Yes, it is only fair to distribute the burden equally.
Yes, if the concept is tweaked a bit.
I'm unsure.
No, but I'm not totally against the idea.
No, "Hell no we won't go!" Pass the doobie...
I have another idea, so let me explain below.
Originally posted by Rumpy Tunanator
The problem is, clones are humans not robots. In your terms, why not just round up anybody who is not gainfully employed and ship them off to wherever. Being unproductive, there is no need for them to ever return.
I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(
Better yet, create semi-human robots, lets call them...replicants...with limited lifespans to do ALL the dirty work-including military service. Maybe we should also have a special corps of enforcers fro the replicants who get too big for their britches and try to escape.
In all seriousness, this has been a good discussion. I have no fundamental problem with public service as a requirement for citizenship. I'm not sure I agree that military service is the only way to fulfill that obligation.
SEMI OFF-TOPIC: One side note, though, is that us "liberals" would question who are really the sponges and who are really being pandered to in society-the welfare moms or, imo, the welfare corporations. I know the corporations sucking on the public teat theoretically provide economic benefits, but come on....
I couldn't have said it any better. There are lot of people in the military, that have no business in the military. Some major civilian institutions have to be overhauled, so that military is not thought of 'the last resort'. My grandmother used to say, "if you feel like you can't make it life, join the Air Force". I knew she meant well, but you shouldn't tell a 13 year old something like that. Personally, I am not a good fit for any of the armed services.
I am recognizing that the voice inside my head
is urging me to be myself but never follow someone else
Because opinions are like voices we all have a different kind". --Q-Tip
But, there is a difference between service in a combat unit and other forms of public service-even non-combat military service.
I would be a horrible soldier, so I agree with you there.
I couldn't agree more.
I think you misunderstood me. I said I am not for it but it had its merits. I have been married to a soldier for 18 1/2 years (we have been married 19 1/2 years but he joined after we married). It is incredibly hard for two people to be married an in service. And with my medical problems, if you take the view some folks on this board are taking and say "everyone serves, no exceptions except medical disability" and then add your position of "you have to serve to have citizenship", I and my oldest son could never qualify for citizenship. Yet, in a very real sense, I have served my country. The lengthy military career of my husband is a burden that has been born by the entire family -- me and the kids and even relatives in the extended family to some degree. You have previously advocated for "no women in the front lines -- it distracts the men from doing their job". So if I am barred from serving fully because I am female or I am barred from serving at all because I am medically handicapped, I am automatically a second class citizen.
My point was that while Heinlein's theories have their merits, the thing he said was "ANYONE can serve, even a blind, deaf-mute -- we will have them count the hairs on the back of a caterpillar by feel, if necessary, but NO ONE is barred from enlistment due to standards of ANY kind -- if you want to serve, you are entitled to serve and we grant you citizenshp". And NO ONE on this board is addressing my point that if you want to "take everyone" or "draft everyone", you have to deal with serious issues of inclusion.
As I understand it, Switzerland has close to 100% of its citizenship in the reserve. You can have hair down to your butt. They do not make you cut it. If you want full participation, you have change how our military is run.
Also, I have read that Switzerland has known peace and maintained its neutrality for so long due to the mountainous terrain. If this is true, then Switzerland can afford to have lax standards because the risk of going to war and the need for serious training are low. I do not think you can say the same is true for the U.S.
So, if you would like to tell me how the issue of INCLUSION for people like ME will be addressed, I am all ears. And if you would like to tell me how, under your system, I can get citizenship as the wife of a career soldier (and daughter of a man who spent 26 1/2 years in service), without this becoming some kind of loophole and problem, again, I am all ears. And if you have no suggestions for effectively addressing such issues, then .... sorry, Heinlein's theories covered inclusion. The theories I am hearing bantered about here do not, as far as I can tell.
I am no slacker nor am I irresponsible. But I do have serious medical issues. There are problems with this country but I seriously doubt that a draft will cure any of them.
Read Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World."Better yet, create semi-human robots, lets call them...replicants...with limited lifespans to do ALL the dirty work-including military service. Maybe we should also have a special corps of enforcers fro the replicants who get too big for their britches and try to escape.
...
WALSTIB
Have you been reading Star Wars books? (The Clone Wars)
I was thinking of Blade Runner, of course
I actually bought a copy of BNW. Trenchant social commentary it may be (I think it is more visionary than 1984), but an enjopyable read-I'm not sure (didn't finish it yet.)
Hold on a bit. Why are we talking draft? We are talking draft because this administration used war as a means of diplomacy -- rather than diplomacy.
I don't favor a draft because I don't want people like the current administration to have a military force they can use unwisely. Let's keep it small and use war as a diplomatic tool of last resort, rather than as a preemptive military tool.
I'm going for the very simplistic view here. I have an 11-year old son, so I vote no draft.
I remember the draft lottery on t.v. during Vietnam. No way would I wish that on anybody ever again.
No draft.
Smaller army.
Less money spent on arms and military (reference Dwight Eisenhower).
Ramp up for national defense if there is a need but don't maintain a large standing army. There is a temptation for leaders to use a strong standing army inappropriately. A smaller defense-based army takes away that temptation
I'll go even simpler. At eighteen, I'm a prime candidate. So No.
Catergorically No.
And even more No.
I have thought about this for quite a while. The more I look at it, more I would be in favor of a draft, but only if needed. I think that most people take the their freedoms for granted.
Realistically, I don’t think that it will ever happen again.
When compassion exceeds logic for too long, chaos will ensue. - Unknown
What about a 2 year period (say 18-20 years old) of mandatory civil service. This could include military, Peace Corps, or a VISTA volunteer (or similar domestic rural/urban "peace corps") service. This would get a lot of my generation as well as up and coming generations away from the video game console and out to experience and help the country and the world.
