RE: Enact the Draft! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Fightdirecto -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 7:13:49 PM)

As a Vietnam combat veteran, I am in favor of a military draft for all children aged 18 to 50 of any member of Congress who votes "Yes" on a declaration of war, with those Congressmen's children to report for basic training within 48 hours of their parent voting "Yes" on a declaration of war.

Further, it should be written into such a draft law that those children of those members of Congress voting "Yes" on a declaration of war be only allowed to serve in a combat arm (Infantry, Armor, Artillery or Combat Engineer) and only as an enlisted service member or a non-commissioned officer.

Further, a similar draft be mandated for the children of the President, Vice President and all members of the Cabinet.

If Julie and Tricia Nixon had been drafted into the U. S. Army Infantry as privates the day their father "Tricky Dick" Nixon was sworn in as President - the Vietnam war would have ended in a negotiated peace in 1968.



Winterapple -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 7:18:06 PM)

FR
In theory the draft would prevent idiocy
but I'm not so sure it would in practice.
It didn't keep us out of Viet Nam.
And the rich and not so rich found all
sorts of ways to legally draft dodge using
deferments.
The drafts use as a protector against
reckless use would only work if there
were no deferments and some people
are physically and mentally unfit to
serve.
The military also says volunteer forces
are stronger and better than drafted ones.
There was alternative service during Viet
Nam such as the Peace Corps.
We still have the Peace Corp and
voluntary programs like the teaching
programs where people commit to
teaching in a needy school.
But I don't think compulsory service
military or voluntarily is a great idea.
People would have learning experiences
and society would benefit in some ways
but it wouldn't all be gravy.
Sort of seems to go against the basic
principles we're based on.
And a peacetime draft is a Cold War anomaly.
We never had it before that.
We aren't in a Congress declared war.
Another type of dodge is going on.



DaddySatyr -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 7:23:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

As a Vietnam combat veteran, I am in favor of a military draft for all children aged 18 to 50 of any member of Congress who votes "Yes" on a declaration of war, with those Congressmen's children to report for basic training within 48 hours of their parent voting "Yes" on a declaration of war.

Further, it should be written into such a draft law that those children of those members of Congress voting "Yes" on a declaration of war be only allowed to serve in a combat arm (Infantry, Armor, Artillery or Combat Engineer) and only as an enlisted service member or a non-commissioned officer.

Further, a similar draft be mandated for the children of the President, Vice President and all members of the Cabinet.

If Julie and Tricia Nixon had been drafted into the U. S. Army Infantry as privates the day their father "Tricky Dick" Nixon was sworn in as President - the Vietnam war would have ended in a negotiated peace in 1968.


Obviously an excellent point and a more than valid one, coming from whence it does.

Do you disagree that young people can benefit from the discipline and uniformity the military provides?

Do you disagree that young people would be more "rounded" individuals if they spent some time with young people from other areas of the country; instead of their own little neighborhoods?

Do you disagree that the structure of military life would be an advantage to just about anyone that's been exposed to it?



Peace and comfort,



Michael



Aylee -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 8:16:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

As a Vietnam combat veteran, I am in favor of a military draft for all children aged 18 to 50 of any member of Congress who votes "Yes" on a declaration of war, with those Congressmen's children to report for basic training within 48 hours of their parent voting "Yes" on a declaration of war.

Further, it should be written into such a draft law that those children of those members of Congress voting "Yes" on a declaration of war be only allowed to serve in a combat arm (Infantry, Armor, Artillery or Combat Engineer) and only as an enlisted service member or a non-commissioned officer.

Further, a similar draft be mandated for the children of the President, Vice President and all members of the Cabinet.

If Julie and Tricia Nixon had been drafted into the U. S. Army Infantry as privates the day their father "Tricky Dick" Nixon was sworn in as President - the Vietnam war would have ended in a negotiated peace in 1968.


You have got to be fucking kidding me.

A child is now responsible for what his parent does?

Why would the offspring be treated differently? That is just wrong. I am going to treat you differently BY LAW because of your parent's choices. Umm. . . NO. We do NOT do that. Sharia law does. But the United States of America, does NOT.

Are you going to rape my 12 year old sister because I offended you? Restore family honor? We will have to stone her to death afterward or marry her to her rapist, but family honor will be fixed.

