0
   

The Draft will settle it

 
 
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 02:40 pm
When you go to a store and select the product you pay for it. However, what I have noticed is that a master goes to a chic store selects an expensive gift and the poor servant has to pay for it. That master is W and the poor servant's are the poor kids signing up for the National Guards and Reserves and paying for W's Iraq decision.

Rangel suggests re-introducing the Draft. I suggest there should be binding vote for the public. Those who select "stay the course" will incur the provision that they, their sons and daughters of military age, willing and able will be given first preference to serve in Iraq. That is only fair, you pay for what you choose/buy!
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,679 • Replies: 54
No top replies

 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 02:43 pm
talk, Your opinion is too rational for the neocons. They also blame not having conscription when more soldiers are needed in our country/Iraq/Afghanistan/worldwide is blamed on the electorate's wishes, but continue to parrot "we will win in Iraq."
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 02:50 pm
Yet they don't send their kids to war.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 02:54 pm
The things they are teaching kids in school these days...
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 02:56 pm
McGentrix wrote:
The things they are teaching kids in school these days...


It's abundantly clear that you wouldn't understand.

Smile
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:01 pm
Re: The Draft will settle it
talk72000 wrote:
When you go to a store and select the product you pay for it. However, what I have noticed is that a master goes to a chic store selects an expensive gift and the poor servant has to pay for it. That master is W and the poor servant's are the poor kids signing up for the National Guards and Reserves and paying for W's Iraq decision.

Rangel suggests re-introducing the Draft. I suggest there should be binding vote for the public. Those who select "stay the course" will incur the provision that they, their sons and daughters of military age, willing and able will be given first preference to serve in Iraq. That is only fair, you pay for what you choose/buy!


Rangel had his chance with the draft. He put forth the legistration and then voted against the draft.

I say we do the same thing for things such as welfare and social security. Those who want the programs should pay for them and those that don't shouldn't have to. Think that is a great idea?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:04 pm
Re: The Draft will settle it
Baldimo wrote:
talk72000 wrote:
When you go to a store and select the product you pay for it. However, what I have noticed is that a master goes to a chic store selects an expensive gift and the poor servant has to pay for it. That master is W and the poor servant's are the poor kids signing up for the National Guards and Reserves and paying for W's Iraq decision.

Rangel suggests re-introducing the Draft. I suggest there should be binding vote for the public. Those who select "stay the course" will incur the provision that they, their sons and daughters of military age, willing and able will be given first preference to serve in Iraq. That is only fair, you pay for what you choose/buy!


Rangel had his chance with the draft. He put forth the legistration and then voted against the draft.

I say we do the same thing for things such as welfare and social security. Those who want the programs should pay for them and those that don't shouldn't have to. Think that is a great idea?


Seems fair.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:09 pm
that is a great idea. so i will pay after i am, for example, laid off to get unemployment benefits, or i will pay once i get old or sick or poor... brilliant thought, really.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:10 pm
This is a childish, impractical suggestion which will certainly never be adopted. There have been wars since the beginning of Man's appearance on Earth, and most of them, probably, for reasons far less reasonable than the motivation for the war in Iraq. Many of the wars in history have probably been started on the grounds: "you have something I want," e.g. Iraq's annexation of Kuwait.

When a country reaches the point of decadence that it won't go to war for any reason, or reaches the point at which any potential enemy knows that you need only give its army a bloodly nose and they'll quit, said country will have little future role in the history of the world.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:29 pm
Re: The Draft will settle it
talk72000 wrote:
That is only fair, you pay for what you choose/buy!

