Sounds to me like there are a lot of youngsters here who have no Idea on life in the greatest country in the world. If you get from the USA you should be prepaired to give to the USA. Life is not a free ride, though there are many who think it should be. I believe if you want to maintain the lifestyle you are living you should be prepaired to anti-up. I personally think its a shame every youngster at age 18 doesn't serve at least two years for his country. Be it Military or peace corps, whatever. I am really sick and tired of the crybabies who say I am physically excused....crap....be a man and step up and be counted. I lost both legs in Vietnam, I regret only that I was such an easy target, not that I served my country. Using reliegion is to me only a cop out. Ali,,,,took the cheap road out. Sorry but this a very touchy subject with me, I served and proud I did. Have no time for slackers.......
ALI, the movie
- Thread starter longeyes
- Start date
JamesA, those are noble sentiments, but you're still not addressing the issue. The issue is not whether it is moral to refuse to serve when asked. The issue is not whether it is right not to serve.
The issue is whether it is moral or just to force a man into service. I have laid out the reasons why it is not.
Paratrooper, you continue to refer to the draft as something it is not. The draft has nothing to do with getting people training or "making sure we are ready." It is not used in peacetime, but only when war is already imminent or occurring. Even then it is only used when we project that we may fall short of the number of soldiers. Nobody got drafted for the Spanish-American war or the Gulf War. No one has been drafted in nigh on thirty years, so how do you justify continuing to claim that the draft is about "readiness?"
HkMP5SD, you answer your own question. You think that if we we're going to refuse to force randomly selected non-volunteers to fight and die for causes they think are wrong, it's only fair to allow volunteers who made commitments while knowing what they were getting into to renege on those commitments? How are those two ideas even remotely comparable?
The fact that we enforce contracts and expect people to live up to their commitments does NOT somehow give us the right to force people who made no commitment and signed no contract to do the same. Far from supporting each other, those two practices are very nearly polar opposites. Think it over.
The issue is whether it is moral or just to force a man into service. I have laid out the reasons why it is not.
Paratrooper, you continue to refer to the draft as something it is not. The draft has nothing to do with getting people training or "making sure we are ready." It is not used in peacetime, but only when war is already imminent or occurring. Even then it is only used when we project that we may fall short of the number of soldiers. Nobody got drafted for the Spanish-American war or the Gulf War. No one has been drafted in nigh on thirty years, so how do you justify continuing to claim that the draft is about "readiness?"
HkMP5SD, you answer your own question. You think that if we we're going to refuse to force randomly selected non-volunteers to fight and die for causes they think are wrong, it's only fair to allow volunteers who made commitments while knowing what they were getting into to renege on those commitments? How are those two ideas even remotely comparable?
The fact that we enforce contracts and expect people to live up to their commitments does NOT somehow give us the right to force people who made no commitment and signed no contract to do the same. Far from supporting each other, those two practices are very nearly polar opposites. Think it over.
Don....With all due respect for your opinion...Who cares. Moral or Imoral. There should be no free rides for draft dodgers period! I suppose we can debate this issue till the cows come home but the bottom line is you use something you should be expected to pay for it. I had a jerk tell me ontime "You are the dumb one, I went to Canada." All I could do is sit in my wheelchair and silently weep. So you ask is it moral.....yup, far as I am concirned. Time tends to heal most all wounds but not this one for me, sorry. I guess ya just had to be there....Have a good day....
Well, I guess that just about says it all. I'm sorry you're in a wheelchair, but there's no point in talking to someone who honestly doesn't care about the difference between right and wrong. Are you sure that's what you think?
I know how this is supposed to go. Now that I know you're in a wheelchair, I'm supposed to roll over. Well, sorry. I can hate what happened to you and still be objective about your argument.
You still haven't given me one bit of support for that argument except to pull out every trick of playing on emotion you could think of. Well, that still doesn't cut it.
