General Says Bring Back the Draft [Archive]

ad4mg

08-11-2007, 04:08 PM

Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,11:28)]The draft is beneficial to our country and to our military. I’ll take nothing away from our professional warriors, they are excellent. However, I believe that citizen soldiers keep out military in closer touch with our citizenry and our citizenry in closer touch with our military. It is for these reasons that I believe that it is always important to have a draft regardless of the size of the military.

The size of our military is a separate issue from the draft except in cases of a national emergency. If we need a million men under arms within six months, the draft is the only way we’ll get those numbers.

Are we functioning as a nation? Do we, all of us, have an obligation to support our elected officials when they make decisions? If we find that we have no such obligation, then why have elections? How are we governing ourselves if not through our elections?

When we conceive of the draft as a means to affect public policy rather than as means to provide for our national defense, we’ve gone a long way toward dissolving our form of government.
Ah, the injection of fear into the equation. And the greatest fear of all, that unless we bow to the wishes of the state, lord bush and the PNAC, we shall cease to exist. Fear is the greatest of all motivators, and the neoconservatives have used it well.

Keep the citizenry in closer touch with the military. For what reason? The total fulfillment of the police state? Why call it a draft? Call it what you wish it to be, an indoctrination.

The PNAC driven neoconservative movement towards world domination is sounding more and more like Nazi Germany every day.

There are monsters under your beds, and the neo-dudes are putting them there. They too have monsters under their beds. We call them truth and freedom.

With the draft, the casualties could become even more negligible, eh, ukk? I'll always recall your remark that the casualties being faced in Iraq were just that, negligible.

How utterly neo, dude.

WF7A

08-11-2007, 04:10 PM

The call for the draft is likely because the current troops, being required to serve longer "over there" than what they were promised or had thought, in disgust will probably not re-enlist, leaving a large personnel shortage in the military.

That, and because it finally stuck a chord in young people's brains that you can really die serving in the military, so they don't want to voluntarily enlist.

Two solutions here:

1) Incorporate a draft similar to what Israel does: mandatory enlistment right out of college/high school for two years.

2) Train and hire civilians to perform some of the military MOSs. After all, you need to be a private, corporal, or sarge to work as a Mess Hall worker. That would solve two problems: civilian unemployment and the personnel shortage.

n2nh

08-11-2007, 04:17 PM

Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,11:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,04:56)]Aha. The Draft. Not just for Democrats anymore. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Obviously.

It appears that we have failed to learn the lessons of Vietnam. If this Administration, with approval from Congress, starts a draft, the only "surge" we'll see is in the death toll of our troops. And since we have a Democratic controlled Congress, this is not beyond the realm of possibilities.
Yes, they are so very good at not keeping promises.

They are also very good at giving Darth Bush what he wants.

w5klb

08-11-2007, 04:23 PM

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,09:17)]Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,11:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,04:56)]Aha. #The Draft. #Not just for Democrats anymore. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Obviously.

It appears that we have failed to learn the lessons of Vietnam. If this Administration, with approval from Congress, starts a draft, the only "surge" we'll see is in the death toll of our troops. And since we have a Democratic controlled Congress, this is not beyond the realm of possibilities.
Yes, they are so very good at not keeping promises. #

They are also very good at giving Darth Bush what he wants.
But you all have General Grievous (John Murtha) "who will run and hide as he always does." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

n0jaa

08-11-2007, 04:27 PM

Yeah, that's the way to do it. People won't volunteer to join the military, so let's force them to join. Yep, that sounds just like a DumbocRAT idea.

n2nh

08-11-2007, 04:28 PM

Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,12:23)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,09:17)]Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,11:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,04:56)]Aha. The Draft. Not just for Democrats anymore. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Obviously.

It appears that we have failed to learn the lessons of Vietnam. If this Administration, with approval from Congress, starts a draft, the only "surge" we'll see is in the death toll of our troops. And since we have a Democratic controlled Congress, this is not beyond the realm of possibilities.
Yes, they are so very good at not keeping promises.

They are also very good at giving Darth Bush what he wants.
But you all have General Grievous (John Murtha) "who will run and hide as he always does." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I'd love to see the Kon that has the guts to say that to his face. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

n2ize

08-11-2007, 04:28 PM

We do need more draft beer.

ad4mg

08-11-2007, 04:34 PM

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,12:28)]Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,12:23)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,09:17)]Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,11:06)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,04:56)]Aha. The Draft. Not just for Democrats anymore. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Obviously.

It appears that we have failed to learn the lessons of Vietnam. If this Administration, with approval from Congress, starts a draft, the only "surge" we'll see is in the death toll of our troops. And since we have a Democratic controlled Congress, this is not beyond the realm of possibilities.
Yes, they are so very good at not keeping promises.

They are also very good at giving Darth Bush what he wants.
But you all have General Grievous (John Murtha) "who will run and hide as he always does." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I'd love to see the Kon that has the guts to say that to his face. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Wow. Once out of the combat theater, our servicemen and women are fair game for all sorts of insults.

My grandfather was shot off a mule and killed by a sniper in Korea, while performing courier duties, bound for a M.A.S.H. unit.

How shall we desecrate his memory? After all, he is no longer capable of serving in the active theater.

kc2orw

08-11-2007, 04:34 PM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Aug. 11 2007,09:28)]We do need more draft beer.
Here! here!

More Draft Beer for all http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

kc0ukk

08-11-2007, 04:37 PM

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,09:08)]With the draft, the casualties could become even more negligible, eh, ukk? #I'll always recall your remark that the casualties being faced in Iraq were just that, negligible.
From the man who refuses to count; how irresponsible can one be?

This same man is a nation of one; what he decides overrides the decisions of others. Does he vote? Probably, does he accept the outcome of the election? Only when he wins. Any other result is of little import to such as he.

Learn to count, young man, learn to count. If you do not do so, your decisions will be based upon supposition, dreams, hopes and fantasies. If the world were to depend upon such, it would be in sad shape indeed.

You failed, of course, to address the issues I raised:

-- Do we have an obligation to support or government's decisions?

-- How do we govern ourselves if not through elections?

-- Do we not, when we vote, incur the obligation to support the outcome of that vote?

And if the people want a police state, then yes, the draft would make that more likely to happen. Of course, the converse is also true; if the people do not want a police state, the draft would make such unlikely to happen.

w2amr

08-11-2007, 04:40 PM

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,09:08)]Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,11:28)]The draft is beneficial to our country and to our military. #I’ll take nothing away from our professional warriors, they are excellent. #However, I believe that citizen soldiers keep out military in closer touch with our citizenry and our citizenry in closer touch with our military. #It is for these reasons that I believe that it is always important to have a draft regardless of the size of the military.

The size of our military is a separate issue from the draft except in cases of a national emergency. #If we need a million men under arms within six months, the draft is the only way we’ll get those numbers.

Are we functioning as a nation? #Do we, all of us, have an obligation to support our elected officials when they make decisions? #If we find that we have no such obligation, then why have elections? #How are we governing ourselves if not through our elections?

When we conceive of the draft as a means to affect public policy rather than as means to provide for our national defense, we’ve gone a long way toward dissolving our form of government.
Ah, the injection of fear into the equation. #And the greatest fear of all, that unless we bow to the wishes of the state, lord bush and the PNAC, we shall cease to exist. #Fear is the greatest of all motivators, and the neoconservatives have used it well.

Keep the citizenry in closer touch with the military. #For what reason? #The total fulfillment of the police state? #Why call it a draft? #Call it what you wish it to be, an indoctrination.

The PNAC driven neoconservative movement towards world domination is sounding more and more like Nazi Germany every day.

There are monsters under your beds, and the neo-dudes are putting them there. #They too have monsters under their beds. #We call them truth and freedom.

With the draft, the casualties could become even more negligible, eh, ukk? #I'll always recall your remark that the casualties being faced in Iraq were just that, negligible.

How utterly neo, dude.
And the W2AMR trophy for best response of the week goes to ( Drum Roll) ......Lukie. Good Job.

http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/34/63/23326334.jpg #

n2nh

08-11-2007, 04:47 PM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Aug. 11 2007,12:40)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,09:08)]Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,11:28)]The draft is beneficial to our country and to our military. I’ll take nothing away from our professional warriors, they are excellent. However, I believe that citizen soldiers keep out military in closer touch with our citizenry and our citizenry in closer touch with our military. It is for these reasons that I believe that it is always important to have a draft regardless of the size of the military.

The size of our military is a separate issue from the draft except in cases of a national emergency. If we need a million men under arms within six months, the draft is the only way we’ll get those numbers.

Are we functioning as a nation? Do we, all of us, have an obligation to support our elected officials when they make decisions? If we find that we have no such obligation, then why have elections? How are we governing ourselves if not through our elections?

When we conceive of the draft as a means to affect public policy rather than as means to provide for our national defense, we’ve gone a long way toward dissolving our form of government.
Ah, the injection of fear into the equation. And the greatest fear of all, that unless we bow to the wishes of the state, lord bush and the PNAC, we shall cease to exist. Fear is the greatest of all motivators, and the neoconservatives have used it well.

Keep the citizenry in closer touch with the military. For what reason? The total fulfillment of the police state? Why call it a draft? Call it what you wish it to be, an indoctrination.

The PNAC driven neoconservative movement towards world domination is sounding more and more like Nazi Germany every day.

