Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2006 Archive' started by Martin, Nov 20, 2006.
What do you think of a military draft?
See what happens when the democrats are in power...
It was a democrat that suggested it today..
I didn't vote, because I don't agree with any of your choices.
I think it is obsolete.
Only if it becomes necessary would I agree to restarting the draft.
If a Republican had suggested a return of the draft, Democrats would be foaming at the mouth.
I've never understood the contemporary fetish dems have with the draft. They argued for it in the first Gulf War. Now, Rangel is bent on having a draft. That will just ensure we have Vietnams all over the place. I prefer an all volunteer army unless need mandates. I don't see the need for it. It's obsolete as someone rightly pointed out.
No, they'd like it. The whole point is that a draft would mean that the sacrifice would apply to everyone.
Unless they had a politically powerful daddy, of course.
If we plan to stay in Iraq then I agree with cranking up the draft. We can't keep sending these same soldiers in to combat zones over and over again. A person can only take so much without lasting effects.
The sacrifice currently applies to those who volunteered for it. Don't want to go to war, don't want to fight, don't volunteer.
That seems pretty simple to me.
Perhaps those that volunteer'd feel they are doing their part and would like others to lend a hand. Some of these guys are on their 3rd or 4th trip. That is too much to ask of anybody.
I was not in favor of the war but now that we are their, we need to finish what we started before coming home. If not, we'll just be back and next time they'll be better prepared.
It won't go anywhere and Rangel knows it. His point is that to re-instute the draft would hit the voting constituents back home, making it far less likely Congress would go to war.
If a nation is not evolved enough to desire a republic/democracy, or they aren't willing to stand up and fight for it themselves, then we should not send our soldiers involuntarily over to try to build something that won't work out.
But there are times when involuntary service is required to defend our country. I just don't think Iraq qualifies.
I was hoping it would be a yes/no poll.
I didn't vote. It's too complicated an issue and a lot of the folks I've heard aren't talking about just a military draft but mandatory public service. That's a different issue and I'd like to know how it would play out.
I'm with you on that one. 365 days of seeing friends get blown up, and getting out in the heat not knowing if it's your turn today, is just too much stress for anyone to handle, not to mention hearing about how immoral the war is and how barbaric American soldiers are everytime you turn on the radio or watch tv.
==Personally I agree with the statement of the Constitution Party on this one, the military draft is unconstitutional. Forced military service, of any kind, is a contradiction to liberty. Besides this a miliary draft not needed.
Rangle's suggestion is also immoral since his suggestion:
1. Is playing politics with people's lives.
2. Is playing politics with the military.
3. Is trying to hurt the United State's ability to confront our enemies. Keep in mind that Rangle has said he hopes a draft would keep future presidents from getting us into wars. That is dangerous because there are times when war is 100% required. We cannot base our national security on the fears of the American people.
The sentiment behind the proposal is sound: if we're going to send people to get killed, then politician's kids should be in just as much danger of dying as the rural and inner-city poor (who resond to military service as a means of employment and educational opportunity).
In point of fact, though, a military draft would merely mean that rich kids would find ways out of it.
Sum change: none.
I voted, and believe, that a draft is immoral.
Last time I checked, those in Iraq and the military in general, never had a gun put to their heads to enlist. They volunteered their service. To state that we should force politician children into service because of the voluntary action of those in the military is absurd.
I, too, voted immoral, as that was the best option available. If the military markets itself as a "career", to force anyone into a career would be immoral, and possibly unconstitutional, in a free society that the citizens can freely choose their own careers.
Well, since you're selectively reading my post, I guess I'll have to entertain you.
I said that the sentiment is sound, not the execution. I don't expect you to understand this, but not all guns-to-the-head are made of metal. Economics can be a gun to the head, as can geography. The idea is that a draft would force all economic and social strata to contribute to the armed forces. This would, of course, never, ever work.
If you'll forgive the hideous movie that was adapted from it, there was an intriguing idea put forth in Robert A. Heinlein's novel, "Starship Troopers." The only people who could vote were those who had attained citizenship, and the only way to attain citizenship was to serve in the armed forces. Perhaps this would be a sound alternative to the draft.
Send all those that voted immoral and unconstitutional along with the senators' and congressmen's kids off to war.
What a Great Idea - defending the freedom that one takes for granted!
I fail to see how one can leap from war in Iraq to defending our freedom. but OK.
Bull. There are always alternatives. This must be the calvinistic version of "freedom".