What is it that justifies a group of people in Washington to decide that they will now own my life for two years? How do you justify slavery? Still no one will answer the question.
JamesA:
"Free ride" would be if one shirked one's constitutional militia duty of national self-defense. We all have, as citizens, obligations to defend our nation and our survival (which are tied) when necessary.
However, that is not what the "draft" is all about, nor was it used as such during some past wars. That is not to suggest that those wars were necessarily "bad" or immoral, only that they should have been waged with volunteers since they clearly went beyond national defense.
Skorzeny
What free rides are you refering to? That some of us feel morally and practically queasy about the state appropriating life and services of free men for ill-defined foreign military adventures?
"Free ride" would be if one shirked one's constitutional militia duty of national self-defense. We all have, as citizens, obligations to defend our nation and our survival (which are tied) when necessary.
However, that is not what the "draft" is all about, nor was it used as such during some past wars. That is not to suggest that those wars were necessarily "bad" or immoral, only that they should have been waged with volunteers since they clearly went beyond national defense.
Skorzeny
Guess I'll go out in the garden and dig up some worms...different opinions are like as.h...., everyone has one...Thanks for your opinion I shall ponder on it..most respectfully......................ok I pondered....Draft dodgers are worms....sorry I hate myself when I do that...but I don't feel sorry for myself either...
I wouldn't object to a FAIR draft.
Or mandatory national service. But I'm sure many would. Something about Americans being independent-minded and all that.
Ah, the Vietnam-era draft. No women allowed. Or college students. Other exemptions were available and many creative, and legal, ways were found to get around it. And some not so legal. No wonder it was despised so.
I knew guys who (legally) avoided serving because they believed that the politicians DIDN'T REALLY WANT TO WIN THE WAR! Looking back, they were right and ahead of their time. Imagine that, the government playing games - and putting the 'official' body counts on the network news every evening right before the sports scores.
I remember it well. My birthday came up in the drawing with Lottery number 161, IIRC. They drafted up to number 125 that year. I'd have felt better about the prospect of being drafted if laser eye surgery, or even soft contacts, had been available.
The draft was a mess and some called it class warfare. Male-female, rich-poor, black-white. Got a way to get into any college and the money to stay there? - You get a deferment. Not rich enough to go to college or smart/lucky enough to pass all of your classes? - Oops. Lose deferment and go directly to the front of the draft line. No wonder guys enlisted, or split, just to avoid the uncertainty.
It seemed like a system designed by suburban soccer moms, and old rich men, to protect their "best and the brightest" sons - even if they weren't called soccer moms back then.
Know a doctor? Could help with the deferment. Know a politician? Know someone on the local draft board?
Sorry for the ramble, but I'd hate to see the country subjected to such a sorry mess again.
John
Or mandatory national service. But I'm sure many would. Something about Americans being independent-minded and all that.
Ah, the Vietnam-era draft. No women allowed. Or college students. Other exemptions were available and many creative, and legal, ways were found to get around it. And some not so legal. No wonder it was despised so.
I knew guys who (legally) avoided serving because they believed that the politicians DIDN'T REALLY WANT TO WIN THE WAR! Looking back, they were right and ahead of their time. Imagine that, the government playing games - and putting the 'official' body counts on the network news every evening right before the sports scores.
I remember it well. My birthday came up in the drawing with Lottery number 161, IIRC. They drafted up to number 125 that year. I'd have felt better about the prospect of being drafted if laser eye surgery, or even soft contacts, had been available.
The draft was a mess and some called it class warfare. Male-female, rich-poor, black-white. Got a way to get into any college and the money to stay there? - You get a deferment. Not rich enough to go to college or smart/lucky enough to pass all of your classes? - Oops. Lose deferment and go directly to the front of the draft line. No wonder guys enlisted, or split, just to avoid the uncertainty.
It seemed like a system designed by suburban soccer moms, and old rich men, to protect their "best and the brightest" sons - even if they weren't called soccer moms back then.