You are saying that to keep family honor intact, a senator or house member needs to sacrifice his children for family honor according to his vote. This is not a good thing.

Fuck family honor.

Make war a general vote. We have the technology for this. If you vote for war you are in the first draft.

This visiting of the sins of the father unto the children is just not acceptable.




hlen5 -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:15:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

If everyone, chickenhawks included, had loved ones called up to serve, we would see how long it would take to find an end to this slaughter (US military AND Afhgan/Iraqi civilians).


We had a draft during the Vietnam War and that lasted longer than WW 2. I'm afraid your premise is faulty, unless of course, unlike the Vietnam Draft, no exemptions are allowed for strategic occupation, University enrollment, and gender. [8|] That might have the effect you desire.


I did say no special treatment in post #4.



TheHeretic -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:22:10 PM)

War by direct democracy, Aylee? I'll take a pass on that one, thank you very much. We'd nuke somebody.

I think what FD is trying to express is a belief that our elected representatives would be far more reluctant to commit our forces, if they knew their own offspring would be on the front lines. Of course, why an elected official who is perfectly willing to put his personal issues ahead of the needs of the country on a vote of such magnitude wouldn't simply pull strings to keep Jr. well clear of the shooting anyway, doesn't make much sense.




DaddySatyr -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:26:05 PM)

I think FD means to close up those loopholes. I think that's a fair assessment.

I think we'd have been less likely to go to war in Iraq if the King George II would have had to get on Marine One to deliver the twins to Ft. By-God Benning for close infantry training.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



hlen5 -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:30:24 PM)

The point of me starting this thread was the burden of fighting has rested on far too few shoulders for far too long.

The draft should have been called long ago to not make so FEW bear the burden of these un-needed wars.

A draft with NO special treatment of the wealthy and well-connected would be more fair.

ETA: Maybe we wouldn't have soldiers going on civilian kill missions and murdering 2 year-olds in their beds.



DaddySatyr -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:34:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5

The point of me starting this thread was the burden of fighting has rested on far too few shoulders for far too long.

The draft should have been called long ago to not make so FEW bear the burden of these un-needed wars.

A draft with NO special treatment of the wealthy and well-connected would be more fair.


and stated that way, I support it but, I still question the validity of a draft, to begin with (5th amendment).

My eldest was in Bosnia, twice, Afghanistan (for what amounted to three times) and Iraq, twice. Very little time off in-between (He had 4 weeks leave and 1 month DER between his stints in Bosnia)



Peace and comfort,



Michael



mynxkat -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:36:44 PM)

I only skimmed most of the posts in this thread. One idea I've supported since I came across it is the idea of earned citizenship.

In order to vote or be eligible for any sort of government office, elected or appointed, you MUST be a citizen.

To earn citizenship, you MUST serve in the military, any branch, and be honorably discharged.

For this to work, however, anyone who chooses to serve in the military MUST be accepted, there can be no refusal based on physical disabilities or any other reason.




blacksword404 -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:39:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

To be fair, your administration is working on the assumption that they can fight wars without an army.
(I don't see why a draft would be a problem, anyway. The elite's kids can claim that they're 4f because they've got a wart on their arses or go awol from the national guard, and the untermensch can go and get shot to make sure that they won't end up on welfare.)


I would have thought he would have learned from bush's mistake. He went into Iraq half assessing without enough boots. Sure they did a surge later, but sufficient force should have been brought from the beginning.

Besides you'll always find it hard to force a member of congresses kid to report.



DaddySatyr -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:40:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mynxkat

I only skimmed most of the posts in this thread. One idea I've supported since I came across it is the idea of earned citizenship.

In order to vote or be eligible for any sort of government office, elected or appointed, you MUST be a citizen.

To earn citizenship, you MUST serve in the military, any branch, and be honorably discharged.

For this to work, however, anyone who chooses to serve in the military MUST be accepted, there can be no refusal based on physical disabilities or any other reason.




Would people who refuse to serve no longer be citizens? I mean would they go from "auxilliary" (as children under their parents' citizenship) right to non-citizen, if they refused to serve?



Peace and comfort,



Michael



mynxkat -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:52:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: mynxkat

I only skimmed most of the posts in this thread. One idea I've supported since I came across it is the idea of earned citizenship.

