is it a good ideal to bring back the draft?

[JuanBolio]

Is there a system on earth you would defend?

Only for lack of anything better. I am currently in the delayed entry program for the U.S. Navy and will be shipping out on November 24th. By choice.

Or is it that nothing is worth you having to risk being harmed. If you push the line far enough out in front of you, no you won't have to cross it.

There's plenty I'd risk my life for, especially the defense of innocent people against violent or tyrannical aggressors. What I'm saying is that no one should be FORCED to do so. We were born into "the system", and there's no place on Earth where some version of it doesn't exist. We can't set out for new lands and make our own way. No matter where we go on this rapidly shrinking world we have to play by someone else's rules.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Is there a system on earth you would defend?

Only for lack of anything better. I am currently in the delayed entry program for the U.S. Navy and will be shipping out on November 24th. By choice.

Or is it that nothing is worth you having to risk being harmed. If you push the line far enough out in front of you, no you won't have to cross it.

There's plenty I'd risk my life for, especially the defense of innocent people against violent or tyrannical aggressors. What I'm saying is that no one should be FORCED to do so. We were born into "the system", and there's no place on Earth where some version of it doesn't exist. We can't set out for new lands and make our own way. No matter where we go on this rapidly shrinking world we have to play by someone else's rules.

There's sadly not any point in making these arguments, my friend. They will not understand. Those who are pro-draft, or in favour of any form of mandatory service ,do not understand the individual drive for duty that comes from choice and self-knowledge, from applying your own sense of worth, skills, talents and dreams to the betterment of your people without detracting from yourself. It's all about control for them. They wish to control your self-image, your means of self-relation, so as to wield you as a tool. This is how young men indoctrinated into a system whereby they are told they have a duty and obligation to be soldiers have always been treated. Their sense of self-worth and self-evaluation and self-relation manipulated by others who seek control over them in the most absolute manner. Your desire to serve and help and better your people- however it manifests, in whatever role you choose- means nothing to them. They want to dictate who you are and how you serve. Service is not the issue. Service on their terms is the issue. It's all about control.

You choose to serve through action in the Navy. I choose to serve through voluntary work with disadvantaged and disabled children, and with study, so as to apply my talents to a field of scholarship and better our people that way. I also serve as a form of unofficial "advisor" for many of my friends and acquaintances, and I plan to be a househusband if possible and dedicate myself to raising my future children to be productive citizens. We know ourselves, where our personalities and choices and talents lead us. That's unacceptable to most people. They must control us, dictate our service on their terms, being frightened of that which they can't control.

We all, as children, possess the instinct to manipulate and control others as a means of keeping our infant selves safe, secure and provided for. Most people never grow up. They continue to feel the need to control those around them, lest they feel insecure.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Blah blah blah. You know what would've been even worse than all that hysterical bollocks you've been spouting? LETTING THE NAZI'S WIN

the ignorant bleating of someone such as yourself means little.

Let's cool it here. Debate is good, personal attacks are bad. Thank you.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Blah blah blah. You know what would've been even worse than all that hysterical bollocks you've been spouting? LETTING THE NAZI'S WIN

the ignorant bleating of someone such as yourself means little.

Let's cool it here. Debate is good, personal attacks are bad. Thank you.

You would of course be quite right, even if you weren't a moderator. I apologize for letting my passions get the better of me there.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Exactly. You're willing to take full advantage of your good fortune in being born here and follow along with any easy rules that require no self sacrifice whatsoever, but when the going gets tough you'll cry about how you didn't ask for any of it. I'm not the one who is being simplistic.

No, when the going gets tough I'll choose for myself what I want to do, based on what I think is right. I don't obey laws I think are unjust, and I won't be forced into fighting for a cause I think is wrong. Nor should anyone else.

Civil disobedience is fine, as long as you're willing to face the consequences-- and anybody who doesn't want to live by our Constitution should be allowed to flee to Canada or anywhere else. But that doesn't justify any foolishness about a society not being able to call upon its own people to defend itself.

 

[RJDiogenes]

You would of course be quite right, even if you weren't a moderator. I apologize for letting my passions get the better of me there.

No problem. It happens.

 

[misterx3]

I am completely against the idea of a military draft. I would explain, but everything I would say has already been covered by JuanBolio and Deranged Nasat.

 

[T'Girl]

Locutus of Bored: The reality of the phrase is that it means you're with us without question.

