to never use the draft. That's all some of his more irrational critics need. (Note: I'm no fan of the president's politics, or the Iraq war.)

[julianw]

(Note: I'm no fan of the president's politics, or the Iraq war.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That means you agree with 68% of this country's population. Big deal...

[Enoch]

(Note: I'm no fan of the president's politics, or the Iraq war.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That means you agree with 68% of this country's population. Big deal...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not wearing it as a badge of honor or anything. I just wanted to make sure that people didn't take my light mockery of some extreme Bush critics as a statement of support for W.

 

I didn't stand around in the January drizzle for hours protesting his '01 inauguration for nothing! (Well, now that I think about it, it was for nothing... Except maybe a badge of honor )

[Cantousent]

I've always had you pegged for one o' those intellectual elites, Enoch. I just figured I wouldn't hold it against you.

 

In regards to the draft, the adoption of which would provide a point to this thread, the draft hasn't been a great equalizer either. Rich people will be... well.... rich. They'll get by with things in society. Poorer folks can't.

 

crazed responses anticipated

[Fenghuang]

I know that Charles Rangel (a house member who represents part of NYC) has brought it up.  His argument was that, since going volunteer, recruiting has been concentrated in poorer communities (often minority communities).  Thus, it has become easier for the elites running the government to justify sending troops off to war because they don't regularly associate with the type of people who will be most affected.  IMO, there's something to his concerns, and they should be discussed, but the draft isn't the answer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Well there is a point to that. I certainly even be considering the military as a valid career option if I had as much money as most the people I grew up with. Also, because I am essentially 'The Man' there are hardly any scholarships available to me to help pay for school, which is why I'm looking to pick up CISCO certification before I go to a four year.

Edited May 8, 2006 by Fenghuang

[Cantousent]

The point is, would it be better to have the draft, which would have an adverse impact on compensation and signing bonuses? The military provides an opportunity for poorer people. Hell, it provides a decent opportunity for middle income folks.

 

You say that you wouldn't even consider the option if you had more money. Isn't it a good thing that the option exists for folks without a lot of money? Isn't it a good thing that you can sign up for the GI bill and get some extra cash for college? I know it was for me.

 

I lose patience with arguments that turn our volunteer military into a wedge for class warfare. It sucks. It's pointless. It's worse than pointless, it's counterproductive.

 

You know, we're going to have folks with more and folks with less. It. will. always. be. thus. Since that's the case, isn't it good that there is something out there that provides a way for folks with less to get a little more? Maybe take four years to serve their country and then get some free college?

 

I don't look down on folks who don't volunteer. That's fine. ...But there's a lot to be said for someone who does volunteer. That's true for the guy who loves his country and wants to keep lesser men safe and protect their freedom. It's also true for the guy who's willing to take some risks in order to get ahead in life.

 

I don't look down on Lonewolf for his candid comments. He's got the guts to say what is undoubtedly true for a lot of people. Nevertheless, our freedom is guaranteed by men and women who volunteer for the service. Folks who scorn them, even by implication, are truly the most hateful of citizens, because it is by the strength of our volunteers that folks can scorn our volunteer army. Be glad, when you so flippantly deride our volunteers, that you have those volunteers standing ready to protect the very right by which you scorn them.

 

As for the whole debate surrounding something for which it is worth either to live or die, folks die for causes all the time. That cause might be money. That cause might be the protection of the community. It might be the republic. Folks die for their children or spouses all the time. I bet that virtually everyone on this board has something for which they'd lay down their life at least at some point in their life. If not flat out lay down their life, they'd at least seriously risk death. Arguing about dying for something is unproductive, as there is only one way to test the assertion, and then we'll never know if it were worth the price.

[alanschu]

Oh, and @Numbers - Note the word "want". Indicates a preference, right? If I had my way, I'd die at middle age, saving a baby from a house fire. Or at least before all that...*shudder* I'd rather die before then.

Are you considering a future in firefighting? If not, that's hypocritical of you to say.

 

I have no problem with people saying there's absolutely nothing in the world that they find worth dying for, mind you. As a matter of fact, I'm one of them, and I'm joining the military after summer. I do find it funny when people delude themselves, though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have to be a firefighter to run into a burning building when a woman's screaming about her baby still being inside? Don't need a uniform for that. You do, however, need a degree in idiocy.

 

And there's a lot I'd die for, just not this particular thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Did you just call firefighters idiots?

[LoneWolf16]

Very well said, all of it in fact, but just to be clear here, in case that particular paragraph was entirely directed at me, I have nothing but respect for the men and women in uniform. I've got family in the military, and honestly, everyone brave enough to sign up in the first place deserves more than their fair share of respect.

 

After all, they've obviously got more cojones than I can muster.

