SecDef Gates Says "Too Few Bear Burdens of War"

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Let me ask you another question that may answer yours, rather than step into the usual logical boobytraps people tend to set for each other in this forum. Such as the rather crude one you have attempted to lay for me here.

No offense, but I've been observing the behavior of individuals here for quite some time... including yours... and although some of the time I agree with your positions, you are no more immune to ideological fanaticism than anyone else here, Maam.

My question is this:

What makes you think you have the the right to dispose of the lives and time of any and all citizens as you see fit? To dictate, who and what they will serve? To decide, how several years of their lives should be spent? And to have it enforced for you, by politicians, at the point of a gun?

America, I love. People who claim the right to take control of the lives of others... to force them to serve the current reigning interests... not so much.

I told you. I do not expect you to understand why. I could continue to explain... but you still won't. However I can sum it up in one word...
Freedom.
-B

And I can sum it up very simply for you... YOUR FREEDOM... did not come for free.

Far too many in this country want... nay ..DEMAND a free ride.

If people are going to support the idea that we are to be the worlds policeman to maintain some semblance of... or at least the appearance of a peaceful world, then THEY need to step up.

NO one should be able to shirk their personal responsibility to this country because of their family or their political connections.

[skipbelt 0]

when you say demand a free ride, i imagine this applies across the board ?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

when you say demand a free ride, i imagine this applies across the board ?

Yes

But it should especially apply to the little fucking war mongering chickenhawks first and foremost.

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

In a speech at Duke University (via Military.com), Defense Secretary Robert Gates says most Americans see military service as "something for other people to do."

Sounds like a lot of bleeding hearts I know.

mh
.

If by "bleeding hearts" you mean "patriotic" pro-war republicans like

Dick Cheney
Paul Wolfowitz
Richard Perle
Dan Quayle
Karl Rove
Newt Gingrich
Rush Limbaugh
Sean Hannity
Rudy Giuliani
John Ashcroft
Rick Santorum

...then I certainly agree!

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I have supported that for YEARS. I think EVERYONE should have to serve their country... I don't care who the hell your family is.

In other words, reinstate the draft that was such a disaster for us in the 60s and 70s?

The armed forces does not need more people, it needs a better purpose and focus. And we've already covered prior the notion of mandated community service when we should have people going to college.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

I have supported that for YEARS. I think EVERYONE should have to serve their country... I don't care who the hell your family is.

In other words, reinstate the draft that was such a disaster for us in the 60s and 70s?

The armed forces does not need more people, it needs a better purpose and focus. And we've already covered prior the notion of mandated community service when we should have people going to college.

After college - two years - includig basic training - then an admin job, military job, trash picker upper . . . whatever we need the most of. Maybe we can have government subsidized farms and work areas.

I like it.

We could even start up commitees and entire huge government agencies that will decide for us where, and what we will do for the administration. Another huge agency can tell us how much we will make, and make sure we don't make to much s as not to make others jealous of our income.

We would of course need to have another law enforcement group dedicated to eliminating any dissagreement and dissent among the "applicants".

We will need an agancy that will run our healthcare as well, and decide who is allowed to receive what procedures and treatments are best for them.
This will all be dependant on what we are doing for the Administration, of course, and how valuable we are to that end.

Now that everyone is and has worked for the government, we might as well give them our paycheck and letthem decide how much we should be allotted out of it and then they can keep the rest.

I can't wait.

If you think that I am honestly in FAVOR of this - you don't know me.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[metalslug 36]

Quote

A good start would be the finance the war directly . . . by an additional yearly tax.

Quote

That would be an excellent idea. I think a lot of people would think twice about supporting a war if they knew that, within six months, they'd get hit with a $1000 bill for it.

Quote

If we had mandatory conscription for both genders, with no deferments and absolutely minimal exemptions, and everyone had to be in and continually train and serve in the Reserves until, say, age 50, maybe a lot of people would think twice about supporting a war if they knew ther result would be that their own daughters would get deployed into the combat zone.

Quote

I have supported that for YEARS. I think EVERYONE should have to serve their country... I don't care who the hell your family is.

I think conscription should be a last resort for any country and I say this as someone who was conscripted into the South African military for 2 years;
deployed to defend Namibia against the Angolans, and later in a policing role to enforce the laws of our conservative government of that day.

Mandatory conscription gives you a heterogenous mix of cultures and political affiliations, many of whom do not support the ruling party, it's policies and it's military objectives. This makes it a challenge for both the commanders and the recruits to develop patriotism in a cohesive fighting unit. It can create resentment that lasts for years.

I'm with kelpdiver and billvon on this.
I believe the US military is mostly fine the way it currently is, and if more funds are needed to feed the beast, add a tax.
It is important that you have a military that wants to be there. Conscription will not give you that.

[lurch 0]

"Freedom isn't free" is a self contradictory statement. The military is fond of self-evidently false statements such as this..."army of one" is another. Originally intended to express the fact that sacrifices had to be made and lives put on the line and often lost to preserve that freedom, it is more often used by people charging for it, to justify charging for it. And it is this usage, the usage to which you have put it, that I will address here.