Not without question sir. Two peoples, working toward a common solution need not agree across the board, that is the nature of any alliance.

Locutus of Bored: see that Iraq had jack shit to do with al Qaeda or US threatening.

The leader of Iraq threatened America, her allies, and people we were helping on a near daily basis. Firing apon our aircraft. Braking multiple international agreements. Giving material and financial aid to many terrorist organizations - one of which was al Qaeda.

Frontline: (Military service, AmeriCorps, etc..)

Please sir we can keep this civil, don't place those two in conjunction.

JuanBolio: I am currently in the delayed entry program for the U.S. Navy.

Thank you for your service, given what you've posted, I confess I find this a unusal statement.

Pingfah: I said that most people would need the imminent threat of invasion to be motivated to fight, and immeditely followed that with my statement that I would require a threat of destruction against my home and family.

What would qualify as"destruction". And would the tank have to be on your one street, for you to do something?

.Pingfah: .. include the defense of our allies before we are actually attacked ...

But not help our allies UNLESS we were also to be attacked.

JuanBolio: No, when the going gets tough I'll choose for myself what I want to do, based on what I think is right. I don't obey laws I think are unjust, and I won't be forced into fighting for a cause I think is wrong. Nor should anyone else.

You just stated you're entering military service , unless I misunderstood. is it your intent to sit on the deck if given an order you personal don't agree with? At some point you have or will take an oath to obey ALL orders given to you. Are you planing on refusing to take the oath?

Deranged Nasa: snap their fingers and remove his rights

Sir nothing is being removed, if you live in a society with a draft, then you or your son does not possess the "right" not to be drafted.

Deranged Nasat: Soldiers did not give their lives for me. -- This "they died for you" nonsense must stop- I have no blood on my hands.

But you are in recept of freedoms, rights, and quality of life obtained by the actions of soldiers, even if it happened before your birth. If you don't like how those freedoms were won, why don't you renounce them?

Main Entry: re·nounce Pronunciation: \ri-ˈnau̇n(t)s\ Function: verb .. to give up, refuse, or resign usually by formal declaration

Deranged NasatYou don't get it do you? I DO NOT WISH TO ACCEPT SUBJUGATION. You are saying "oh, you should be prepared to, to protect others".

Actual what I said was: you should WANT to defend other, Not subjugation but a act of volition on your part.

Alidar Jorok: We also destroyed any chance of a good relationship with Iran. -- ... lost Vietnam to communism. -- ... and are still facing a stalemate in Korea. -- ... contributed to the rise of Osama bin Laden

Okay. Are the people of Iran better now under the Mullahs or under the Shah -both were flawed, both possess secret police. Answer the Shah, more - not total - freedoms. Are the people of Vietnam better now, or with the former system of South Vietnam. Both were flawed. Answer, South Vietnam, 'more freedoms'. Would the people of South Korea be better, have more freedoms if the peninsula were united under the system of the north. Answer, no. Would every last person in the entire world have more freedoms under the system of OBL. Answer, no.

Deranged Nasat:Please don't overlook the biggest issue- that it applies to members of one sex only.

The draft, which I don't support at all times, will of course bring in young healthy men. Not old folks, disabled, or women. In an extreme emergency all of that latter group COULD defend their family and people, but the former is the best choose.

Deranged Nasat: ...drafts will not bring peace, they will not bring security, they only ever fuel conflicts, ...

A draft during the second world war brought the first and second to the people of america and other land as well, no not perfection. But we had both.

Deranged Nasat:I'm not going to reproduce my arguments about the second world war and its many contributors' ideologies, because you clearly wouldn't understand.

This last include direct condensation, non-agreement doesn't mean lack of understanding. If you don't wish to type it all out a second time -- perhaps a link?

JuanBolio:We were born into "the system", and there's no place on Earth where some version of it doesn't exist.

There are dozens of countries with no military forces, just civilian police departments. Many of the independant island nations south of Hawaii have only a handful of cops. I've been to a few of them. You know JuanBolio, we have these things call airplanes now.

T'Girl:All that said, personally I'm for a all volunteer force.

And I still am. I don't hold with a non-emergency, permanent, never ending draft.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Drafts will not bring peace, they will not bring security, they only ever fuel conflicts, and place ALL young men and boys in the position of being "legitimate targets" for the enemy (be in no doubt, they will be automatically treated as such by most nations), and playthings for their own nation.