There are monsters under your beds, and the neo-dudes are putting them there. They too have monsters under their beds. We call them truth and freedom.

With the draft, the casualties could become even more negligible, eh, ukk? I'll always recall your remark that the casualties being faced in Iraq were just that, negligible.

How utterly neo, dude.
And the W2AMR trophy for best response of the week goes to ( Drum Roll) ......Lukie. Good Job.

http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/34/63/23326334.jpg
Absolutely. In fact right now, as I type, there is a 'dirty bomb' "threat" in the city. The news even claims that it is unverified, and that the source has been highly unreliable in the past. There are all sorts of checkpoints, all kinds of activity and people are being put through all kinds of changes. They're even stopping the tourist buses and running them through metal detectors and letting the dogs run in the bus sniffing about. You know what? Despite this "threat" the city is running as usual. No frozen zones, no closing of any areas...

Get lotsa popcorn. It's a long ways to 1/20/09.

ad4mg

08-11-2007, 05:02 PM

Quote[/b] ]-- Do we have an obligation to support or government's decisions?
No, we are not bound to blindly follow bad decisions rendered by our elected representatives. There are avenues available for removal of the most corrupt, although most are foiled by those who take advantage of the system.

Quote[/b] ]-- How do we govern ourselves if not through elections?
I cannot recall where I have stated anything to the contrary. In fact, I have encouraged reform, and if needed, revolution, but all through the ballot box. I don't understand this connection to myself. It must be some pre-determined prejudice you have formed towards me.

Quote[/b] ]-- Do we not, when we vote, incur the obligation to support the outcome of that vote?
See my answer to #1. It is basically the same question.

Now, let's put these pre-conceived opinions you have of me to rest (for the 1,000th time here). I supported Bush 100% after the attacks of 9/11/2001. I thought he had us on the right course. We attacked the source of the problem, the home of the terrorists, and we had the backing of nearly the entire planet. What power we wielded, the righteous nation of freedom loving people, the sleeping giant, defending it's very right to exist. Only the insane little despots of the world dared speak against a cause that was just, and right. No sane nation on the planet speaks ill of a sovereign nation's will to defend it's right to exist.

Then we invaded Iraq. Weeks before we did, I spoke here, warning that it was a very bad idea. Ring wing zealots, intoxicated with their new found power and the displays of patriotism absolutely bashed me for daring speak against the lord bush and his objectives. Fast-forward to the present, and gee golly whiz, it looks like I was right. Iraq signaled the end of any support I had for this president and his criminally inept administration. I looked for reasons why this president would take such a gamble when he had almost the entire planet behind him, and I found the PNAC. The rest is self explanatory. And his agenda fits nicely into the PNAC doctrine. His actions no longer come as any surprise, and in fact have become quite predictable.

I don't know how old you are, but I doubt you can be that much older than I and still breathing unassisted, and I can count very well. I resented it then, and I resent it now your remark that attempted to blow off the deaths of our brave soldiers as negligible. Because it was for some "cause" and because the number was small in comparison to previous wars. In Iraq, one death was too many. How do you justify this war that has had so many different reasons attempting to justify it? What is our reason for being there this week?

No, had we been content to concentrate solely on Afghanistan, the terrorists would surely have followed us there, where we would be in a far more superior position to fight them, with our resources concentrated, and the entire world behind us. But bush needed a new set of pistols, so he selected the weakest of his "evildoers", and away we went. And I pray to God that the lessons we learn in the meatgrinder that is Iraq are longer lasting than those of our previous mistakes.

I somehow doubt it.

w2amr

08-11-2007, 05:34 PM

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,09:47)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Aug. 11 2007,12:40)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,09:08)]Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,11:28)]The draft is beneficial to our country and to our military. #I’ll take nothing away from our professional warriors, they are excellent. #However, I believe that citizen soldiers keep out military in closer touch with our citizenry and our citizenry in closer touch with our military. #It is for these reasons that I believe that it is always important to have a draft regardless of the size of the military.

The size of our military is a separate issue from the draft except in cases of a national emergency. #If we need a million men under arms within six months, the draft is the only way we’ll get those numbers.

Are we functioning as a nation? #Do we, all of us, have an obligation to support our elected officials when they make decisions? #If we find that we have no such obligation, then why have elections? #How are we governing ourselves if not through our elections?

When we conceive of the draft as a means to affect public policy rather than as means to provide for our national defense, we’ve gone a long way toward dissolving our form of government.
Ah, the injection of fear into the equation. #And the greatest fear of all, that unless we bow to the wishes of the state, lord bush and the PNAC, we shall cease to exist. #Fear is the greatest of all motivators, and the neoconservatives have used it well.

Keep the citizenry in closer touch with the military. #For what reason? #The total fulfillment of the police state? #Why call it a draft? #Call it what you wish it to be, an indoctrination.

The PNAC driven neoconservative movement towards world domination is sounding more and more like Nazi Germany every day.

There are monsters under your beds, and the neo-dudes are putting them there. #They too have monsters under their beds. #We call them truth and freedom.

With the draft, the casualties could become even more negligible, eh, ukk? #I'll always recall your remark that the casualties being faced in Iraq were just that, negligible.

How utterly neo, dude.
And the W2AMR trophy for best response of the week goes to ( Drum Roll) ......Lukie. Good Job.

http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/34/63/23326334.jpg
Absolutely. #In fact right now, as I type, there is a 'dirty bomb' "threat" in the city. #The news even claims that it is unverified, and that the source has been highly unreliable in the past. # There are all sorts of checkpoints, all kinds of activity and people are being put through all kinds of changes. #They're even stopping the tourist buses and running them through metal detectors and letting the dogs run in the bus sniffing about. #You know what? #Despite this "threat" the city is running as usual. #No frozen zones, no closing of any areas...

Get lotsa popcorn. #It's a long ways to 1/20/09.
What? Go to yellow alert. Lock phasers on target Mister Wharf. Where's Tom Ridge? Where's the duct tape? Where's Rush? Call Dick Cheney!
Step up the surge ! HELLLLLLLLP!

k6bbc

08-11-2007, 05:46 PM

Bring back the draft? Yes. Then you will see all these lazy white kids get off their collective butts and take to the street and end this insane big-business driven war in Iraq. It is about time America wakes up to the fact our country is being run by a pack of neo-fascist, Christian-fascist, terrorist.

WAKE UP.

bbc

w5klb

08-11-2007, 06:04 PM

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,09:28)]Quote[/b] ]But you all have General Grievous (John Murtha) "who will run and hide as he always does." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I'd love to see the Kon that has the guts to say that to his face. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
There are some former Vietnam Combat Marine Corps vets here that would just loooove to tell him. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

n2nh

08-11-2007, 06:06 PM

Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,14:04)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,09:28)]Quote[/b] ]But you all have General Grievous (John Murtha) "who will run and hide as he always does." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I'd love to see the Kon that has the guts to say that to his face. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
There are some former Vietnam Combat Marine Corps vets here that would just loooove to tell him. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
If I felt that way, I would find a way. Of course, talk is cheap. Don't mind me. It's just that way where I grew up. We tended to be do'ers.

w5klb

08-11-2007, 06:55 PM

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,11:06)]Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Aug. 11 2007,14:04)]Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Aug. 11 2007,09:28)]Quote[/b] ]But you all have General Grievous (John Murtha) "who will run and hide as he always does." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I'd love to see the Kon that has the guts to say that to his face. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
There are some former Vietnam Combat Marine Corps vets here that would just loooove to tell him. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
If I felt that way, I would find a way. #Of course, talk is cheap. #Don't mind me. #It's just that way where I grew up. #We tended to be do'ers.
Since we Veterans live on a fixed income, we tend to be poor. But if YOU want to buy his airplane ticket, be my guest.

Quote[/b] ]Of course, talk is cheap.

So is propaganda. You seem to do a lot of both.

kc0ukk

08-11-2007, 08:26 PM

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,10:02)]Quote[/b] ]-- Do we have an obligation to support or government's decisions?
No, we are not bound to blindly follow bad decisions rendered by our elected representatives. #There are avenues available for removal of the most corrupt, although most are foiled by those who take advantage of the system.

Quote[/b] ]-- How do we govern ourselves if not through elections?
I cannot recall where I have stated anything to the contrary. #In fact, I have encouraged reform, and if needed, revolution, but all through the ballot box. #I don't understand this connection to myself. #It must be some pre-determined prejudice you have formed towards me.

Quote[/b] ]-- Do we not, when we vote, incur the obligation to support the outcome of that vote?
See my answer to #1. #It is basically the same question.

Now, let's put these pre-conceived opinions you have of me to rest (for the 1,000th time here). #I supported Bush 100% after the attacks of 9/11/2001. #I thought he had us on the right course. #We attacked the source of the problem, the home of the terrorists, and we had the backing of nearly the entire planet. #What power we wielded, the righteous nation of freedom loving people, the sleeping giant, defending it's very right to exist. #Only the insane little despots of the world dared speak against a cause that was just, and right. #No sane nation on the planet speaks ill of a #sovereign nation's will to defend it's right to exist.