Know a doctor? Could help with the deferment. Know a politician? Know someone on the local draft board?
Sorry for the ramble, but I'd hate to see the country subjected to such a sorry mess again.
John
paratrooper
New member
Let me re-state my position . I believe that we need MANY people in this country ready and ABLE to fight when the time comes . Waiting for the first bomb to fall is foolish . It's also quite an experience . It's the way that many guys got training in things that gave us work in civilian life . If I had my way I would revise the system . How about this . If you are asked to train you either go or leave the country for 2 years . In case of a war you must not only leave again but you can't come back.... ever .
As far as foriegn encoursons are concerned . I don't think that we should be in most of the places we are at this point . Afghanistan is a definite "must do" . As far as police actions are concerned I think I can see a small glimmer of logic . Hitler was able to take a down trodden people and create a war machine like the world has never seen . We seem to be worried about that happening again . The US seems to be trying to nip stuff like this in the bud . It's a judgement call . If a guy moves in next door to you and aims more and more weapons at your house you would be concerned to say the least . It would be better if you knew this person existed and found a way of keeping them from moving in there to start with .
Of course this is another can of worms better not opened if we ever want to discuss anything else in this lifetime . It's a never ending enigma .
As far as foriegn encoursons are concerned . I don't think that we should be in most of the places we are at this point . Afghanistan is a definite "must do" . As far as police actions are concerned I think I can see a small glimmer of logic . Hitler was able to take a down trodden people and create a war machine like the world has never seen . We seem to be worried about that happening again . The US seems to be trying to nip stuff like this in the bud . It's a judgement call . If a guy moves in next door to you and aims more and more weapons at your house you would be concerned to say the least . It would be better if you knew this person existed and found a way of keeping them from moving in there to start with .
Of course this is another can of worms better not opened if we ever want to discuss anything else in this lifetime . It's a never ending enigma .
Values...
"It is proper that you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our government... Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship , with all nations -- entangling alliances with none."
--Thomas Jefferson, Inauguration Address -- March 4, 1801
Paratrooper, Governments are instituted among men to secure our rights, not violate them. Governments "derive their just powers from the consent of the governed". You should know that government, as our founding fathers envisioned it, has no more power than the individual. If an individual cannot steal property, neither can a group of individuals. If an individual cannot forcible enslave someone, neither can a group of individuals.
Once you accept the fact that your life can be forfeit to the government, you have accepted the supremacy of the state (or group) over the individual. You have taken the first step towards fascism, communism, socialism, democracy. Call it what you will. It's all different degrees of gang rule, where the individual has no right to live for himself.
Skorzeny, Rand's concept of egoism was only that man should realize that his primary oblication is to achieve hi own welfare, well-being, or self-interest. This is not intended to offer an "anything goes" morality. On the contrary, the alternative is to tell man that he must live to serve an entity other than himself: God, or society at the price of his own welfare. She taught rational self-interest.
Egoism, Rand style, is not sacrificing oneself for others. Now, the term sacrifice must be clarified. A sacrifice is the surrender of something of value for something of lesser value, or no value.
Example: It is a sacrifice to gamble your money away rather than spend it on food for your family. It is NOT a sacrifice to die defending your freedom, rather than living as a slave. Of course, a coward is one who does not value freedom and would rather live as a slave than as a free man.
We don't need a draft, we need a return to a rational philosophy that holds mans life and the individual as supreme.
"It is proper that you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our government... Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship , with all nations -- entangling alliances with none."
--Thomas Jefferson, Inauguration Address -- March 4, 1801
Paratrooper, Governments are instituted among men to secure our rights, not violate them. Governments "derive their just powers from the consent of the governed". You should know that government, as our founding fathers envisioned it, has no more power than the individual. If an individual cannot steal property, neither can a group of individuals. If an individual cannot forcible enslave someone, neither can a group of individuals.