I wasn't talking about any of that. I was talking about how it gave French soldiers a common identity during Napoelon's campaigns and basically erased the differences between Languedoc and France and, to some extent, the aristocracy and poor (well, those in the aristocracy that hadn't been killed off ). It has helped unify Italy, Germany, etc. My point is that our modern world wouldn't exist without the draft - nothing else.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Drafts will not bring peace, they will not bring security, they only ever fuel conflicts, and place ALL young men and boys in the position of being "legitimate targets" for the enemy (be in no doubt, they will be automatically treated as such by most nations), and playthings for their own nation.

I wasn't talking about any of that. I was talking about how it gave French soldiers a common identity during Napoelon's campaigns and basically erased the differences between Languedoc and France and, to some extent, the aristocracy and poor (well, those in the aristocracy that hadn't been killed off ). It has helped unify Italy, Germany, etc. My point is that our modern world wouldn't exist without the draft - nothing else.

Fair enough, but the point is it unifies them against someone else, because an army is always raised in opposition to someone else, whether it is active or not. If the result of their unification is more nationalism nothing meaningful has changed; the divisions and conflicts only become larger and wider.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

The draft, which I don't support at all times, will of course bring in young healthy men. Not old folks, disabled, or women. In an extreme emergency all of that latter group COULD defend their family and people, but the former is the best choose.

"bring in". What a nice tidy euphanism for the systematic and selective/discriminatory application of forced labour and the removal of basic freedoms and liberties.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Sir nothing is being removed, if you live in a society with a draft, then you or your son does not possess the "right" not to be drafted.

Well, I thank the gods I live in the modern UK- where we're not made to register for a draft- and not the USA, then, because it scares me just how happy Americans as a people are to sacrifice liberty in favour of "security". Young men here have freedoms and priveleges American young men do not. My only fear is that my nation will backtrack at some point. Also, rights cannot be removed at the say-so of a government. That's missing the whole point of the concept of rights. Maybe America is all for ignoring internationally recognized rights in favour of "we systematically and with discrimination remove basic liberties, suck it up", but you can't use laws to remove liberties from those unconvicted of a crime and say that's acceptable.

But you are in recept of freedoms, rights, and quality of life obtained by the actions of soldiers, even if it happened before your birth. If you don't like how those freedoms were won, why don't you renounce them?

Main Entry: re·nounce Pronunciation: \ri-ˈnau̇n(t)s\ Function: verb .. to give up, refuse, or resign usually by formal declaration

So, your argument is that the draft- which I'm opposing as a violation of basic freedoms- is justifiable because its application bought me...basic freedoms. Right. So, to preserve my basic freedoms, I should be happy to give them up? Right.

Or...so I should justify the subjugation of others through a draft to support my own privelege? No. My privelege and freedom is a country which no longer sees me as war material. My ancestors and forebears did not enjoy that privelege. Their misfortune and subjugation did not bring me freedom. My freedom comes from people advancing to the point where they discontinued that misfortune and subjugation.

Actual what I said was: you should WANT to defend other, Not subjugation but a act of volition on your part.

Here we go again. Why should I want to? Because I'm a young man, it's my duty, etc, etc? This is the 21st century, not the 19th.

Also, see how you think either A) I willingly accept it, or B) I be drafted. There's no C) option in your mind is there? The idea that I might be permitted a life of peace, protection and safety doesn't even enter into it, because young men are not worthy of such a life. Sacrifice in the defense of others is their "purpose".

Quote:
Deranged Nasat: ...drafts will not bring peace, they will not bring security, they only ever fuel conflicts, ...

A draft during the second world war brought the first and second to the people of america and other land as well, no not perfection. But we had both.

No, T'Girl, drafts did not bring peace to America. They brought war. They pulled communities and families across the USA into that war. Your sons were being sent off to war; America was at war. Not peace. Military action brings war to a nation, not peace.

 

[Smiley]

At our current level of technology, the draft is not likely to be a concern for the US. It takes a smaller number of people to cause more death and destruction than it did in WW2 or Vietnam. It's doubtful that we would ever need massive amounts of new military personnel to fight a ground war.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Okay. Are the people of Iran better now under the Mullahs or under the Shah -both were flawed, both possess secret police. Answer the Shah, more - not total - freedoms. Are the people of Vietnam better now, or with the former system of South Vietnam. Both were flawed. Answer, South Vietnam, 'more freedoms'. Would the people of South Korea be better, have more freedoms if the peninsula were united under the system of the north. Answer, no. Would every last person in the entire world have more freedoms under the system of OBL. Answer, no.