If it is not free, it is not freedom. That is what freedom actually means. To say "freedom isn't free" is to say that freedom does not in fact exist, and what freedom I have, is only by the leave of those charging for it. Freedom as a commodity, subject to revocation at the whim of those charging for it and setting the price at whatever rate they see fit- and I do not buy it.

The Native Americans were free and it did not cost them anything. Freedom most certainly -was- free. When exactly did that change, and by what right did our ancestors begin to charge them for it? After they had been subjugated and brought into line, do you think they were any more free than they had been before? The more I hear about how free I am, the less free I actually am. Strange.

This is why I do not expect you to understand. Your entire reply was addressing things I have not said and demands I have not made. Most people are not able to tell the difference between ideological conditioning and patriotism. Your angry response to me which has nothing to do with anything I've said, except by being angry because I do not adhere to the same rigid ideology you feel is the only permissible one, is the same reason I do not adhere to it. It inhibits reason and replaces it with emotional opinions stated as if they were facts.

This nation owes me nothing. Nor I, it. I started life as a feral street kid, and everything I have, I have earned. I consider myself entitled to nothing more than the air I breathe. I neither want nor demand anything from this country. The only thing I want from my country is that it stay out of my way and leave me alone to live my life and earn my living any way I can in peace provided I harm none.

The perspective you hold seems to assume I owe it something, in the specific form of a type of indentured servitude to its administration which may or may not actually be in the best interests of the nation, because it did me the favor of existing before I was born, and that the fact of my own existence automatically obligates me to serve the administrative interests currently running it.

This is a secular ideological version of the concept of "original sin" and just as flawed. I do not recognize a debt written for me arbitrarily by people supposedly acting on my behalf before I existed, any more than I grant recognition to the christian notion that I am automatically guilty just because I exist.

I serve my country by adhering to the social compact that logically follows from the fact that this civilization does exist... by fulfilling a productive role in it, working to earn my living and creating larger benefits for that society by that choice. I have not been given anything by this country nor have I taken anything from it. I contribute to it voluntarily by my own free will by choosing a productive role in it, in the exact way that the men and women who gave their lives to defend that freedom, intended that I should be free to choose to do.

Conscription or forced "service" makes a sick mockery of the same freedom it is supposed to be defending while simultaneously revoking it, enslaving some for the benefit of others. As a free man I cannot condone it.
If the day ever comes when I become aware that America is actually in danger... of being invaded, conquered, or defeated, they would not need to draft me. As a free man I would feel it my moral obligation to stand in between that force, and the society of which I am a part. They would not have time to draft me. I would be beating down their door to get into the military in any capacity I was allowed... "Use me for whatever you think appropriate, but for gods sake let me help!" Anything less would be cowardice, a state I am not capable of.
But if I am told "You will serve", that same morality would compel me to fight against THAT. To defend freedom.
And THAT, is the philosophy you have endorsed, Amazon. That is not patriotism... it is a betrayal of it, and of everything this nation is supposed to stand for. Consider that, if you will.
-B
I -am- curious as to how you will respond to this. You do tend to be fond of flaming anger, and if you wish to respond to what I've said here in any meaningful way you will need to do it rationally. What say you, Maam? Agree? Disagree? And why?

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[Andy9o8 2]

Just for the record here: I do not really advocate conscription in the US. It was a point-illustrator.

My point was: if everyone - and everyone's daughters and sons - were conscripted, and guaranteed to be deployed to the combat zone in case of war, a whole hell of a lot fewer people would beat their chests like gorillas and advocate the US fighting foreign wars. It's always easier to spill the blood of someone else's children and not your own.

[kallend 2,137]

And there I was thinking you believed in smaller government - one that doesn't intrude unnecessarily into the lives of the people. And all along you are really a big, intrusive govt. guy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[D22369 0]

I have supported that for YEARS. I think EVERYONE should have to serve their country... I don't care who the hell your family is. ***

I supported this idea for many years till I realized our leaders dont care about the lives of the soldiers and will put them in harms way for little to no gain.

I served my country, but will admit I am scared of my son joining the service.

I watched a family bury thier only son, I dont want to be that father

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

I have supported that for YEARS. I think EVERYONE should have to serve their country... I don't care who the hell your family is.

In other words, reinstate the draft that was such a disaster for us in the 60s and 70s?

The armed forces does not need more people, it needs a better purpose and focus. And we've already covered prior the notion of mandated community service when we should have people going to college.

Perhaps it was a disaster because it allowed so many to escape service because they were special.

It certainly seems we have a large segment of this population that feel they deserve all the benefits of being an American, with none of the disadvantages that come with it.

[shward 0]

While I do not feel that actual military service should be required, I do feel that some sort of civil service should be required for everyone. Now, be that Peace Corps, national park service, military, fire/police service. I also feel that the time frame should be from high school graduation to the age of 22. College should come after service has been completed.