Once you accept the fact that your life can be forfeit to the government, you have accepted the supremacy of the state (or group) over the individual. You have taken the first step towards fascism, communism, socialism, democracy. Call it what you will. It's all different degrees of gang rule, where the individual has no right to live for himself.
Skorzeny, Rand's concept of egoism was only that man should realize that his primary oblication is to achieve hi own welfare, well-being, or self-interest. This is not intended to offer an "anything goes" morality. On the contrary, the alternative is to tell man that he must live to serve an entity other than himself: God, or society at the price of his own welfare. She taught rational self-interest.
Egoism, Rand style, is not sacrificing oneself for others. Now, the term sacrifice must be clarified. A sacrifice is the surrender of something of value for something of lesser value, or no value.
Example: It is a sacrifice to gamble your money away rather than spend it on food for your family. It is NOT a sacrifice to die defending your freedom, rather than living as a slave. Of course, a coward is one who does not value freedom and would rather live as a slave than as a free man.
We don't need a draft, we need a return to a rational philosophy that holds mans life and the individual as supreme.
I will admit that I signed up for three years of "voluntary servitude". There were many restrictions on my "freedoms" and I took them in stride. I placed myself there, as my drafted buddies used to say.
My training company at Ft. Ord was the first "All Volunteer" basic training company at Ft. Ord. Circa 1973. We were as diverse as they come. Mostly middle class, some from wealthy families, some form poor ones. We all had one thing in common: WE WERE THERE BY CHOICE! And we had a great time.
I went on to spend 27 months in a combat support unit about 200 miles from the closest possible "front". Did that make us feel any safer? No. As we were at the largest conventional and nuclear storage area in NATO we knew we would receive one of the first Soviet missiles should the stuff hit the fan. And it nearly did in October of 73.
I do not favor the draft. If this country is filled with people who will respond in times of crisis then it will continue. If not, then it deserves to go away.
What I can not abide is what France does. At least it is our citizens who fight for us.
What I would like to see is a program-voluntary- which would offer to give basic miltary training to males and females. This would be at the Government's expense (you would receive no pay) and you would be given certain benfits for taking and passing the course. Just a thought.
My training company at Ft. Ord was the first "All Volunteer" basic training company at Ft. Ord. Circa 1973. We were as diverse as they come. Mostly middle class, some from wealthy families, some form poor ones. We all had one thing in common: WE WERE THERE BY CHOICE! And we had a great time.
I went on to spend 27 months in a combat support unit about 200 miles from the closest possible "front". Did that make us feel any safer? No. As we were at the largest conventional and nuclear storage area in NATO we knew we would receive one of the first Soviet missiles should the stuff hit the fan. And it nearly did in October of 73.
I do not favor the draft. If this country is filled with people who will respond in times of crisis then it will continue. If not, then it deserves to go away.
What I can not abide is what France does. At least it is our citizens who fight for us.
What I would like to see is a program-voluntary- which would offer to give basic miltary training to males and females. This would be at the Government's expense (you would receive no pay) and you would be given certain benfits for taking and passing the course. Just a thought.
Think.........
"A soldier's pack is not as heavy as a slave's chains".
You people do as you wish, I for one am very proud to have served the United States of America. In times of war and in times of peace, and RIGHT OR WRONG. This is my country! As it is yours, defend it! Defend it at all cost.
Clem
USMC Retired
"A soldier's pack is not as heavy as a slave's chains".
You people do as you wish, I for one am very proud to have served the United States of America. In times of war and in times of peace, and RIGHT OR WRONG. This is my country! As it is yours, defend it! Defend it at all cost.
Clem
USMC Retired
Scarborough
New member
Happy new year! I checked the constitution. There is no prohibition against standing military forces. For those of us who served a pat on the back. For all the rest who have all stated that in time of need they would serve a atta boy. Despite philosophical differences we all seem to have the same ''Don't tread on me''spirit of our forefathers. That is nice.