Then we invaded Iraq. #Weeks before we did, I spoke here, warning that it was a very bad idea. #Ring wing zealots, intoxicated with their new found power and the displays of patriotism absolutely bashed me for daring speak against the lord bush and his objectives. #Fast-forward to the present, and gee golly whiz, it looks like I was right. #Iraq signaled the end of any support I had for this president and his criminally inept administration. #I looked for reasons why this president would take such a gamble when he had almost the entire planet behind him, and I found the PNAC. #The rest is self explanatory. #And his agenda fits nicely into the PNAC doctrine. #His actions no longer come as any surprise, and in fact have become quite predictable.

I don't know how old you are, but I doubt you can be that much older than I and still breathing unassisted, and I can count very well. #I resented it then, and I resent it now your remark that attempted to blow off the deaths of our brave soldiers as negligible. #Because it was for some "cause" and because the number was small in comparison to previous wars. #In Iraq, one death was too many. #How do you justify this war that has had so many different reasons attempting to justify it? #What is our reason for being there this week?

No, had we been content to concentrate solely on Afghanistan, the terrorists would surely have followed us there, where we would be in a far more superior position to fight them, with our resources concentrated, and the entire world behind us. #But bush needed a new set of pistols, so he selected the weakest of his "evildoers", and away we went. #And I pray to God that the lessons we learn in the meatgrinder that is Iraq are longer lasting than those of our previous mistakes.

I somehow doubt it.
Since Congress authorized the battle for Iraq and the President exercised his authority as Commander In Chief and carried out his responsibility, this firmly established the will of the nation.

Those actions were reaffirmed by the nation in the election of 2004 which returned President Bush to power. Congress has had, over this time, complete authority to halt the funding for this war. They have chosen not to do so, a further affirmation of this nation's actions.

Well over 160,000 men and women have been placed in harms way for the past four years carrying out the will of the people as expressed through the nation’s elections. They have been asked to offer their lives on our behalf and just over 3,700 have given their lives in this cause.

There are those, such as yourself, who have chosen to discourage our warriors and to encourage those of our enemies. You tell our enemies that all they need so is to wait us out, one more year, two more years and we will leave in defeat. You tell the Iraqis not to join with us because we will abandon them in a few short months, leaving them to the mercies of their foes. You tell our troops that the deaths of their comrades are for naught as will be their own lives should they also be killed.

You mistakenly believe that your moral bearings supersede and are superior to those who have made the decision to confront our enemies in their own territory. You take at face value the words of tyrants who claim innocence while they murder, rape and enslave their own people.

You fail to ask what happened to the Christian nations of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon. Where are the Armenians? You choose to ignore the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania, in Kenya, the Australian embassy in Jakarta; you choose to ignore the take over of our embassy in Iran, the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, the attack on the USS Cole, the bombing of our troop barracks, Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia.

You choose to ignore the bombings in Bali, Indonesia; in the Philippines, in Spain, in Great Britain. You choose to ignore the first attack on the WTC and focus only on the second attack on the WTC which you use to justify the invasion of Afghanistan. You choose to ignore the invasion of Kuwait, you choose to ignore that Iranian weapons are killing our warriors in Iraq.

To you, these are all negligible actions, unworthy of response. You justify your opposition to the war in Iraq by claiming Iraqi innocence in the 9/11 bombing. You choose to ignore that we are killing Iraqis, Pakistanis, Saudis, Syrians, Chechens, Iranians, Jordanians, and yes, even some American and British terrorists in Iraq.

You know nothing of today’s reality let alone of history. You’re sitting on a throne with your feet dangling in the air, your legs too short to reach the ground. You preach with a righteousness imbued with ignorance. You know not the plight of the warrior in combat, yet you profess to ‘Support Our Troops’ as though they could read your bumper sticker. One life lost you say, is too many. You find it abhorrent that I find our extremely low casualties to well worth the price.

Only in a child’s world does the good ship lollypop sail into the sunset playing Lennon’s “Imagine” in an endless loop. Somewhere near 200 million people died in the wars of the 20th Century. We do not all share the same needs and desires; we do not share the same sense of freedom and human rights.

We do not all agree to submit in the name of ‘peace’.

NL7W

08-11-2007, 08:34 PM

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,05:55)]You must drink the Kool Aid, Comrades.
Yes, they are! Stop sipping yourself...

NL7W

08-11-2007, 08:40 PM

Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,13:26)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,10:02)]Quote[/b] ]-- Do we have an obligation to support or government's decisions?
No, we are not bound to blindly follow bad decisions rendered by our elected representatives. There are avenues available for removal of the most corrupt, although most are foiled by those who take advantage of the system.

Quote[/b] ]-- How do we govern ourselves if not through elections?
I cannot recall where I have stated anything to the contrary. In fact, I have encouraged reform, and if needed, revolution, but all through the ballot box. I don't understand this connection to myself. It must be some pre-determined prejudice you have formed towards me.

Quote[/b] ]-- Do we not, when we vote, incur the obligation to support the outcome of that vote?
See my answer to #1. It is basically the same question.

Now, let's put these pre-conceived opinions you have of me to rest (for the 1,000th time here). I supported Bush 100% after the attacks of 9/11/2001. I thought he had us on the right course. We attacked the source of the problem, the home of the terrorists, and we had the backing of nearly the entire planet. What power we wielded, the righteous nation of freedom loving people, the sleeping giant, defending it's very right to exist. Only the insane little despots of the world dared speak against a cause that was just, and right. No sane nation on the planet speaks ill of a sovereign nation's will to defend it's right to exist.

Then we invaded Iraq. Weeks before we did, I spoke here, warning that it was a very bad idea. Ring wing zealots, intoxicated with their new found power and the displays of patriotism absolutely bashed me for daring speak against the lord bush and his objectives. Fast-forward to the present, and gee golly whiz, it looks like I was right. Iraq signaled the end of any support I had for this president and his criminally inept administration. I looked for reasons why this president would take such a gamble when he had almost the entire planet behind him, and I found the PNAC. The rest is self explanatory. And his agenda fits nicely into the PNAC doctrine. His actions no longer come as any surprise, and in fact have become quite predictable.

I don't know how old you are, but I doubt you can be that much older than I and still breathing unassisted, and I can count very well. I resented it then, and I resent it now your remark that attempted to blow off the deaths of our brave soldiers as negligible. Because it was for some "cause" and because the number was small in comparison to previous wars. In Iraq, one death was too many. How do you justify this war that has had so many different reasons attempting to justify it? What is our reason for being there this week?

No, had we been content to concentrate solely on Afghanistan, the terrorists would surely have followed us there, where we would be in a far more superior position to fight them, with our resources concentrated, and the entire world behind us. But bush needed a new set of pistols, so he selected the weakest of his "evildoers", and away we went. And I pray to God that the lessons we learn in the meatgrinder that is Iraq are longer lasting than those of our previous mistakes.

I somehow doubt it.
Since Congress authorized the battle for Iraq and the President exercised his authority as Commander In Chief and carried out his responsibility, this firmly established the will of the nation.

Those actions were reaffirmed by the nation in the election of 2004 which returned President Bush to power. Congress has had, over this time, complete authority to halt the funding for this war. They have chosen not to do so, a further affirmation of this nation's actions.

Well over 160,000 men and women have been placed in harms way for the past four years carrying out the will of the people as expressed through the nation’s elections. They have been asked to offer their lives on our behalf and just over 3,700 have given their lives in this cause.

There are those, such as yourself, who have chosen to discourage our warriors and to encourage those of our enemies. You tell our enemies that all they need so is to wait us out, one more year, two more years and we will leave in defeat. You tell the Iraqis not to join with us because we will abandon them in a few short months, leaving them to the mercies of their foes. You tell our troops that the deaths of their comrades are for naught as will be their own lives should they also be killed.

You mistakenly believe that your moral bearings supersede and are superior to those who have made the decision to confront our enemies in their own territory. You take at face value the words of tyrants who claim innocence while they murder, rape and enslave their own people.

You fail to ask what happened to the Christian nations of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon. Where are the Armenians? You choose to ignore the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania, in Kenya, the Australian embassy in Jakarta; you choose to ignore the take over of our embassy in Iran, the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, the attack on the USS Cole, the bombing of our troop barracks, Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia.

You choose to ignore the bombings in Bali, Indonesia; in the Philippines, in Spain, in Great Britain. You choose to ignore the first attack on the WTC and focus only on the second attack on the WTC which you use to justify the invasion of Afghanistan. You choose to ignore the invasion of Kuwait, you choose to ignore that Iranian weapons are killing our warriors in Iraq.

To you, these are all negligible actions, unworthy of response. You justify your opposition to the war in Iraq by claiming Iraqi innocence in the 9/11 bombing. You choose to ignore that we are killing Iraqis, Pakistanis, Saudis, Syrians, Chechens, Iranians, Jordanians, and yes, even some American and British terrorists in Iraq.

You know nothing of today’s reality let alone of history. You’re sitting on a throne with your feet dangling in the air, your legs too short to reach the ground. You preach with a righteousness imbued with ignorance. You know not the plight of the warrior in combat, yet you profess to ‘Support Our Troops’ as though they could read your bumper sticker. One life lost you say, is too many. You find it abhorrent that I find our extremely low casualties to well worth the price.

Only in a child’s world does the good ship lollypop sail into the sunset playing Lennon’s “Imagine” in an endless loop. Somewhere near 200 million people died in the wars of the 20th Century. We do not all share the same needs and desires; we do not share the same sense of freedom and human rights.