To Lurch:
The term "Freedom isn't free" is now and has always been true. Your specific example of the Native Americans is flawed in one aspect. Each and every male (and in many tribes, the females as well) stood ready and able to defend their people at a moment’s notice. Whether you reference the Blackfeet, the Comanche, Iroquois or any other tribe, their "freedom" was guaranteed by their force of arms. Our freedom is not given simply by the fact that we live on this piece of land, it is offered by the Constitution and that Constitution is enforced by our strength of arms to defend our land, people and beliefs from others. Without the military to enforce it, the Constitution isn't worth the paper that it is written on. Freedom is paid for in blood and has been since the beginning of time.
In an ideal world, where everyone is able to "live and let live" your viewpoint would be completely valid. But the fact of the matter is that we don't live a utopian world and there are groups that are working to seek power for themselves and don't worry about who they have to kill/enslave/use to get it. If ignored long enough, those influences will eventually grow to affect us. Better to kill the tiger in the forest than to have to kill it in your yard.

Life is short, eat more bacon, have more sex and jump anytime you can!!

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

While I do not feel that actual military service should be required, I do feel that some sort of civil service should be required for everyone. Now, be that Peace Corps, national park service, military, fire/police service. I also feel that the time frame should be from high school graduation to the age of 22. College should come after service has been completed.

That's basically how I feel; except I'd cap it at 2 years of full-time service, and I'd allow college (or other post-HS) courses to be taken, as long as it doesn't interfere w/the service.

I'm a big believer in civil service to give something back to society. But I disagree with those who feel that that must necessarily take the form of military service.

[fossg 0]

"This nation owes me nothing. Nor I, it. I started life as a feral street kid, and everything I have, I have earned".......I am happy you are a success. This country had the oportunities for you and you took advantage of them. Now the question is who enabled this country to exist grow and thrive? The people who are willing to fight for it and defend it. I like my beer cold lurch.. If you ever run into me or any of my friends kick me down one. I earned it...

[wmw999 2,575]

I agree that the service need not be military. But it should, if at all possible, be away from home -- it helps most kids to grow up. Especially the ones whose parents think they aren't ready

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

And there I was thinking you believed in smaller government - one that doesn't intrude unnecessarily into the lives of the people. And all along you are really a big, intrusive govt. guy.

You didn't actually read the post did you?

Telling.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Just for the record here: I do not really advocate conscription in the US. It was a point-illustrator.

My point was: if everyone - and everyone's daughters and sons - were conscripted, and guaranteed to be deployed to the combat zone in case of war, a whole hell of a lot fewer people would beat their chests like gorillas and advocate the US fighting foreign wars. It's always easier to spill the blood of someone else's children and not your own.

But it wouldn't. It's merely a talking point.

There are far more sons and daughters that would be available for the military, so only a scant few would be directed into battle. As we saw with Vietnam, that selection will be skewed to the same demographics that are likely to enlist now. The rest will do make work service, wasting most of these 2 years when they could be doing real work to better America - go to college. (instead we'll continue to educate foreign students who can then take that skill back home, along with our jobs)

With the growing obesity issues affected our youth, I can see legions of parents stuffing twinkies down their kids' throats to ensure they never see combat.

[Andy9o8 2]

OK, so maybe we'll wind up boosting the population of Canada. Again.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

OK, so maybe we'll wind up boosting the population of Canada. Again.

It might stem illegal immigration too.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lurch 0]

Although as you might have guessed, I tend to be critical enough of authority that I could not function well in the military unless it was an emergency, I hold those of our citizens who can, in the highest respect.
If you ever wind up at my home dropzone, look me up... I'm Pepperell's resident wingsuit geek, technical freak, and all-around fix-it guy. Introduce yourself, and you'll have that beer.
Many of our citizens take what you do for granted. Although it may seem paradoxical given what I've had to say in this forum, I am not one of them. Thank you.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I agree that the service need not be military.

I don't - too easy to play favorites again

if the service is mandatory, then the service needs to start in the same place.

Unless you want one guy serving as a grunt and another (more privileged) getting an easy stint in the air national guard or another (more privileged) running a soup kitchen or another (more privileged) going to oxford as an ambassador.

military is the only place it makes sense - it's equal, the consequences are the same - the sacrifice is equal

if someone protests anti-violence ethic? too bad - everyone will have an excuse - no matter how sincere



I would prefer all volunteer - but it were to be done, then it has to be equally applied. Now, if you do volunteer - the I'm all for that group getting something above and beyond the others in terms of ownership in the country - voting rights maybe....

...
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

[billvon 3,096]

>military is the only place it makes sense - it's equal, the consequences
>are the same - the sacrifice is equal

I spent a few years working on an Air Force base, and at least there, military service was not equal in terms of sacrifice/risk/consequences. There were people who were going to be cleaning toilets there for two years and that's it, and there were going to be people who worked in labs, and there were going to be pilots and crew who could be deployed almost anywhere. In _general_ people ended up in jobs that suited them.

[jakee 1,585]

Quote

I would prefer all volunteer - but it were to be done, then it has to be equally applied. Now, if you do volunteer - the I'm all for that group getting something above and beyond the others in terms of ownership in the country - voting rights maybe....

Starship Troopers was a good book and all, but that concept was and still is repugnant and stupid.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Coreece 190]

Quote

think EVERYONE should have to serve their country

Wow...who's against freedom now?

...and they say christians live in a fantasy world forcing their belifs on everyone.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...