 

Edit: No, Alan. It'd be idiotic of me to run into a burning building without the necessary equipment to protect myself. Firemen don't charge in there wearing jeans and a T-shirt, do they?

Edited May 8, 2006 by LoneWolf16

[alanschu]

It looked like you were making a blanket statement about people running into burning buildings.

[LoneWolf16]

I need to learn how to be more clear on here...it's causing way too many problems.

[Fenghuang]

The point is, would it be better to have the draft, which would have an adverse impact on compensation and signing bonuses?  The military provides an opportunity for poorer people.  Hell, it provides a decent opportunity for middle income folks.

 

You say that you wouldn't even consider the option if you had more money.  Isn't it a good thing that the option exists for folks without a lot of money?  Isn't it a good thing that you can sign up for the GI bill and get some extra cash for college?  I know it was for me.

 

I lose patience with arguments that turn our volunteer military into a wedge for class warfare.  It sucks.  It's pointless.  It's worse than pointless, it's counterproductive.

 

You know, we're going to have folks with more and folks with less. It. will. always. be. thus.  Since that's the case, isn't it good that there is something out there that provides a way for folks with less to get a little more?  Maybe take four years to serve their country and then get some free college?

 

I don't look down on folks who don't volunteer.  That's fine.  ...But there's a lot to be said for someone who does volunteer.  That's true for the guy who loves his country and wants to keep lesser men safe and protect their freedom.  It's also true for the guy who's willing to take some risks in order to get ahead in life.

 

I don't look down on Lonewolf for his candid comments.  He's got the guts to say what is undoubtedly true for a lot of people.  Nevertheless, our freedom is guaranteed by men and women who volunteer for the service.  Folks who scorn them, even by implication, are truly the most hateful of citizens, because it is by the strength of our volunteers that folks can scorn our volunteer army.  Be glad, when you so flippantly deride our volunteers, that you have those volunteers standing ready to protect the very right by which you scorn them.

 

As for the whole debate surrounding something for which it is worth either to live or die, folks die for causes all the time.  That cause might be money.  That cause might be the protection of the community.  It might be the republic.  Folks die for their children or spouses all the time.  I bet that virtually everyone on this board has something for which they'd lay down their life at least at some point in their life.  If not flat out lay down their life, they'd at least seriously risk death.  Arguing about dying for something is unproductive, as there is only one way to test the assertion, and then we'll never know if it were worth the price.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

No, I know Eldar. And military is better way for people with less to get more than crime, be it petty theft, gangs, or even more organized forms of crime.

 

The argument is silly, but there is also merit to it. Unfortunately making a non-voluntary army would make poorer soldiers, and the rich people would still find a way out of it if they wanted. Y'know, because money solves most everything.

[Walsingham]

I must apologise but I haven't time to read all the posts up until now. I read the first page, and this one.

 

I don't look down on people who don't join up. I do believe that everyone has a duty to contribute to society, but that can be done in a myriad of ways. Not everyone is best suited to frolicking in the mud. Even if they are best suited, I know that some people are just plain scared of signing up, and frankly that's OK too. I'd encourage them to overcome that fear, but I don't look down on them.

 

The people I do have a problem with are those who are ungrateful towards those who do manage to overcome fear, and give up the easy life in order to get out and fight. I think it's a hell of a thing to see one young man or woman put themselves forward when so many others hang back. It frustrates me beyond words when people knock them for it. And it particularly annoys me when those same knockers try to portray themselves as more brave for refusing to go.

 

[Plano Skywalker]

the idea of the U.S. adopting an Israel-like mandatory conscription policy is ridiculous as it is so antithetical to our founding documents.

 

every once in a while even a "conservative" pundit (like talk show host Ken Hamblin) will push for such a thing. it is, at best, misguided, liberal, social engineering in drag.

 

I think we do need something like the French Foreign Legion, though. Allow hardened criminals who are otherwise locked up in cages an opportunity to *volunteer* to serve their country.

 

Also, you do not have to be a U.S. citizen to serve in the military (at least from certain countries). The Philippines is an example of this. They could look at expanding this practice if the need arises.

 

I like the idea of a "guess worker" program and how, if you join the guest worker program, you get bumped up on the waiting list for naturalization. They could have a military version of this for those who want to be citizens.

[Walsingham]

I've never met any serving soldier who believes conscription achieves any useful military purpose below the world war level of fighting.

[Enoch]

I've always had you pegged for one o' those intellectual elites, Enoch.  I just figured I wouldn't hold it against you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In my defense, I was a senior in college at the time of the '01 inaugural, living a whole 5 blocks from the parade route. If there was anything non-inaugural on TV at the time, I probably wouldn't have gone.