We do not all agree to submit in the name of ‘peace’.
Way to go!

You're presenting to many historical facts and logic for the lost hippies to absorb and understand. You know that, right?

Next comes the misdirection, non-sequitur, and emotional responses from the left...

73.

ad4mg

08-11-2007, 09:02 PM

Quote[/b] ]Since Congress authorized the battle for Iraq and the President exercised his authority as Commander In Chief and carried out his responsibility, this firmly established the will of the nation.
No! Since one person had the power to DECIDE, he alone had the power to say yes or no. There was plenty of doubt at the time, and a responsible president would have first checked, double checked, and triple checked the "intelligence". Many say the intelligence was distorted to allow justification for invading a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us whatsoever,harbored no terrorists, and had absolutely nothing to do with the attacks of 9/11/2001.

Quote[/b] ]Those actions were reaffirmed by the nation in the election of 2004 which returned President Bush to power. Congress has had, over this time, complete authority to halt the funding for this war. They have chosen not to do so, a further affirmation of this nation's actions.
There was enough reasonable doubt as to the outcome of the '04 election that if it had been a murder trial, it would have been dismissed. That the democrats in congress are lying cowards has no connection to the will of the people. The will of the majority is to get out of Iraq. You cannot deny that.

Quote[/b] ]Well over 160,000 men and women have been placed in harms way for the past four years carrying out the will of the people as expressed through the nation’s elections. They have been asked to offer their lives on our behalf and just over 3,700 have given their lives in this cause.
No, as explained earlier, they carried out the will of bush. Are these 3,700 your "negligible" casualties?

Quote[/b] ]There are those, such as yourself, who have chosen to discourage our warriors and to encourage those of our enemies. You tell our enemies that all they need so is to wait us out, one more year, two more years and we will leave in defeat. You tell the Iraqis not to join with us because we will abandon them in a few short months, leaving them to the mercies of their foes. You tell our troops that the deaths of their comrades are for naught as will be their own lives should they also be killed.
Total BS, party line rhetoric straight from OxyRushbo's lips to your keyboard. What a total lack of originality. Is this the best you can do?

Quote[/b] ]You mistakenly believe that your moral bearings supersede and are superior to those who have made the decision to confront our enemies in their own territory. You take at face value the words of tyrants who claim innocence while they murder, rape and enslave their own people.
Your mind reading skills are sub par, Comrade. If you really believe this, you are a bigger fool than I thought. How do you pretend to know of anything I'm thinking? I never said anything of the sort, never claimed anything of the sort. I take at face value the words of tyrants? You and OxyRushbo have the same doctors? You must be in a drug induced coma if this is what's going through your head. It's just more party line rhetoric ... attack the messenger when you have no basis for argument. Typical.

Quote[/b] ]You fail to ask what happened to the Christian nations of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon. Where are the Armenians? You choose to ignore the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania, in Kenya, the Australian embassy in Jakarta; you choose to ignore the take over of our embassy in Iran, the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, the attack on the USS Cole, the bombing of our troop barracks, Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia.
We're trying to discuss the war in Iraq. Try to keep up. Iraq had NOTHING to do with any of this.

Quote[/b] ]You choose to ignore the bombings in Bali, Indonesia; in the Philippines, in Spain, in Great Britain. You choose to ignore the first attack on the WTC and focus only on the second attack on the WTC which you use to justify the invasion of Afghanistan. You choose to ignore the invasion of Kuwait, you choose to ignore that Iranian weapons are killing our warriors in Iraq.
Misdirection, another loser neoconservative tactic. What does any of this have to do with the war in Iraq?

Quote[/b] ]To you, these are all negligible actions, unworthy of response. You justify your opposition to the war in Iraq by claiming Iraqi innocence in the 9/11 bombing. You choose to ignore that we are killing Iraqis, Pakistanis, Saudis, Syrians, Chechens, Iranians, Jordanians, and yes, even some American and British terrorists in Iraq.
So there are horrific things happening in the world. Let's bomb every country listed above, and throw in New York city for the for the American terrorists. It makes more sense than us invading Iraq.

Quote[/b] ]You know nothing of today’s reality let alone of history. You’re sitting on a throne with your feet dangling in the air, your legs too short to reach the ground. You preach with a righteousness imbued with ignorance. You know not the plight of the warrior in combat, yet you profess to ‘Support Our Troops’ as though they could read your bumper sticker. One life lost you say, is too many. You find it abhorrent that I find our extremely low casualties to well worth the price.
More mind reading. And, no, I actually find it totally disgusting that you find even one death of an American soldier to be "negligible", especially in an unjust invasion of a sovereign nation that was never proven to be a threat to us, or a country that harbored terrorists. All built on lies.

Quote[/b] ]Only in a child’s world does the good ship lollypop sail into the sunset playing Lennon’s “Imagine” in an endless loop. Somewhere near 200 million people died in the wars of the 20th Century. We do not all share the same needs and desires; we do not share the same sense of freedom and human rights.[/quote
Neoconservative stereotyping coupled with PNAC induced visions of world domintation make a very weak argument, Comrade.

[quote]We do not all agree to submit in the name of ‘peace’.
The word does not exist in the PNAC inspired doctrine of today's neoconservative war machine.

You have failed to provide one iota of justification for the invasion of Iraq, but you have neatly covered every neocon talking point used by dittoheads everywhere.

Congratulations, you have reached the level of super con.

No doubt a card carrying member of the "Party of Hate". You should be their poster child. You could provide a daily body count of all the "negligible" casualties to the families of the fallen heroes. And YOU claim to support the troops. You support only the doctrine of hate that has consumed this country.

Save yourself the trouble of a reply. I find your drivel to be a total waste of time, unless you suddenly discover the ability to think on your own.

ad4mg

08-11-2007, 09:04 PM

Quote[/b] (NL7W @ Aug. 11 2007,16:40)]Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,13:26)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,10:02)]Quote[/b] ]-- Do we have an obligation to support or government's decisions?
No, we are not bound to blindly follow bad decisions rendered by our elected representatives. There are avenues available for removal of the most corrupt, although most are foiled by those who take advantage of the system.

Quote[/b] ]-- How do we govern ourselves if not through elections?
I cannot recall where I have stated anything to the contrary. In fact, I have encouraged reform, and if needed, revolution, but all through the ballot box. I don't understand this connection to myself. It must be some pre-determined prejudice you have formed towards me.

Quote[/b] ]-- Do we not, when we vote, incur the obligation to support the outcome of that vote?
See my answer to #1. It is basically the same question.

Now, let's put these pre-conceived opinions you have of me to rest (for the 1,000th time here). I supported Bush 100% after the attacks of 9/11/2001. I thought he had us on the right course. We attacked the source of the problem, the home of the terrorists, and we had the backing of nearly the entire planet. What power we wielded, the righteous nation of freedom loving people, the sleeping giant, defending it's very right to exist. Only the insane little despots of the world dared speak against a cause that was just, and right. No sane nation on the planet speaks ill of a sovereign nation's will to defend it's right to exist.

Then we invaded Iraq. Weeks before we did, I spoke here, warning that it was a very bad idea. Ring wing zealots, intoxicated with their new found power and the displays of patriotism absolutely bashed me for daring speak against the lord bush and his objectives. Fast-forward to the present, and gee golly whiz, it looks like I was right. Iraq signaled the end of any support I had for this president and his criminally inept administration. I looked for reasons why this president would take such a gamble when he had almost the entire planet behind him, and I found the PNAC. The rest is self explanatory. And his agenda fits nicely into the PNAC doctrine. His actions no longer come as any surprise, and in fact have become quite predictable.

I don't know how old you are, but I doubt you can be that much older than I and still breathing unassisted, and I can count very well. I resented it then, and I resent it now your remark that attempted to blow off the deaths of our brave soldiers as negligible. Because it was for some "cause" and because the number was small in comparison to previous wars. In Iraq, one death was too many. How do you justify this war that has had so many different reasons attempting to justify it? What is our reason for being there this week?

No, had we been content to concentrate solely on Afghanistan, the terrorists would surely have followed us there, where we would be in a far more superior position to fight them, with our resources concentrated, and the entire world behind us. But bush needed a new set of pistols, so he selected the weakest of his "evildoers", and away we went. And I pray to God that the lessons we learn in the meatgrinder that is Iraq are longer lasting than those of our previous mistakes.

I somehow doubt it.
Since Congress authorized the battle for Iraq and the President exercised his authority as Commander In Chief and carried out his responsibility, this firmly established the will of the nation.

Those actions were reaffirmed by the nation in the election of 2004 which returned President Bush to power. Congress has had, over this time, complete authority to halt the funding for this war. They have chosen not to do so, a further affirmation of this nation's actions.

Well over 160,000 men and women have been placed in harms way for the past four years carrying out the will of the people as expressed through the nation’s elections. They have been asked to offer their lives on our behalf and just over 3,700 have given their lives in this cause.

There are those, such as yourself, who have chosen to discourage our warriors and to encourage those of our enemies. You tell our enemies that all they need so is to wait us out, one more year, two more years and we will leave in defeat. You tell the Iraqis not to join with us because we will abandon them in a few short months, leaving them to the mercies of their foes. You tell our troops that the deaths of their comrades are for naught as will be their own lives should they also be killed.

