Lefty 0 #51 August 21, 2007 QuoteMaybe you'd like to go to war armed with 19th Century weaponry, since you appear to devalue the contributions of those who developed the 20th and 21st Century weapons systems. Yes, Oppenheimer would have been far better employed carrying a rifle than running Los Alamos. Where is it said they'd be infantrymen? I already stated that they could join the military in an R&D capacity.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #52 August 21, 2007 QuoteI think that point flew well over your head, there. Did it? My reply to you is the same as the one to Kallend. Where did I say these scientists would have been on the front line fighting instead of using their brilliant minds in an R&D capacity?Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #53 August 21, 2007 QuoteA critical component of the strength of the US military and the overall US nation-state is being missed in this discussion - the importance of civilian control of the military Paraphrasing from the book: While you are in the military, you can't vote. You have to complete your term, thus returning to civilian life, before you can vote or enter politics.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,566 #54 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteMaybe you'd like to go to war armed with 19th Century weaponry, since you appear to devalue the contributions of those who developed the 20th and 21st Century weapons systems. Yes, Oppenheimer would have been far better employed carrying a rifle than running Los Alamos. Where is it said they'd be infantrymen? I already stated that they could join the military in an R&D capacity. So then you think that simply taking an oath and then carrying on what you would be doing any way would somehow be an earth shattering epiphany? An oath has only as much significance as you let it have. At the end of the day, it's just a bunch of words.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #55 August 21, 2007 QuoteAn oath has only as much significance as you let it have. At the end of the day, it's just a bunch of words. Words with the backing of the UCMJ.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #56 August 21, 2007 Quote Did it? My reply to you is the same as the one to Kallend. Where did I say these scientists would have been on the front line fighting instead of using their brilliant minds in an R&D capacity? While the government did do all the work for the bomb, most miltary technology comes from the defensive contractors. That would include just above every vehicle (tank, plane, or rocket). And if it's still serving the public good to do R&D safely at home in America, there are thousands of other job roles that also serve the public good, so why not just stick to what has actually worked? Your model sounds much more like membership in the Party in communist nations like China and the USSR. Hasn't worked nearly so well for them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,566 #57 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteAn oath has only as much significance as you let it have. At the end of the day, it's just a bunch of words. Words with the backing of the UCMJ. Not once the two years is up.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #58 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuote Did it? My reply to you is the same as the one to Kallend. Where did I say these scientists would have been on the front line fighting instead of using their brilliant minds in an R&D capacity? While the government did do all the work for the bomb, most miltary technology comes from the defensive contractors. That would include just above every vehicle (tank, plane, or rocket). And if it's still serving the public good to do R&D safely at home in America, there are thousands of other job roles that also serve the public good, so why not just stick to what has actually worked? Your model sounds much more like membership in the Party in communist nations like China and the USSR. Hasn't worked nearly so well for them. Ok, we're straying a bit off topic here, so here's a reiteration. No one said these jobs weren't important. Further, no one said defense contractors can't exist or whatever straw man you all want to put up. We're simply talking about the right to vote. A stint in the military, even if the job is not on the front lines, still requires that you be a line of defense between society and threats to it. It's part of the oath you swear when you join. When you think about the oath, it is a pretty heavy burden to bear...maybe too heavy, for some. Still, more than any other indicator, the willingness to swear this oath and to place yourself in harm's way for society (be in completely voluntary or with a bit of caoxing from UCMJ, once you're in) demonstrates a commitment to that society that no other occupation can boast. The people who swear this oath and subject themselves to military law (giving up many of their freedoms in the process) show a level of commitment that no scientist, professor, doctor, or defense contractor can boast. At the end of the day, these people can choose to save their own skins and nothing will happen to them. The same is not true of a soldier. I hope that's clear enough...like Kallend says, though, the burden of successful communication is on the speaker. I'll keep trying if I have to. Quotewhy not just stick to what has actually worked? Sure, we could do that if you don't mind having a boring Speaker's Corner :)Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #59 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteAn oath has only as much significance as you let it have. At the end of the day, it's just a bunch of words. Words with the backing of the UCMJ. Not once the two years is up. Ok. Pointless, but ok.