Different incentives would be placed upon either of these three services depending upon need. I.E. now, we are at war, so there would be better incentives for kids to enter the military, same could be said of Katrina/Rita clean up.
You get all squeezed up inside/Like the days were carved in stone/You get all wired up inside/And it's bad to be alone
You can go out, you can take a ride/And when you get out on your own/You get all smoothed out inside/And it's good to be alone
-Peart
You know, that's not a half bad idea. I recall reading accounts from folks who during the 30's worked in the Civilian Conservation Corps. They said it was a formative experience and something they remembered the rest of their lives. For about the last three decades the lumber industry has been reaping the (literal) fruits of the CCC's labors.
People will miss that it once meant something to be Southern or Midwestern. It doesn't mean much now, except for the climate. The question, “Where are you from?” doesn't lead to anything odd or interesting. They live somewhere near a Gap store, and what else do you need to know? - Garrison Keillor
I say no draft. By making people go into the military is not going to fix any social ills. When I was in the Air Force we flew into all THREE military prisons. YES there are alot of very bad people in the military that end up in the prison system run by the military. There is an american prison in Germany, one in Guam and of course Fort Levenworth here in the US. One of the most notorious in the prison US Army sargent who killed young girls in Yougoslavia. Funny we don't here much about the military prisons.... oh yes there was pvt Lyndsay England who was invloved with torture.
BKM, thanks for the laugh today.....very nice.....do you also dream of electric sheep and worship Mercer??Better yet, create semi-human robots, lets call them...replicants...with limited lifespans to do ALL the dirty work-including military service. Maybe we should also have a special corps of enforcers fro the replicants who get too big for their britches and try to escape.
....
On the ground, protecting the Cyburbia Shove since 2004.
Hell no. The draft = communism, plain and simple.
I'm as far right as you can be, but there is no way in hell anyone should be forced to do good service. It should come out of the goodness of their hearts, and I think we have plenty of that right now. I also think they have lots of resources but could always use more and more. Only under extreme circumstances, such as a World War with multiple fronts or when a significantly large opposing army (i.e. China) must be confronted should we reinstate the draft. But right now, we are doing just fine. I loved how Kerry tried to say that if Bush was reelected, Bush would reinistate the draft. What a load of crap. I know Bush wouldn't do such a thing. It's Kerry who would've. The Democrats are famous for instituting drafts.
"Life's a journey, not a destination"
-Steven Tyler
I don't try to incite, only clarify...
I believe Abraham Lincoln was the first to establish a military draft in the US, and he was the very first Republican President. Lincoln's establishment of the draft in 1863 led to widespread riots in New York City, chiefly conducted by recent Irish immigrants who didn't want to fight a war they had nothing to do with.
Yes, Democrats (Wilson and Roosevelt) did institute drafts for World Wars I and II. But Eisenhower and a GOP Congress in the 1950s did nothing to stop military conscription, not with Korea and the Cold War going on. LBJ upped troop levels in Vietnam with the draft; Nixon lowered troop levels once in office, and it was Ford who put an end to the draft as we now know it.
In 1980, Carter instituted Selective Service registration as a means to gauge the numbers of people available for military service. But the last President to prosecute those who refused to register? Reagan, between '80 and '84.
source: military-history.com
Well, I think the Civil War is an obvious exception. I might have went a little far in saying that a draft = communism. I just don't think forced service (espeically mandatory service for multiple years for everyone during wartime and peacetime) is the right idea. I think people need to realize that some are ready to pursue their careers and sustain American economics and culture at home, and others are more equipped to serve in the military. And I think the choices most young Americans are currently making in that respect are right on target, and nothing needs to be changed at the moment.
I also believe that World Wars are exceptions. However, the draft during Vietnam could possibly be one the worst decisions our country ever made.
"Life's a journey, not a destination"
-Steven Tyler
Well......
I DO worship Phillip K. Dick, though
So...being, for example, a hack warmongering blogger/newspaper columnist who refuses to enlist is fine with you? "We need need need NEEEEEEED this war...but, but, but I myself and all of my social class are too important to actually fight in it."I think people need to realize that some are ready to pursue their careers and sustain American economics and culture at home, and others are more equipped to serve in the military..
Yeah, right.
Once again Zman & I are on the same page. I think I may have brought up something similar to this in one of the ancient threads sometime back. I know that not everyone is cut out to squeeze a trigger, but there are other ways to serve society. A policy like what Zman describes would not only help others, but also help our society that seems to have become so selfish and self-centered.
I definitely do not support a draft system similar to Vietnam, although a draft might make Congress/Prez think twice before embarking on military action, especially if all of the "Senators' Sons" loopholes are sealed up. I don't expect any politicians to touch this political H-bomb for quite some time though.
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
- Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)
So, what do these exceptions do to your original point?
(Grabs giant pot stirring spoon)
So when we cut student aid and programs for low income folks, that leaves little option for those who "are more equipped to serve in the military." except military service. That way, the wealthy elite can "sustain American economics and culture at home"....
“As soon as public service ceases to be the chief business of the citizens, and they would rather serve with their money than with their persons, the State is not far from its fall”
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
I agree, giff57. I think everyone should be required to serve in some sort of military or civil service, and I think that tuition should be very low or free at state universities.
Right now we're in a situation where the rich never have to face the responsibilities of citizenship while they send their kids to posh liberal arts schools while the working class have to work their fingers to the bone and still end up with large amounts of debt just to go to so-called "public" schools or put their lives on the line in silly conflicts just to get an education.
Meanwhile, organizations like Peace Corps have trouble getting recruits because the working class are occupied with keeping their heads above water and the rich are too selfish to do things like that.
Quote