You mistakenly believe that your moral bearings supersede and are superior to those who have made the decision to confront our enemies in their own territory. You take at face value the words of tyrants who claim innocence while they murder, rape and enslave their own people.

You fail to ask what happened to the Christian nations of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon. Where are the Armenians? You choose to ignore the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania, in Kenya, the Australian embassy in Jakarta; you choose to ignore the take over of our embassy in Iran, the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, the attack on the USS Cole, the bombing of our troop barracks, Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia.

You choose to ignore the bombings in Bali, Indonesia; in the Philippines, in Spain, in Great Britain. You choose to ignore the first attack on the WTC and focus only on the second attack on the WTC which you use to justify the invasion of Afghanistan. You choose to ignore the invasion of Kuwait, you choose to ignore that Iranian weapons are killing our warriors in Iraq.

To you, these are all negligible actions, unworthy of response. You justify your opposition to the war in Iraq by claiming Iraqi innocence in the 9/11 bombing. You choose to ignore that we are killing Iraqis, Pakistanis, Saudis, Syrians, Chechens, Iranians, Jordanians, and yes, even some American and British terrorists in Iraq.

You know nothing of today’s reality let alone of history. You’re sitting on a throne with your feet dangling in the air, your legs too short to reach the ground. You preach with a righteousness imbued with ignorance. You know not the plight of the warrior in combat, yet you profess to ‘Support Our Troops’ as though they could read your bumper sticker. One life lost you say, is too many. You find it abhorrent that I find our extremely low casualties to well worth the price.

Only in a child’s world does the good ship lollypop sail into the sunset playing Lennon’s “Imagine” in an endless loop. Somewhere near 200 million people died in the wars of the 20th Century. We do not all share the same needs and desires; we do not share the same sense of freedom and human rights.

We do not all agree to submit in the name of ‘peace’.
Way to go!

You're presenting to many historical facts and logic for the lost hippies to absorb and understand. You know that, right?

Next comes the misdirection, non-sequitur, and emotional responses from the left...

73.
He proved nothing, and repeated only unrelated talking points of the far right.

You want to take a stab at justifying our invasion of Iraq? Perhaps you could fare better doing this, as you make a pretty horrific cheerleader.

K2WH

08-12-2007, 12:59 AM

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,05:08)]Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,11:28)]The draft is beneficial to our country and to our military. #I’ll take nothing away from our professional warriors, they are excellent. #However, I believe that citizen soldiers keep out military in closer touch with our citizenry and our citizenry in closer touch with our military. #It is for these reasons that I believe that it is always important to have a draft regardless of the size of the military.

The size of our military is a separate issue from the draft except in cases of a national emergency. #If we need a million men under arms within six months, the draft is the only way we’ll get those numbers.

Are we functioning as a nation? #Do we, all of us, have an obligation to support our elected officials when they make decisions? #If we find that we have no such obligation, then why have elections? #How are we governing ourselves if not through our elections?

When we conceive of the draft as a means to affect public policy rather than as means to provide for our national defense, we’ve gone a long way toward dissolving our form of government.
Ah, the injection of fear into the equation. #And the greatest fear of all, that unless we bow to the wishes of the state, lord bush and the PNAC, we shall cease to exist. #Fear is the greatest of all motivators, and the neoconservatives have used it well.

Keep the citizenry in closer touch with the military. #For what reason? #The total fulfillment of the police state? #Why call it a draft? #Call it what you wish it to be, an indoctrination.

The PNAC driven neoconservative movement towards world domination is sounding more and more like Nazi Germany every day.

There are monsters under your beds, and the neo-dudes are putting them there. #They too have monsters under their beds. #We call them truth and freedom.

With the draft, the casualties could become even more negligible, eh, ukk? #I'll always recall your remark that the casualties being faced in Iraq were just that, negligible.

How utterly neo, dude.
What is it with you and this PNAC thing. #I looked at it once since you mentioned it and never went back. #I'll bet, most on here never heard about it until you mentioned it.

And, your "Party of Hate" phrase is BS since the dems are in control, they are party to it. So drop it. YOu say your are non-partisan, but you always come to the defense immediately to the loony left guys on this site. I think your full of sh_t.

K2WH

ad4mg

08-12-2007, 01:14 AM

Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Aug. 11 2007,20:59)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,05:08)]Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,11:28)]The draft is beneficial to our country and to our military. I’ll take nothing away from our professional warriors, they are excellent. However, I believe that citizen soldiers keep out military in closer touch with our citizenry and our citizenry in closer touch with our military. It is for these reasons that I believe that it is always important to have a draft regardless of the size of the military.

The size of our military is a separate issue from the draft except in cases of a national emergency. If we need a million men under arms within six months, the draft is the only way we’ll get those numbers.

Are we functioning as a nation? Do we, all of us, have an obligation to support our elected officials when they make decisions? If we find that we have no such obligation, then why have elections? How are we governing ourselves if not through our elections?

When we conceive of the draft as a means to affect public policy rather than as means to provide for our national defense, we’ve gone a long way toward dissolving our form of government.
Ah, the injection of fear into the equation. And the greatest fear of all, that unless we bow to the wishes of the state, lord bush and the PNAC, we shall cease to exist. Fear is the greatest of all motivators, and the neoconservatives have used it well.

Keep the citizenry in closer touch with the military. For what reason? The total fulfillment of the police state? Why call it a draft? Call it what you wish it to be, an indoctrination.

The PNAC driven neoconservative movement towards world domination is sounding more and more like Nazi Germany every day.

There are monsters under your beds, and the neo-dudes are putting them there. They too have monsters under their beds. We call them truth and freedom.

With the draft, the casualties could become even more negligible, eh, ukk? I'll always recall your remark that the casualties being faced in Iraq were just that, negligible.

How utterly neo, dude.
What is it with you and this PNAC thing. I looked at it once since you mentioned it and never went back. I'll bet, most on here never heard about it until you mentioned it.

And, your "Party of Hate" phrase is BS since the dems are in control, they are party to it. So drop it. YOu say your are non-partisan, but you always come to the defense immediately to the loony left guys on this site. I think your full of sh_t.

K2WH
That myth was easily "busted".Quote[/b] ]Posted by ad4mg in another active thread: Seriously, the dems are every bit as inept and brain dead as the repubs. Honestly, I'm starting to believe it's a conspiracy to morph the existing two party corporate political crime syndicate into a true ruling class. There is no other explanation for the decisions our federal government make these days. It one of us acted in a manner this disconnected from reality, they would have us institutionalized.

As it is still a free country (for now), if you think I'm full of <EXPLETIVE DELETED TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN>, then that's acceptable.

Drop the "Party of Hate" BS?

Because you said so?

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Perpetuate the Hate - Vote Republican - the "Party of Hate".
"One Way, Our Way, The Only Way".
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

You mean that one Willie? Not a chance.

Where's your delightful Kon sense of humor? Truth diggin' at you?

You may, optionally attempt to do what your Comrades failed to do ... justify why we invaded Iraq.

Or not.

How do you like my "new one"?

"The Hate Always Shines Through".

Mega-dittos neo-person.

W4DFW

08-12-2007, 01:15 AM

Any country whose citizens do not respect its fundamental principles of Freedom enough to be willing to VOLUNTEER in order to fight for those Freedoms does not deserve to survive.

The US of A is doomed in this regard, thanks to Lib'rul Lunes who would rather make love, smoke dope, and hug a tree rather than fight to keep what other brave souls died for so that they COULD spew their lib'rul lunacy in safety.

k6bbc

08-12-2007, 01:27 AM

Quote[/b] (W4DFW @ Aug. 11 2007,18:15)]Any country whose citizens do not respect its fundamental principles of Freedom enough to be willing to VOLUNTEER in order to fight for those Freedoms does not deserve to survive.

The US of A is doomed in this regard, thanks to Lib'rul Lunes who would rather make love, smoke dope, and hug a tree rather than fight to keep what other brave souls died for so that they COULD spew their lib'rul lunacy in safety.
Not being a card carrying member of the liberal left – please name me you current heroes who have served in the military. Good luck. All of the big-mouthed right-wing-pigs you worship at the feet of NEVER VOLUNTEERED for the military. So frankly, you are full of EXPLETIVE DELETED.

bbc

W4DFW

08-12-2007, 01:59 AM

Quote[/b] (k6bbc @ Aug. 10 2007,21:27)]Not being a card carrying member of the liberal left – please name me you <SIC> current heroes who have served in the military. Good luck. All of the big-mouthed right-wing-pigs you worship at the feet of NEVER VOLUNTEERED for the military. So frankly, you are full of EXPLETIVE DELETED.

bbc
Uhm, is there a point you are attempting to make??

Less hyperbole and focusing on the issue at hand might make your endeavor somewhat easier.

I just get lost at the claim that somehow NEVER VOLUNTEERED is representative of the Military as a whole.

Is there an 807 or two on your desk?? Please elucidate, won't you??

Thanks! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

k6bbc

08-12-2007, 02:01 AM

Quote[/b] (W4DFW @ Aug. 11 2007,18:59)]Quote[/b] (k6bbc @ Aug. 10 2007,21:27)]Not being a card carrying member of the liberal left – please name me you <SIC> current heroes who have served in the military. Good luck. All of the big-mouthed right-wing-pigs you worship at the feet of NEVER VOLUNTEERED for the military. So frankly, you are full of EXPLETIVE DELETED.

bbc
Uhm, is there a point you are attempting to make??