In order to vote or be eligible for any sort of government office, elected or appointed, you MUST be a citizen.

To earn citizenship, you MUST serve in the military, any branch, and be honorably discharged.

For this to work, however, anyone who chooses to serve in the military MUST be accepted, there can be no refusal based on physical disabilities or any other reason.





Would people who refuse to serve no longer be citizens? I mean would they go from "auxilliary" (as children under their parents' citizenship) right to non-citizen, if they refused to serve?



Peace and comfort,



Michael


In this set up, military service is entirely voluntary, with only one or two reservations (but those are doozies, I'll get to them in a moment). No one is required to volunteer for service, so it's entirely possible to have a family where the parents are NOT citizens, but one or more of the offspring are.

There is absolutely NO inherited citizenship in this set up, either, you either serve and earn your citizenship or you don't and you remain a resident, but not a citizen.

Now, to the reservations regarding voluntary service- If you join, and decide you want out, simplest thing in the world to get out with no repurcussions aside from not earning citizenship. EXCEPT in battle conditions. You can't decide to terminate your service then. You also can't decide to terminate service if you're facing a court martial for any reason, until the court martial has been resolved, and any repercussions from it. Any other time, simply inform your CO and that's pretty much that. You don't get a second chance, though.

ETA: This system of military service to earn citizenship I got from Robert A. Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers. Don't waste your time with the movie of the same name, the producers/directors of that movie absolutely BUTCHERED a terrific story.



Fightdirecto -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 9:57:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
I think what FD is trying to express is a belief that our elected representatives would be far more reluctant to commit our forces, if they knew their own offspring would be on the front lines.


If the "cause" is "just" - you should be willing to sacrifice your own children's lives first for the "cause".

If you are willing to risk your own children's lives, then and only the do you have the moral authority to risk the lives of someone else's children.

I am reminded of a story my father told me: During WWII, a man in his town "patriotically volunteered" to serve on the local draft board - and then used his position on the draft board to destroy his two sons' records to keep them from being drafted. They "double-crossed" him and voluntarily enlisted as soon as they were old enough. His destruction of their records was discovered and he ended up in a federal prison for a while.




DaddySatyr -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 10:07:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mynxkat
In this set up, military service is entirely voluntary, with only one or two reservations (but those are doozies, I'll get to them in a moment). No one is required to volunteer for service, so it's entirely possible to have a family where the parents are NOT citizens, but one or more of the offspring are.

There is absolutely NO inherited citizenship in this set up, either, you either serve and earn your citizenship or you don't and you remain a resident, but not a citizen.


I'm just excited about not having to pay federal taxes! That's a great idea.

Not really, no. I wasn't really trying to mock you but, do you see any issue with making citizenship conditional?

I don't know which amendment to start with but, I'll start with 5.

In your scenario ...

... achild is born. That child is not a citizen. That child attains the age of 18 and in order to be allowed to vote, hold public office, or be given a non-elected government job (mailman, police officer, firefighter, tax collector, surveyor, civil engineer, etc.) they have to enter a military where they will be forced to follow the orders of someone they had no voice in electing (The president being commander-in-chief of the armed forces)? Seriously?

Now, let's not even go to a (discernable) constitutional issue:

Your system would set up a class system such as none of us alive, right now have ever seen. We would truly be a society of the "Have"s and "Have not"s.

Oy! No thank you.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



Fightdirecto -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 10:14:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto
As a Vietnam combat veteran, I am in favor of a military draft for all children aged 18 to 50 of any member of Congress who votes "Yes" on a declaration of war, with those Congressmen's children to report for basic training within 48 hours of their parent voting "Yes" on a declaration of war.

Further, it should be written into such a draft law that those children of those members of Congress voting "Yes" on a declaration of war be only allowed to serve in a combat arm (Infantry, Armor, Artillery or Combat Engineer) and only as an enlisted service member or a non-commissioned officer.

Further, a similar draft be mandated for the children of the President, Vice President and all members of the Cabinet.

If Julie and Tricia Nixon had been drafted into the U. S. Army Infantry as privates the day their father "Tricky Dick" Nixon was sworn in as President - the Vietnam war would have ended in a negotiated peace in 1968.

Obviously an excellent point and a more than valid one, coming from whence it does.
Do you disagree that young people can benefit from the discipline and uniformity the military provides?