Uh, what are you talking about? I said that you can't claim we won the cold war because people are not better off in the Islamic Republic of Iran, nor in Vietnam (this one could be a bit debatable), nor in DPRK. Therefore, how can you say we "won" the Cold War? Russia could still completely wipe out our population through a nuclear attack and we helped Osama bin Laden gain power, authority, and contacts throughout the Islamic world.

Also, whether or not things were better with the Shah, things would also have been better under Mosadegh, but we removed him from power to bring back the Shah. Instead of taking the time to build up the Iranian infrastructure to ensure a populous that was friendly towards us, we ensured a populous that saw us as an oppressor and turned towards radical Shi'aism. That was the consequence of the Cold War more often than not.

 

[T'Girl]

Deranged Nasat I thank the gods I live in the modern UK- where we're not made to register for a draft ---rights cannot be removed at the say-so of a government

--- Given that in the past the government of UK has imposed military conscription on the British people, what makes you think that in a time of extreme national emergency they won't do the same now. Over your protests naturally.

Deranged Nasat No. My privelege and freedom is a country which no longer sees me as war material.

--- Simply not being viewed a certain way is not what guarantees your life and liberty, you are currently being protected by others, as you have throughout you life.

Deranged Nasat drafts did not bring peace to America. They brought war.

--- In regard to the second world war, a attack by Japan and declaration of war by Germany and Italy, in fact brought war.

Alidar Jarok Therefore, how can you say we "won" the Cold War? Russia could still completely wipe out our population through a nuclear attack ...

--- The most likely scenario leading to a full nuclear exchange began with a attack by Russian forces on West Germany. Central europe was freed by Americas actions during the cold war, fifteen soviet republics freed, threat from russian missiles-bombers-submarine reduced for two decades, tension between russia and china reduced - another possible trigger of nuclear war, russia's export of weapons across the world reduced - . Yes sir, we "WON" the cold war.

T'Girl: All that said, personally I'm for a all volunteer force.

--- And I remain so.



T'Girl
.

 

[drychlick]

with some of your people! i like to ask what will it take to fight! not untill the bad guy is at your doorstep? you fight a war over there so they can"t get here! you must take the bad part of living in this country to get the joy of freedem! and a hell of lot of people die so you can sit down on your buit and said anything your want on that computer you have! you think they do not want to stay home! but they did there duty and i and you should all thank them! and if you are draft you can 2 thing do you duty or run be put in jall! god bless the usa

 

[paudemge]

No it is not a good idea to bring back the draft. Our volunteer military is superior to any military of comparable size. It is likely we will never need a draft again.

But a draft is certainly Constitutional, just as jury duty is. Congress has the power and authority to raise an army, the 13th amendment was never intended to restrict duty required to the state, even against your will.

 

[Pingfah]

I said that most people would need the imminent threat of invasion to be motivated to fight, and immeditely followed that with my statement that I would require a threat of destruction against my home and family.

What would qualify as"destruction". And would the tank have to be on your one street, for you to do something?

Do you have some sort of problem reading whole paragraphs? The very next sentence that you cut out said:

. I was including any credible threat to the sovereignty of my country or the lives of it's citizens

So no, I would not be waiting for the tanks to roll down my street.

But not help our allies UNLESS we were also to be attacked.

I would not support a draft if there was no chance of us being attacked personally, nor would I personally be prepared to join up to fight a battle that had zero implications for my own country.

But most situations where our allies are being attacked without provocation carries with it severe implications for ourselves. I can't imagine many situations where a country is threatening and capable of an unprovoked invasion or a missile attack on a European country or America, sparking a battle big enough to require a draft to win, yet poses no ongoing threat to us.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^^ Well, I guess we differ there. I think we should be just as ready to defend our allies as ourselves.

Reminder to everybody: Please don't Post more than twice in a row, as that is considered Spamming. Thank you.

 

[Pingfah]

^ To be clear, i'm not saying we shouldn't get involved where peaceful countries are being attacked, just that the government should not impose a draft to fight a battle that has zero implications for our country. We have a good volunteer force for that sort of thing.

If it is wrong to not join up to fight every international injustice in the world, then we should ALL be in the army.