I agree with the principle, but not with the application. The US has a volunteer army. Everyone who serves in it has chosen and bought into this particular job. None of them conditioned their service on their commander in chief being competent or honest. And now they have to pay the price. That's only fair.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:32 pm
I don't support welfare as a lifestyle besides lifelong welfare has been legislated out by Clinton and Congress so why bring it up as it is not an issue? Iraq is affecting the national financial health as it is taking 2-3 $billion a month to feed that monster. Imagine, that money would help New Orleans and reduce part of the deficit. It is affecting even Social Security as the National treasury is depleted of funds.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:39 pm
Thomas, that volunteer army is close to bankruptcy. Reserves and Guardsmen are being sent on repeated tours of duty in Iraq. They didn't sign up for war duty as a regular but as a reserve. W is distorting the word of 'reserve' as normallt used and guardsmen are for 'home' duty not overseas assignment again a distorsion of the "National" Guards.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 03:42 pm
talk72000 wrote:
Thomas, that volunteer army is close to bankruptcy. Reserves and Guardsmen are being sent on repeated tours of duty in Iraq. They didn't sign up for war duty as a regular but as a reserve. W is distorting the word of 'reserve' as normallt used and guardsmen are for 'home' duty not overseas assignment again a distorsion of the "National" Guards.

In that case, the solution is withdrawal from Iraq, and a concentration of military policy on protecting the homeland. Re-introducing the draft is an inacceptable solution, as the draft is morally equivalent to slavery.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 05:21 pm
The Draft would be acceptable in a true national defense but then there would be no shortage of recruits for I am sure people will sign up able-bodied or not, of age or not, like in WWII. There would be volunteers galore if the United States was invaded. But with Iraq it had multiple objectives but I am not sure if national security was part of it. I would guess it was greed for some but sufferance for most.

There are 3 things wrong with it:

1) It was an unprovoked invasion with a fabricated lie to justice the act.
2) Regime Change was ballyhooed and Saddam was removed with much fanfare - statue toppled and 'Mission Accomplished' photo-op.
3) It requires 200,000 troops to stabilize Iraq after the invasion.

Just for argument sake let's leave the invasion rightness and wrongness out. The 'stay the course' crowd doesn't have the necessary bodies to stabilize Iraq so a Draft is necessary to make for the shortfall.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 05:43 pm
Brandon, you are speaking of Imperialism. Even Rome and Great Britain could not carry on as the tasks far exceeds the resources of both Rome and little United Kingdoms. Their empires eroded away. Emporer W like Emporer Nero, who fiddled while Rome burned, strummed a guitar while New Orleans drowned.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 06:53 pm
talk, The major difference between your examples of Rome and GB is the simple fact that we can replace our king.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 07:12 pm
talk72000 wrote:
Brandon, you are speaking of Imperialism. Even Rome and Great Britain could not carry on as the tasks far exceeds the resources of both Rome and little United Kingdoms. Their empires eroded away. Emporer W like Emporer Nero, who fiddled while Rome burned, strummed a guitar while New Orleans drowned.

These are the statements of mine, to which the above post is a response:

1. Your idea that only the children of those who favor a war ought to be subject to the draft is childish, and impractical, and will certainly never be adopted.

2. A country which is unable to muster the will to use military force, and maintain it until a task is complete will not play much of a role in the world.

3. The reasons for which Iraq was invaded are certainly reasonable compared to the motives behind most of the wars of history.

How is anything you've said a response to anything I've said? You appear to be incapable of following a linear train of thought. Repeating a bunch of random slogans does not constitute debate.

I will refrain from correcting your other false, but irrelevant, statements, since I, at least, am capable of carrying on a linear train of thought, you imbecile.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:01 pm
Thomas wrote:
In that case, the solution is withdrawal from Iraq, and a concentration of military policy on protecting the homeland. Re-introducing the draft is an inacceptable solution, as the draft is morally equivalent to slavery.


Your equivalance to slavery is a point well taken. Yet, Merry Andrew (and I hope he shows up) has fairly well convinced me that an all volunteer force with frequent re-enlistment is equivalant to a mercenary army, subject to becoming distant to it's civilan leadership.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:29 pm
I wrote that those who are of the "stay the course" crowd be given first preference but never excluding the the others. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:32 pm
You certainly know which side of your bread is buttered by bomb makers!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Draft will settle it
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/25/2022 at 03:36:43