Some benefit - some do not. It depends on the individual.

quote:

Do you disagree that young people would be more "rounded" individuals if they spent some time with young people from other areas of the country; instead of their own little neighborhoods?


The draft surely was a great "leveler". I enlisted in 1969 and was not drafted, but most of the men I trained with in Army basic training were draftees. Several had never been further away from their homes than 50 miles until the day they entered the military - and I believe it made them better citizens to be exposed to other American citizens of other faiths (or no faith at all), other races, other economic backgrounds, etc.

quote:

Do you disagree that the structure of military life would be an advantage to just about anyone that's been exposed to it?


Again, it depends on the individual. In my case, the biggest problem I had to face was how to retain my individualism when surrounded by forces that demand unthinking uniformity/conformity. I struggled with that the 27 years I spent in uniform (a mix of active service and Reserve service). Dominants, by nature, do not like to follow orders. [;)]



mynxkat -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 10:37:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I'm just excited about not having to pay federal taxes! That's a great idea.

Not really, no. I wasn't really trying to mock you but, do you see any issue with making citizenship conditional?

I don't know which amendment to start with but, I'll start with 5.

In your scenario ...

... achild is born. That child is not a citizen. That child attains the age of 18 and in order to be allowed to vote, hold public office, or be given a non-elected government job (mailman, police officer, firefighter, tax collector, surveyor, civil engineer, etc.) they have to enter a military where they will be forced to follow the orders of someone they had no voice in electing (The president being commander-in-chief of the armed forces)? Seriously?

Now, let's not even go to a (discernable) constitutional issue:

Your system would set up a class system such as none of us alive, right now have ever seen. We would truly be a society of the "Have"s and "Have not"s.

Oy! No thank you.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



With all due respect, I disagree.

The type of government I'm describing would require ALL of the lawmakers, congress members, the President, and everyone else making policy decisions about the nation to have already demonstrated a willingness to put the welfare of that nation ahead of their own. Our current government (in the U.S., at any rate) has become so bogged down by corruption at every level and lawmakers and policy makers looking out for only their own special interests that frankly, it's time to scrap it and start fresh.

I will grant that the form of government I'm espousing is not viable with the Constitution and Amendments that currently (supposedly) form the basis of the United States government. I will also grant that the period of transition from our current government to a system such as I describe would be horrendously complicated, and likely take at least a decade to complete.

Cynical? Perhaps.



Fightdirecto -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 10:51:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mynxkat
I will also grant that the period of transition from our current government to a system such as I describe would be horrendously complicated, and likely take at least a decade to complete.

You do recall, since your idea was influenced by Sci-Fi writer Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers, that the transition in the book came out of armed civil war, which Heinlein refers to in the book as the "Veteran's Revolt"?

I sincerely doubt that such a drastic governmental change could be made wthout violence.



mynxkat -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 10:54:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

quote:

ORIGINAL: mynxkat
I will also grant that the period of transition from our current government to a system such as I describe would be horrendously complicated, and likely take at least a decade to complete.

You do recall, since your idea was influenced by Sci-Fi writer Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers, that the transition in the book came out of armed civil war, which Heinlein refers to in the book as the "Veteran's Revolt"?

I sincerely doubt that such a drastic governmental change could be made wthout violence.



I agree with you there, it isn't likely to happen peacefully.



DaddySatyr -> RE: Enact the Draft! (3/17/2012 11:32:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mynxkat
With all due respect, I disagree.

The type of government I'm describing would require ALL of the lawmakers, congress members, the President, and everyone else making policy decisions about the nation to have already demonstrated a willingness to put the welfare of that nation ahead of their own. Our current government (in the U.S., at any rate) has become so bogged down by corruption at every level and lawmakers and policy makers looking out for only their own special interests that frankly, it's time to scrap it and start fresh.

I will grant that the form of government I'm espousing is not viable with the Constitution and Amendments that currently (supposedly) form the basis of the United States government. I will also grant that the period of transition from our current government to a system such as I describe would be horrendously complicated, and likely take at least a decade to complete.

Cynical? Perhaps.


Your proposal still sets up a diametrically opposed two-tiered system of residency that is ... well ... I wonder how people would take to being cecond-class (non-)citizens?



Peace and comfort,



Michael



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.173828E-02