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #60 August 21, 2007 QuoteI've got the DVD. Denise Richards is fucking hot! But I digress..... very true... the shower scene is the only reason to watch that piece of shit they grafted RH's name on____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,566 #61 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAn oath has only as much significance as you let it have. At the end of the day, it's just a bunch of words. Words with the backing of the UCMJ. Not once the two years is up. Ok. Pointless, but ok. Well, no actually, not pointless at all - unless you've shifted your goal posts again. You've said that non-combat personnel ie. physicists and engineers can basically do their civvy jobs as their service as long as they take an oath and do it for a military paycheck. The kind of people we were talking about (Manhatten project workers were one example) know damn well they would never be called on to go into harms, oath or not. So again, the oath is just words, and once they actually become citizens, words that are no longer enforced.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #62 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteI've got the DVD. Denise Richards is fucking hot! But I digress..... very true... the shower scene is the only reason to watch that piece of shit they grafted RH's name on [creepy announcer voice]Would you like to see more?[/creepy announcer voice]quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #63 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAn oath has only as much significance as you let it have. At the end of the day, it's just a bunch of words. Words with the backing of the UCMJ. Not once the two years is up. Ok. Pointless, but ok. Well, no actually, not pointless at all - unless you've shifted your goal posts again. You've said that non-combat personnel ie. physicists and engineers can basically do their civvy jobs as their service as long as they take an oath and do it for a military paycheck. The kind of people we were talking about (Manhatten project workers were one example) know damn well they would never be called on to go into harms, oath or not. So again, the oath is just words, and once they actually become citizens, words that are no longer enforced. Still pointless. Just because they might not be called into harm's way doesn't mean they could run if harm were to find them. They would be required to follow orders, even if it meant standing and fighting while the civilians ran away.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #64 August 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAn oath has only as much significance as you let it have. At the end of the day, it's just a bunch of words. Words with the backing of the UCMJ. Not once the two years is up. Ok. Pointless, but ok. Well, no actually, not pointless at all - unless you've shifted your goal posts again. You've said that non-combat personnel ie. physicists and engineers can basically do their civvy jobs as their service as long as they take an oath and do it for a military paycheck. The kind of people we were talking about (Manhatten project workers were one example) know damn well they would never be called on to go into harms, oath or not. So again, the oath is just words, and once they actually become citizens, words that are no longer enforced. I still think you are missing the point. Yes, when the 2 years are up, you are free to go. But even though he no longer falls under the UCMJ, the man in quetion was still willing to give up his rights for 2 years for the betterment of society. We are not talking about what he is acountable for, but what he has proven himself willing to do."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #65 August 22, 2007 QuoteA stint in the military, even if the job is not on the front lines, still requires that you be a line of defense between society and threats to it. It's part of the oath you swear when you join. When you think about the oath, it is a pretty heavy burden to bear...maybe too heavy, for some. Still, more than any other indicator, the willingness to swear this oath and to place yourself in harm's way for society (be in completely voluntary or with a bit of caoxing from UCMJ, once you're in) demonstrates a commitment to that society that no other occupation can boast. You'll have to explain this contradiction between "even if they're not on the front lines" and "place yourself in harm's way." And get off the oath fixation - you make an oath just to work for the state of California. So really all you got is being subject to military law. Eh. I've signed more than my share of NDAs and those working for the defense companies are well screened, giving up lots of privacy rights in the process. do you know what sort of commitment it takes to earn a PhD in a hard science? Or just to survive the med school application process? Put it this way - it's more than just one "hell week." I don't devalue the efforts of the soldiers. I just haven't seen you remotely support the notion that only they have earned the right to vote. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #66 August 22, 2007 Quote You'll have to explain this contradiction between "even if they're not on the front lines" and "place yourself in harm's way." And get off the oath fixation - you make an oath just to work for the state of California. So really all you got is being subject to military law. Eh. I've signed more than my share of NDAs and those working for the defense companies are well screened, giving up lots of privacy rights in the process. do you know what sort of commitment it takes to earn a PhD in a hard science? Or just to survive the med school application process? Put it this way - it's more than just one "hell week." I don't devalue the efforts of the soldiers. I just haven't seen you remotely support the notion that only they have earned the right to vote. Ever heard of the saying "every marine a rifleman"? Expand that to the whole military, and realize that even the quartermasters would be expected and maybe required to fight if the situation called for it. As for the oath fixation, it's an important part of what sets the military apart from civilians...you can't just discount it. Now, as for your point about the PhD and other such commitments, I've addressed all that in prior posts.