[~Di]

The people I do have a problem with are those who are ungrateful towards those who do manage to overcome fear, and give up the easy life in order to get out and fight. I think it's a hell of a thing to see one young man or woman put themselves forward when so many others hang back. It frustrates me beyond words when people knock them for it. And it particularly annoys me when those same knockers try to portray themselves as more brave for refusing to go.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What he said. ^^ There hasn't been anything like that in this thread so far, but I've read lots of posts where people have done exactly what Walsingham describes, not only ridicule and insult those who have chosen to serve their country militarily, but also try to portray themselves as more courageous, even saintly, because they refuse to do so. Makes me nuts when I see stuff like that.

[metadigital]

Lonewolf, read Walsingham and ~Di's posts.

The people I do have a problem with are those who are ungrateful towards those who do manage to overcome fear, and give up the easy life in order to get out and fight. I think it's a hell of a thing to see one young man or woman put themselves forward when so many others hang back. It frustrates me beyond words when people knock them for it. And it particularly annoys me when those same knockers try to portray themselves as more brave for refusing to go.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What he said. ^^ There hasn't been anything like that in this thread so far, but I've read lots of posts where people have done exactly what Walsingham describes, not only ridicule and insult those who have chosen to serve their country militarily, but also try to portray themselves as more courageous, even saintly, because they refuse to do so. Makes me nuts when I see stuff like that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If this still doesn't make it plain enough for you (whether you're suffering from poor elucidation skills or not); some of what you are saying is patently self-contradictory. Let me illustrate:

I too am quite happy for someone else to die in my place. I don't think Lovewolf claimed to be altruism personified. I'd say it's quite normal for a human being to put self-preservation before say duty or this new kind of follow your enlightened leaders patriotism. I'm pretty sure that he just wants to die by his own volition, be that as a 90 year old man in ****-stained bedsheets or a 25 year old kid in a war he does believe in against foes he does wish to see dead.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(Not exactly, but...) Bingo #1

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You don't want to put yourself in harm's way (it's "crazy" man).

What's with this condescending (I like this word) tone? If he doesn't want to be a part of the military due to conflicting opinions then that is his right. I wouldn't want to go fight for Bush and Co. in Iraq either. Now if some nation or group was to attack 'my' country or one of our allies on their soil, then it would be a different matter entirely.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not condescending (I can tell that is your New Favourite Word), simply using laconic humour to point out the hypocrisy latent in his post.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How am I being hypocritical? If I want to avoid death for what I deem to be a pointless war, why am I the bad guy when somebody else decides they want to go fight in my place? Good on them. They see a reason, so let them fight for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bingo #2

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yet you are happy for others to do so on your behalf, so that you might enjoy their sacrifices. (Hint: that's the hypocrisy.)

 

Then, when Numbers called you on it (which I would have done, if I were here), you tried and failed to wriggle out of it, flinging insults at him.

Were it something I believed in, a war with actual meaning behind it, or those I cared for were threatened, I'd be on the front lines in a heart beat.

 

Truly sorry I'd rather not throw my life away for some jackass in a suit and tie with about as much sense as a rabid chimp, and the looks of one too...thought I have to admit, creative use of Nicholson's famous speech. 

Oh, and @Numbers - Note the word "want". Indicates a preference, right? If I had my way, I'd die at middle age, saving a baby from a house fire. Or at least before all that...*shudder* I'd rather die before then.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you considering a future in firefighting? If not, that's hypocritical of you to say.

 

I have no problem with people saying there's absolutely nothing in the world that they find worth dying for, mind you. As a matter of fact, I'm one of them, and I'm joining the military after summer. I do find it funny when people delude themselves, though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have to be a firefighter to run into a burning building when a woman's screaming about her baby still being inside? Don't need a uniform for that. You do, however, need a degree in idiocy.

 

And there's a lot I'd die for, just not this particular thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To clarify: you are suggesting that you would put yourself in harm's way for something worthwhile, e.g. saving a baby from a house fire, yet you aren't backing up that comment with action (you aren't volunteering for fire service).

 

So what are the "lot" you'd die for, because you haven't volunteered a single one (apart from a fantasy accident).

[Judge Hades]

Anyway, if their was a threat to the US and the US was attacked then I would be in full support of the troops, the leadership of the country, and willing to fight to protect what is mine. George W. was right in his war in Afganistan. Nothing will change my mind on that though I would have done it differently.

 

The war in Iraq was completely and totally unjustified. Georgie boy and his cronies spinned Intelligence to the point of falsehood and used it to justify to invade when Saddam was no threat to US citizens on US soil. Hell, he was no longer a threat to his neighbors. Only threat he posed was to his own people and well, that was their problem and not ours.

 

I will tell you this much, guys, I will never vote for another Republican in the White House or for any public office again.