Less hyperbole and focusing on the issue at hand might make your endeavor somewhat easier.

I just get lost at the claim that somehow NEVER VOLUNTEERED is representative of the Military as a whole.

Is there an 807 or two on your desk?? Please elucidate, won't you??

Thanks! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
What I said was quite clear.

W4DFW

08-12-2007, 02:14 AM

Quote[/b] (k6bbc @ Aug. 10 2007,22:01)]What I said was quite clear.
Coming from an Obama supporter, I can safely say that you sure cleared that up!

Shall we nuke Pakistan?? What'da'ya think!! Eh??

k6bbc

08-12-2007, 02:22 AM

I think all you heros – Bush, Cheney, Hannity, Rush – are all a pack of draft-dodger and no shows when it came to military service. Funnies how they all have an easy time sending troops to war when not a one of them served – chicken hawks. And now there is Romney. Another no-show who went to the south of France on a “mission” to avoid Viet Nam.

Why is it so many conservatives think these guys are so macho and good on defence? It is truly baffling.

Kerry, who did serve was painted to be a coward by your pig friends. At least her served. More than I can say for you drug-addict hero Rush. Why do you even bother to pay one moments attention to such people. Will you answer me that one?

bbc

W1GUH

08-12-2007, 05:41 AM

ONE...TWO...THREE...FOUR

WE DON'T WANT YOUR F@#$ING WAR.

w2amr

08-12-2007, 08:13 AM

Quote[/b] (W4DFW @ Aug. 11 2007,18:15)]Any country whose citizens do not respect its fundamental principles of Freedom enough to be willing to VOLUNTEER in order to fight for those Freedoms does not deserve to survive.

The US of A is doomed in this regard, thanks to Lib'rul Lunes who would rather make love, smoke dope, and hug a tree rather than fight to keep what other brave souls died for so that they COULD spew their lib'rul lunacy in safety.
response (http://www.prankcallsunlimited.com/freesound2/cuckooclock.wav)

KI4PEQ

08-13-2007, 02:56 AM

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 11 2007,05:59)]Not a chance. #The corporate fat cats will never allowed their chosen children to be forced to fight the wars destined to be fought by the children of others.

Nada, zip, zero.
The children of the rich and powerful never were chosen in a draft. There are always college deferments for those children, doctors who will swear that the scions of industry and commerce are too frail to serve, or if all else fails, the young spawn of the rich and famous can always relocate to another country.

None of these options are available to the poor and middle class. The poor and middle class have always been the ones to fill the ranks of the military, even in this age of an all volunteer force.

The military needs unwilling, unmotivated recruits like it needs a thousand more casualties in Iraq.

W2ILP

08-25-2007, 04:40 AM

Bring back the draft is nothing new. The suggestion was made by Congressman Rangel, who fears that minorities are making up too large a percentage of servicemen these days and would like to see the services be more representative of the actual American population percentages.

Many of our service people are not even citizens of the USA.

And there was another thread about this subject here. I had said that we may need more wise guys in the services. That is guys who are now too wise to volunteer for enlistment. I dunno about girls. If we could draft only men and leave the girls behind so that they could get pregnant in their own home towns maybe that might be a big saving. Some might say that I am a chauvinist for thinking that only men should be soldiers. This seemed to work out for the most part in previous wars when the only females on battle fronts were a few nurses. Maybe I'm old fashioned...but I would like to think that it is a man's job to protect females and not the opposite condition.

Don't get me wrong I respect the service people in the US military. I think that most of the junior officers in today's Army know more about history and geography than those of the past. Thus they question the President's use of Vietnam to enforce his stay the course policy. They may not even be as foolish as American Legionnaires or VFW members, who have entirely different points of view either because they were in Nam or because they weren't.

The military needs people who can read instruction manuals, preferably in English. Lowering standards as they have has not proved to be so efficient. Remember that we won WWII with a drafted Army. I would not dare to call the draftees in the Korean or Vietnam police actions unmotivated recruits either.

w2ilp (I Like Peace)...but if we must have war... all good MEN should share the responsibilities of military service.

W1GUH

08-25-2007, 05:31 AM

In one of 'piu's posts he mentioned that the lowest scores amongst high school students today is American History.

One should really wonder why that is...but here's some American History that is VERY REAL and VERY RELEVANT.

Ignore it at your peril.

The Viet Nam war split this great nation, and caused massive turmoil and dissent against the government.

Then Nixon first, instituted the draft lottery. #That action split the draft age young men into three groups:

#Those that KNEW they'd be called.

#Those that MIGHT be called.

#Those that WON'T be called.

Prior to the draft lottery ALL American men of draft age COULD be called. #It was a matter of luck.

So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

This is documented, true American history.

If the draft is re-instituted, and all men of draft age are liable to be drafted into the army, probably to die in Iraq, and maybe Iran, #you gotta believe the anti-war movement will make what happened in the 60's look like a love-in. #Those young men will NOT stand for this.

Oh, there's many who will say, screw them. #We need this, and, by God, we're gonna see that it happens.

Mark my words, this will split this country to the point where it ceases to exist.

Get outta here, the draft is the LAST thing we need.

But then, so many Americans think American history is irrelevant, so we're gonna have to go through this again...but this time it's not gonna be so benign.

Peace, brothers and sisters, and love.

W2ILP

08-25-2007, 05:57 AM

Another factor that is not clearly understood here is that toward the end of the Vietnam war, there was new legislation (including a lottery system) that was to change the way Americans would be selected for a draft if one was to be needed in future wars. #It was understood that the Selective Service rules at the start of the Vietnam draft were not equitable, because (for example) they allowed exemptions for affluent men who could afford to go to college, and thus no exemptions for poor guys who might not get accepted into state colleges or who had to go to work in full time employment. #There were even a lot of guys who became engineers because engineers on critical jobs could get to be exempt for military service. #In my opinion these engineers were never as motivated at their jobs as hams who become engineers are.

Some rich guys had the money required to relocate to Sweeden...while some guys got drafted who were too poor to make it to Canada.
#
Some draft dogers found religions that made them conscioncously exempt. #As an atheist, I know that some non-believers couldn't claim to be exempt if they had no faith and others might claim exemption because they had no faith in wars. #I think that atheists have to separate their lack of faith from their lack of faith in government and serve along with all God's children...but that is me...because I served...my father served and one of my sons served.

w2ilp (I Love Peace)....and everyone must help to keep the peace... even if there is no war. #They must do so in a regular army and not in a mercenary "peace corp"....in my opinion.

W1GUH

08-25-2007, 06:02 AM

Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Aug. 23 2007,23:57)]Another factor that is not clearly understood here is that toward the end of the Vietnam war, there was new legislation that was to change the way Americans would be selected for a draft if one was to be needed in future wars. #It was understood that the Selective Service rules at the time of the Vietnam draft were not equitable, because (for example) they allowed exemptions for affluent men who could afford to go to college, and thus no exemptions for poor guys who might not get accepted into state colleges or who had to go to work in full time employment. #There were even a lot of guys who became engineers because engineers on critical jobs could get to be exempt for military service. #In my opinion these engineers were never as motivated at their jobs as hams who become engineers are.

Some rich guys had the money required to relocate to Sweeden...while some guys got drafted who were too poor to make it to Canada.
#
Some draft dogers found religions that made them conscioncously exempt. #As an atheist, I know that some non-believers couldn't claim to be exempt if they had no faith and others might claim exemption because they had no faith in wars. #I think that atheists have to separate their lack of faith from their lack of faith in government and serve along with all Gods children...but that is me...because I served...my father served and one of my sons served.

w2ilp (I Love Peace)....and everyone must help to keep the peace... even if there is no war. #They must do so in a regular army and not in a mercenary "peace corp"....in my opinion.
Your words are a highly relevant indication of what the draft, when it's used for immoral purposes, can cause.

n2ize

08-25-2007, 11:43 AM

Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Aug. 24 2007,22:31)]In one of 'piu's posts he mentioned that the lowest scores amongst high school students today is American History.

One should really wonder why that is...but here's some American History that is VERY REAL and VERY RELEVANT.

Ignore it at your peril.

The Viet Nam war split this great nation, and caused massive turmoil and dissent against the government.

Then Nixon first, instituted the draft lottery. #That action split the draft age young men into three groups:

#Those that KNEW they'd be called.

#Those that MIGHT be called.

#Those that WON'T be called.

Prior to the draft lottery ALL American men of draft age COULD be called. #It was a matter of luck.

So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

This is documented, true American history.

If the draft is re-instituted, and all men of draft age are liable to be drafted into the army, probably to die in Iraq, and maybe Iran, #you gotta believe the anti-war movement will make what happened in the 60's look like a love-in. #Those young men will NOT stand for this.

Oh, there's many who will say, screw them. #We need this, and, by God, we're gonna see that it happens.

Mark my words, this will split this country to the point where it ceases to exist.

Get outta here, the draft is the LAST thing we need.

But then, so many Americans think American history is irrelevant, so we're gonna have to go through this again...but this time it's not gonna be so benign.