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #67 August 22, 2007 Sounds like a unrealistic romantic view of the military. Also the idea of accepting anyone who wants to join sounds like a dangerous one. As for the rest of the idea its not a good one. Some people are by nature warriors, others scholars (a few both) people have different nature for good a good reason, thats how society has a balanced skill mix. Trying to make a person with a peace loving gentle nature who would be a good responsible citizen into a warrior simply isn't a good idea. Better leave war to warriors.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #68 August 22, 2007 QuoteThe people who swear this oath and subject themselves to military law (giving up many of their freedoms in the process) show a level of commitment that no scientist, professor, doctor, or defense contractor can boast. Speak for yourself mate. For me, the level of commitment was greater when I did my PhD. Army bollocks was much easier. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #69 August 22, 2007 QuoteEach time I read Starship Troopers, my appreciation for Heinlein's proposed system of politics grows. For those who haven't read the book, the only way to earn the right to vote (or become a politician at all) is to serve a term in the military. No one can be turned away if they wish to serve; it's a constitutional right...which is a very important point. Part of the dialogue in the book deals with why this is a good idea. It's not because military members are smarter or even because they have a stronger moral sense, per se. Rather, it's because they've put themselves through the rigors of a military term and have thus demonstrated their willingness to put the good of the society before themselves; swearing an oath to defend the society with their lives if necessary. Heinlein refers to this as "a unique 'poll tax'". It all sounds like a great idea to me. I would have a lot more confidence in politicians and even voters in general if I knew they placed a high enough value in the political process to risk their lives in order to participate. Your thoughts? Your memory of the dialogue is incomplete. When questioned on whether requiring military service made for a better society, Mr. DuBois replied that it was just one system and like many others, functions to one degree or another.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,566 #70 August 22, 2007 QuoteStill pointless. Just because they might not be called into harm's way doesn't mean they could run if harm were to find them. They would be required to follow orders, even if it meant standing and fighting while the civilians ran away. The only instance when such a person would be rewuired to "stand and fight" would be one involving the complete disintegration of the state. Seriously, this whole idea that one has to be willing to fight to be 'proved worthy' or whatever is just bizarre and anachronistic. Part of that is the culture difference I'm sure, it seems in the US that even a coffee boy in uniform is given the status of a Homeric hero - and I just can't get with that. Personally I'd much rather work towards an Arthur C Clarke type vision of the future.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #71 August 22, 2007 Quote Your model sounds much more like membership in the Party in communist nations like China and the USSR. Hasn't worked nearly so well for them. Yes, ... & you identified what has been one of the long-standing criticisms of Heinlein's Starship Troopers -- it starts to resemble an oppressive communist or fascist state. Heinlein was no leftist or 'alternative' writer. --- Again, there's a more comprehensive message that one can read into the novel with regard to the importance and value of service, community, and committing to ideals larger than oneself. The fun of these intellectual arguments (aka 'dialectic' in acadmic jargon) is taking them to hyperbolic ends of the spectrum & no one gets shot ... unlike in the real world of military-dominated states (Idi Amin, Franco, Pinochet, SLORC, etc.) Literary fundamentalism, whether it's Muslim salafist who want to impose their version of the 7th century as described in the Koran or Biblical fundamentalists building museums showing humans and dinosaurs interacting, is scary. Heinlein was too good of an author to be made into an L. Ron Hubbard - either through Starship Troopers or Stranger in a Strange land. Grok? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #72 August 22, 2007 QuoteQuoteI've got the DVD. Denise Richards is fucking hot! But I digress..... very true... the shower scene is the only reason to watch that piece of shit they grafted RH's name on Agreed, but it's not Denise Richards in the shower. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #73 August 22, 2007 "it's not Denise Richards in the shower" wouldn't that have been great? Shower footage of a young Denise (has she done any films lately) should really be playing 24/7 on some accessible site Dina Meyer is no one to sneeze at though. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #74 August 22, 2007 Quote "it's not Denise Richards in the shower" wouldn't that have been great? Shower footage of a young Denise (has she done any films lately) should really be playing 24/7 on some accessible site Dina Meyer is no one to sneeze at though. The uncut version of "Wild Things" is your answer. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #75 August 22, 2007 Quote The uncut version of "Wild Things" is your answer. that's your answer for everything ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
