Draft

That is complete bullshit
I don't care what it is, if I'm forced to do anything at all, I will outrightly refuse and say "Fuck You Assholes!" and go live in the BWI.

The American people would never let something like this happen. In a country that prides itself on "freedom," forced service, whether military or civil, would go against everything the US supposedly stands for. It would be a travesty.
 
The American people would never let something like this happen. In a country that prides itself on "freedom," forced service, whether military or civil, would go against everything the US supposedly stands for. It would be a travesty.
Click to expand...
Ehmm...Vietnam, anyone?

Although it won't happen, at least not until Bush is re-elected (or not), because it would kill Bush's chances for re-election.
 
I was talking about present day Sander. There's so much outcry about "freedom" and shit that the people couldn't ever let something like this happen.
 
Ok...first off I meant the war on terror, never said any damn thing about Iraq...but thanks for trying.

And secondly Murdoch, I don't plan on being drafted.
 
I was talking about present day Sander. There's so much outcry about "freedom" and shit that the people couldn't ever let something like this happen.
Click to expand...
PATRIOT Act? Hello?
 
I'm not talking about privacy rights or any of that shit. I'm talking about physical freedom. The Patriot Act isn't forcing me to go shoot at people or fucking clean out public restrooms.
 
I'm not talking about privacy rights or any of that shit. I'm talking about physical freedom. The Patriot Act isn't forcing me to go shoot at people or fucking clean out public restrooms.
Click to expand...
No, then again, there is still some form of freedom in such a draft. Moral objections and all that.
If you can allow the PATRIOT Act without even protesting in the slightest, then this should be no problem.

Plus, there isn't that much difference between America now and America during Vietnam.
 
There is a big difference. I can point out one major one off the top of my head. Civil rights. I'm not saying it's perfect now...just saying if you can't notice that difference, then you sound like you're wishing for America to enter another Vietnam era...do you?
 
There is a big difference. I can point out one major one off the top of my head. Civil rights. I'm not saying it's perfect now...
Click to expand...
There are differences, but when it comes to such things as draft, I don't think that much has changed in opinions.
just saying if you can't notice that difference, then you sound like you're wishing for America to enter another Vietnam era...do you?
Click to expand...
Yeah, sure.....
That's the worst use of straw I have seen in my entire life. It's completely stupid.
 
Paladin Solo said:
Ok...first off I meant the war on terror, never said any damn thing about Iraq...but thanks for trying.
Click to expand...

Why do you think that the question of a draft is coming up? Because we need more soldiers to fight terrorists, or because we need more soldiers in Iraq? Where exactly did you get the idea that a massive army is the best way to combat cells of terrorists? It's fairly hard for a battalion of soldiers to fight an enemy when they don't know who or where they are, don't you think? Or do you think that every soldier is going to be trained in intelligence gathering, counter-terrorism, and arabic languages and sent individually into the middle-east to sneakily root out every Al-Queda sleeper, James Bond style? Drafts are to get more people into military service for military operations, and the only current military operation the US has that needs quantity on it's side is Iraq. And since the overthrow of Hussein and the occupation of Iraq were done under the guise of "the war on terror", I can't concieve of how you couldn't be talking about Iraq.

"....but thanks for trying" - you know, if you're going to debate, then debate, don't throw in smarmy little comments that do nothing but weaken your chances of being taken seriously.
 
The war on terror is a GLOBAL WAR. That's why the thought of the draft seems reasonable, the THOUGHT, not making it right.

"....but thanks for trying" - you know, if you're going to debate, then debate, don't throw in smarmy little comments that do nothing but weaken your chances of being taken seriously.
Click to expand...

I said that because you put words into my mouth. I wasn't talking about Iraq, but you made it seem like I was. If I was, I wouldn't have said we didin't want this fight.
 
Suppose that a draft was done with the war on terrorism in mind. What result? You might be able to create a larger occupation army for countries that we think are havens for terrorists, but wouldn't that make the US an imperial power? Are there not cheaper and more effective ways to fight the war against terrorism.

No, MOntez is right, this is about Iraq. THe US military is being stretched and I doubt the reserves and National Guard forces will be sufficient.

Bush says, "If they won't volunteer we'll conscript the little young fuckers. After all this is about oil, gas guzzling SUVs and corporate profits, damn it! Not about their education and employment opportunities!" Or so one might read in US policy.
 
Drafts are useless. The only thing most drafteees do is add to the body count. Just give better incentives to join the US Army.

Think of it this way: In WW2, 25% of our soldiers fired a wepon. Why? Draft, alot of peopel joining who did'nt want too. Now the number is about 2 times that.
 
ConstinpatedCraprunner said:
Think of it this way: In WW2, 25% of our soldiers fired a wepon. Why? Draft, alot of peopel joining who did'nt want too. Now the number is about 2 times that.
Click to expand...

Off topic, but did you ever read a book called "On Killing"? (by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, in case anyone is interested) If not, I highly recommend it - it's a very in-depth book about that subject.
 
Still, welsh, unless 9/11 attacks didn't happen, do you think the American people would've allowed Bush to go into Iraq? So in fact, the terrorists are partially at blame for Iraq as well. When terrorists or a nation decides to attack you country, causing mass casualties, destroying national/world icons, just because you have a huge influence on the world, do you think this is good reason? Do you think your people will not be more accepting of war? Tis what happens in war my friend, especially one where we were brought into without wanting it.
 
Paladin Solo said:
Still, welsh, unless 9/11 attacks didn't happen, do you think the American people would've allowed Bush to go into Iraq? So in fact, the terrorists are partially at blame for Iraq as well.
Click to expand...
So, the terrorist's make your decisions for you?
It's the terrorist's fault Bush is in office?

Bush went to war because he wanted to. 9/11 and the war on terror is the excuse he keeps using, and you keep letting him.
 
Keep us letting him...exactimundo. No, we don't let terrorists decide for us, or who is in office, but because of the attacks on 9/11, the American people became more accepting of war, and casualties. That's why Bush might've dared to put more sanctions on Iraq, but not go to war without something on the lines of Pearl Harbor or 9/11. There would've been impeachment, all of America would've cried Vietnam! But just as long as we are killing terrorists, I think America will not care much for war, since it was brought to our doorsteps, brutally on September 11.
 
Paladin Solo said:
But just as long as we are killing terrorists, I think America will not care much for war, since it was brought to our doorsteps, brutally on September 11.
Click to expand...
Brought to yor doorstep by Al-Qaeda, not by Saddam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top