Peace, brothers and sisters, and love.
Quote[/b] ]
So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

Which then shows that the anti war movement had nothing to do with Vietnam being a corrupt, immoral, and wrong war, it had to do with young people who were afraid they'd get drafted and simply wanted to save their own skin. In other words the only principle involved in the anti Vietnam war movement was saving ones own skin. Had their been no draft nobody would have given a damn and the war could have gone on forever. We could still be in Vietnam today. These days the politicians are much smarter. They know most Americans don't give a damn how wrong, immoral, or corrupt a war is. Just so long as they don't have to go fight it. As long as some other guy does the dirty work for them they could care less.

I'm not saying I nessesarilly buy into the idea that the anti war activism was entirely driven by "selfish" ideas. I think there were a great many people concerned with the immorality and corrupt nature of such a war, i.e the underlying motif for a fair percentage of activism was a genuine belief that the war was bad. And is activism soley for the reason that one wants to save ones own skin nessesarilly selfish ? In some ways yes, particularly if at the same time their is no regard or concern for other aspects or reasons why the war is wrong. Lacking that essense I feel it would be quite selfish. However, if one truly appreciates why the war is wrong then the added motivation towards activism, i.e. saving oneself from the draft, is not particularly selfish.

KI4PJW

08-26-2007, 02:22 AM

The day this country put a draft dodging communist into the White House was the day I as a volunteer made the decision that my children will not be drafted to serve a United Nations Police Force.

kc9kun

08-26-2007, 03:55 AM

yeah i here that i just got out not too long ago and i think as well that we need to get out of the UN and quit doing all the dirty work. and the worst part is after we do it for them they hate us. also i wold hate to get called back to train a bunch of lugnuts that don't want to be there. that would be the worst training ever they would be sent and not be ready. my 2 cents

W1GUH

08-26-2007, 04:35 AM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Aug. 24 2007,05:43)]Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Aug. 24 2007,22:31)]In one of 'piu's posts he mentioned that the lowest scores amongst high school students today is American History.

One should really wonder why that is...but here's some American History that is VERY REAL and VERY RELEVANT.

Ignore it at your peril.

The Viet Nam war split this great nation, and caused massive turmoil and dissent against the government.

Then Nixon first, instituted the draft lottery. #That action split the draft age young men into three groups:

#Those that KNEW they'd be called.

#Those that MIGHT be called.

#Those that WON'T be called.

Prior to the draft lottery ALL American men of draft age COULD be called. #It was a matter of luck.

So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

This is documented, true American history.

If the draft is re-instituted, and all men of draft age are liable to be drafted into the army, probably to die in Iraq, and maybe Iran, #you gotta believe the anti-war movement will make what happened in the 60's look like a love-in. #Those young men will NOT stand for this.

Oh, there's many who will say, screw them. #We need this, and, by God, we're gonna see that it happens.

Mark my words, this will split this country to the point where it ceases to exist.

Get outta here, the draft is the LAST thing we need.

But then, so many Americans think American history is irrelevant, so we're gonna have to go through this again...but this time it's not gonna be so benign.

Peace, brothers and sisters, and love.
Quote[/b] ]
So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

Which then shows that the anti war movement had nothing to do with Vietnam being a corrupt, immoral, and wrong war, it had to do with young people who were afraid they'd get drafted and simply wanted to save their own skin. In other words the only principle involved in the anti Vietnam war movement was saving ones own skin. Had their been no draft nobody would have given a damn and the war could have gone on forever. We could still be in Vietnam today. These days the politicians are much smarter. They know most Americans don't give a damn how wrong, immoral, or corrupt a war is. Just so long as they don't have to go fight it. As long as some other guy does the dirty work for them they could care less.

I'm not saying I nessesarilly buy into the idea that the anti war activism was entirely driven by "selfish" ideas. I think there were a great many people concerned with the #immorality and corrupt nature of such a war, i.e the underlying motif for a fair percentage of activism was a genuine belief that the war was bad. And is activism soley for the reason that one wants to save ones own skin nessesarilly selfish ? #In some ways yes, particularly if at the same time their is no regard or concern for other aspects or reasons why the war is wrong. Lacking that essense I feel it would be quite selfish. However, if one truly appreciates why the war is wrong then the added motivation towards activism, i.e. saving oneself from the draft, is not particularly selfish.
Thank you for adding your eloquent analysis that goes beyond what I said. #You are exactly right, and I thank you for adding that.

KC7ATO

08-26-2007, 05:47 PM

WF7A (Quote) "Train and hire civilians to perform some of the military MOSs. After all, you need to be a private, corporal, or sarge to work as a Mess Hall worker. That would solve two problems: civilian unemployment and the personnel shortage."
NOTE: All Army and USAF messing requirements are now provided by "Contract Personnel" (Halliburton/KBR) even in Iraq. "KP" has been eliminated except for aboard Naval and USCG vessels. When deployed in the field our Army lives on "MREs". There are no "Mess Sgts" or "Food service personnel" in the Army. You can't even be "put on report" and assigned to "KP" anymore. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

KW4MW

08-26-2007, 11:22 PM

If the insipid remarks of QRZ's Lib-Bots are in any way representative of and proportional to the country populace at large then by all means bring on the draft.

It might help thin the weaklings from the herd. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

KI4PJW

08-26-2007, 11:32 PM

Quote[/b] (KW4MW @ Aug. 25 2007,22:22)]If the insipid remarks of QRZ's Lib-Bots are in any way representative of and proportional to the country populace at large then by all means bring on the draft. #

It might help thin the weaklings from the herd. # # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Who is the weaker, the ones who go along to get along, even when what is being dictated is wrong or those who have the intestinal fortitude to resist?
The US is not functioning in a soverign capacity and as such, no one should submit to being ruled by a pack of Trotskyite Communist Tyrants.

KW4MW

08-26-2007, 11:45 PM

Quote[/b] (KI4PJW @ Aug. 26 2007,19:32)]Quote[/b] (KW4MW @ Aug. 25 2007,22:22)]If the insipid remarks of QRZ's Lib-Bots are in any way representative of and proportional to the country populace at large then by all means bring on the draft. #

It might help thin the weaklings from the herd. # # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Who is the weaker, the ones who go along to get along, even when what is being dictated is wrong or those who have the intestinal fortitude to resist?
The US is not functioning in a soverign capacity and as such, no one should submit to being ruled by a pack of Trotskyite Communist Tyrants.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

W1GUH

08-27-2007, 03:52 AM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Aug. 24 2007,05:43)]Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Aug. 24 2007,22:31)]In one of 'piu's posts he mentioned that the lowest scores amongst high school students today is American History.

One should really wonder why that is...but here's some American History that is VERY REAL and VERY RELEVANT.

Ignore it at your peril.

The Viet Nam war split this great nation, and caused massive turmoil and dissent against the government.

Then Nixon first, instituted the draft lottery. #That action split the draft age young men into three groups:

#Those that KNEW they'd be called.

#Those that MIGHT be called.

#Those that WON'T be called.

Prior to the draft lottery ALL American men of draft age COULD be called. #It was a matter of luck.

So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

This is documented, true American history.

If the draft is re-instituted, and all men of draft age are liable to be drafted into the army, probably to die in Iraq, and maybe Iran, #you gotta believe the anti-war movement will make what happened in the 60's look like a love-in. #Those young men will NOT stand for this.

Oh, there's many who will say, screw them. #We need this, and, by God, we're gonna see that it happens.

Mark my words, this will split this country to the point where it ceases to exist.

Get outta here, the draft is the LAST thing we need.

But then, so many Americans think American history is irrelevant, so we're gonna have to go through this again...but this time it's not gonna be so benign.

Peace, brothers and sisters, and love.
Quote[/b] ]
So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

Which then shows that the anti war movement had nothing to do with Vietnam being a corrupt, immoral, and wrong war, it had to do with young people who were afraid they'd get drafted and simply wanted to save their own skin. In other words the only principle involved in the anti Vietnam war movement was saving ones own skin. Had their been no draft nobody would have given a damn and the war could have gone on forever. We could still be in Vietnam today. These days the politicians are much smarter. They know most Americans don't give a damn how wrong, immoral, or corrupt a war is. Just so long as they don't have to go fight it. As long as some other guy does the dirty work for them they could care less.

I'm not saying I nessesarilly buy into the idea that the anti war activism was entirely driven by "selfish" ideas. I think there were a great many people concerned with the #immorality and corrupt nature of such a war, i.e the underlying motif for a fair percentage of activism was a genuine belief that the war was bad. And is activism soley for the reason that one wants to save ones own skin nessesarilly selfish ? #In some ways yes, particularly if at the same time their is no regard or concern for other aspects or reasons why the war is wrong. Lacking that essense I feel it would be quite selfish. However, if one truly appreciates why the war is wrong then the added motivation towards activism, i.e. saving oneself from the draft, is not particularly selfish.
It wasn't that we weren't aware of the fact that war was simply wrong. #We knew that. #But it took the threat of getting that letter from the Selective Service System that started out, "Greetings...", that really motivated large numbers to go out and vote with their feet. #It was a matter of saving you own life, and those of others. #We got pretty tired of seeing dear friends come home in a box, and knowing they died simply because the President of the United States considered draft age young men to be nothing but cannon fodder, just like the FM does today.

Prior to '69-70, when the anti-war movement went mainstream and middle of the road, it took a certain amount of courage of one's convictions to take an unpopular stand. #Had it not been for the draft, I doubt if it would have had the large numbers to get out there and show how stroungly they felt.

If the draft does come back, there are going to be some nasty times in the U.S.

n2ize

08-27-2007, 04:42 AM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Aug. 12 2007,01:13)]Quote[/b] (W4DFW @ Aug. 11 2007,18:15)]Any country whose citizens do not respect its fundamental principles of Freedom enough to be willing to VOLUNTEER in order to fight for those Freedoms does not deserve to survive.

The US of A is doomed in this regard, thanks to Lib'rul Lunes who would rather make love, smoke dope, and hug a tree rather than fight to keep what other brave souls died for so that they COULD spew their lib'rul lunacy in safety.
response (http://www.prankcallsunlimited.com/freesound2/cuckooclock.wav)
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

N3ATS

08-27-2007, 05:28 AM

Quote[/b] (k6bbc @ Aug. 11 2007,21:22)]I think all you heros – Bush, Cheney, Hannity, Rush – are all a pack of draft-dodger and no shows when it came to military service. Funnies how they all have an easy time sending troops to war when not a one of them served – chicken hawks. And now there is Romney. Another no-show who went to the south of France on a “mission” to avoid Viet Nam.

Why is it so many conservatives think these guys are so macho and good on defence? It is truly baffling.

Kerry, who did serve was painted to be a coward by your pig friends. At least her served. More than I can say for you drug-addict hero Rush. Why do you even bother to pay one moments attention to such people. Will you answer me that one?

bbc
From a chicken in every pot to a pot smoking chicken and a coke snortin' chicken hawk! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

We've come a long way baby!

Pass the Oxy...

n2ize

08-27-2007, 07:17 AM

Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Aug. 26 2007,20:52)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Aug. 24 2007,05:43)]Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Aug. 24 2007,22:31)]In one of 'piu's posts he mentioned that the lowest scores amongst high school students today is American History.

One should really wonder why that is...but here's some American History that is VERY REAL and VERY RELEVANT.

Ignore it at your peril.

The Viet Nam war split this great nation, and caused massive turmoil and dissent against the government.

Then Nixon first, instituted the draft lottery. #That action split the draft age young men into three groups:

#Those that KNEW they'd be called.

#Those that MIGHT be called.

#Those that WON'T be called.

Prior to the draft lottery ALL American men of draft age COULD be called. #It was a matter of luck.

So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

This is documented, true American history.

If the draft is re-instituted, and all men of draft age are liable to be drafted into the army, probably to die in Iraq, and maybe Iran, #you gotta believe the anti-war movement will make what happened in the 60's look like a love-in. #Those young men will NOT stand for this.

Oh, there's many who will say, screw them. #We need this, and, by God, we're gonna see that it happens.

Mark my words, this will split this country to the point where it ceases to exist.

Get outta here, the draft is the LAST thing we need.

But then, so many Americans think American history is irrelevant, so we're gonna have to go through this again...but this time it's not gonna be so benign.

Peace, brothers and sisters, and love.
Quote[/b] ]
So, ALL Americans of draft age had a stake in ending the Viet Nam war, and that was what fueled the anti-war movement.

As soon as two thirds of those draft age men knew that they woud either not be called, or probably not be called, the anti-war turmoil was significantly reduced.

Then, when Nixon eliminated the draft, the anti-war movement was dead, and the protesters disappeared.

Which then shows that the anti war movement had nothing to do with Vietnam being a corrupt, immoral, and wrong war, it had to do with young people who were afraid they'd get drafted and simply wanted to save their own skin. In other words the only principle involved in the anti Vietnam war movement was saving ones own skin. Had their been no draft nobody would have given a damn and the war could have gone on forever. We could still be in Vietnam today. These days the politicians are much smarter. They know most Americans don't give a damn how wrong, immoral, or corrupt a war is. Just so long as they don't have to go fight it. As long as some other guy does the dirty work for them they could care less.

I'm not saying I nessesarilly buy into the idea that the anti war activism was entirely driven by "selfish" ideas. I think there were a great many people concerned with the #immorality and corrupt nature of such a war, i.e the underlying motif for a fair percentage of activism was a genuine belief that the war was bad. And is activism soley for the reason that one wants to save ones own skin nessesarilly selfish ? #In some ways yes, particularly if at the same time their is no regard or concern for other aspects or reasons why the war is wrong. Lacking that essense I feel it would be quite selfish. However, if one truly appreciates why the war is wrong then the added motivation towards activism, i.e. saving oneself from the draft, is not particularly selfish.
It wasn't that we weren't aware of the fact that war was simply wrong. #We knew that. #But it took the threat of getting that letter from the Selective Service System that started out, "Greetings...", that really motivated large numbers to go out and vote with their feet. #It was a matter of saving you own life, and those of others. #We got pretty tired of seeing dear friends come home in a box, and knowing they died simply because the President of the United States considered draft age young men to be nothing but cannon fodder, just like the FM does today.

Prior to '69-70, when the anti-war movement went mainstream and middle of the road, it took a certain amount of courage of one's convictions to take an unpopular stand. #Had it not been for the draft, I doubt if it would have had the large numbers to get out there and show how stroungly they felt.

If the draft does come back, there are going to be some nasty times in the U.S.
What amazes me is that we still have people defending the corrupt Vietnam war. Even after it has been clearly pointed out and admitted that it was built on a pack of lies. Now we see the same thing happening all over again, less the draft. Abnd the same arguments being used to support it and condemn anyone who is against it.

The more we change the more we stay the same.

n2ize

08-27-2007, 07:26 AM

Quote[/b] (kc0ukk @ Aug. 11 2007,13:26)]
Quote[/b] ]

You mistakenly believe that your moral bearings supersede and are superior to those who have made the decision to confront our enemies in their own territory. #You take at face value the words of tyrants who claim innocence while they murder, rape and enslave their own people.

The people of Iraq were not our enemies. They did not attack and kill us. They did not commit the 911 disaster. But we decided to attack them and blow up their country and cause them to die and wreck up their infrastructure and wreck up their jobs, etc.

How would you feel is some country that we never attacked or bothered came and did the same thing here because they think they know what is best for us ? I'll be you'd be infurated.

Quote[/b] ]
There are those, such as yourself, who have chosen to discourage our warriors and to encourage those of our enemies. #You tell our enemies that all they need so is to wait us out, one more year, two more years and we will leave in defeat. #You tell the Iraqis not to join with us because we will abandon them in a few short months, leaving them to the mercies of their foes. #You tell our troops that the deaths of their comrades are for naught as will be their own lives should they also be killed.

This is the same false garbage argument that was used against the anti Vietnam war people. It's nothing but bull. Why don;t you explain to us what was the justification for Vietnam ? Another "enemy" that did nothing to us, that lived thousands of miles from us, that we simply HAD to attack.

Quote[/b] ]
You fail to ask what happened to the Christian nations of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon. #Where are the Armenians? #You choose to ignore the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania, in Kenya, the Australian embassy in Jakarta; #you choose to ignore the take over of our embassy in Iran, the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, the attack on the USS Cole, the bombing of our troop barracks, Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia.

More bull. This has NOTHING to do with why we are in Iraq. It does have a lot to do with a long sordid history of western involvement in the middle east, failed autocracies, and mixed up diplomacy.

W1GUH

08-27-2007, 11:05 AM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Aug. 26 2007,01:26)]
Quote[/b] ]

You mistakenly believe that your moral bearings supersede and are superior to those who have made the decision to confront our enemies in their own territory. #You take at face value the words of tyrants who claim innocence while they murder, rape and enslave their own people.

The people of Iraq were not our enemies. They did not attack and kill us. They did not commit the 911 disaster. But we decided to attack them and blow up their country and cause them to die and wreck up their infrastructure and wreck up their jobs, etc.

How would you feel is some country that we never attacked or bothered came and did the same thing here because they think they know what is best for us ? I'll be you'd be infurated.

Quote[/b] ]
There are those, such as yourself, who have chosen to discourage our warriors and to encourage those of our enemies. #You tell our enemies that all they need so is to wait us out, one more year, two more years and we will leave in defeat. #You tell the Iraqis not to join with us because we will abandon them in a few short months, leaving them to the mercies of their foes. #You tell our troops that the deaths of their comrades are for naught as will be their own lives should they also be killed.

This is the same false garbage argument that was used against the anti Vietnam war people. It's nothing but bull. Why don;t you explain to us what was the justification for Vietnam ? Another "enemy" that did nothing to us, that lived thousands of miles from us, that we simply HAD to attack.

Quote[/b] ]
You fail to ask what happened to the Christian nations of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon. #Where are the Armenians? #You choose to ignore the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania, in Kenya, the Australian embassy in Jakarta; #you choose to ignore the take over of our embassy in Iran, the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, the attack on the USS Cole, the bombing of our troop barracks, Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia.

More bull. This has NOTHING to do with why we are in Iraq. It does have a lot to do with a long sordid history of western involvement in the middle east, failed autocracies, and mixed up diplomacy.
Do the even still teach history in high school these days?

Or have the revisionists been very effective at what they do?

How else to explain why so many people have no clue about Vietnam? Kool-aid?