|
Post by BTweety04 on Nov 14, 2007 17:13:43 GMT -5
Yes I agree, a draft style military would diminish the "quality" of soldiers. If you are looking for a critically-thinking military then forcing every Tom, Dick, and Harry to mandatory service is not the answer. That is saying that they will accept just about anybody, but now they make you take tests and make sure your are mentally capable besides just physically capable.
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 14, 2007 19:13:23 GMT -5
There is currently a growing crescendo of voices among the military top brass - both active duty and retired - that the draft is going to have to be brought back to remedy the cronic manpower shortage that our military is experiencing not only in Iraq, but in all other theaters of military operations around the world.
You may be right that cumpulsory military service is not right for the USA, but the question of the draft coming back is very real. After the next Presidental election, I'm expecting talk in Washington of re-instating the draft to ramp-up very fast. If we're going to be maintaining a military ground presence in Iraq into the count of decades like we have over in South Korea, then the draft is going to have to be re-instated.
I do advocate that every American citizen should be required to spend two years of their life partaking in some manner of compulsory government service to their country. It wouldn't have to be service in the military; it could be service in a civilian sector of government.
|
|
|
Post by ♥Ms J®♥ on Nov 14, 2007 20:14:45 GMT -5
WE ARE FIGHTING A USELESS WAR! Why should the American people be forced to fight in something that is completely and utterly hopeless.
I don't believe in mandatory millitary or government working, because why should the government run our lives? I would be much happier with less government interference. Our country is fucked now because our government feels the need to butt it's head into every thing!
Our phones are being tapped because they are cathcing "domestic terrorists", but do they nbeed a warrent, no of course not, got to love that Patriot Act. Soon enough they are going to be using those taps to catch every sort of criminal, and I'm not saying that catching tha bad guy is bad, but why the fuck am I going to give up MY civil liberties for that? We're no safer than we were in 2001...so why are we letting our goverment treat us this way, well it's because everyone is scared. For no reason.
|
|
|
Post by Ass Turkey on Nov 14, 2007 20:23:13 GMT -5
The power over an entire nation of people is a hefty duty. However, the ability to brainwash over half of them is the most dangerous weapon on earth. We talk about the brainwashed muslims well maybe not WE as in those of on this forum but believe I have heard the discussion more than once and how is telling everyone how they are pure evil different than them saying we are pure evil. A large number of americans have been brainwashed into a life of blood thirst and hatred for a people because they are told those people have a blood thirst and hatred for christians and jews. Should we take a defensive mindset to maybe be on watch for anyone to attack us, the offensive to annihilate every muslim in our paths? Or both like we are?
I simply adore how the Patriot Act was named what it was. To make the close midned and easily tricked Americans to actually think it must be something American PATRIOTIC and good.
UGH!!! so in a few words I agree with you Jenna
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 14, 2007 23:17:23 GMT -5
WE ARE FIGHTING A USELESS WAR! Why should the American people be forced to fight in something that is completely and utterly hopeless. I don't believe in mandatory millitary or government working, because why should the government run our lives? I would be much happier with less government interference. Our country is fucked now because our government feels the need to butt it's head into every thing! Our phones are being tapped because they are cathcing "domestic terrorists", but do they nbeed a warrent, no of course not, got to love that Patriot Act. Soon enough they are going to be using those taps to catch every sort of criminal, and I'm not saying that catching tha bad guy is bad, but why the fuck am I going to give up MY civil liberties for that? We're no safer than we were in 2001...so why are we letting our goverment treat us this way, well it's because everyone is scared. For no reason. I've been cursing our invasion of Iraq from day one. Every time I hear Bush, or Cheney, or any other Washington politician use the word "Iraq" and "9-11" in the same sentence, I break out yelling a vile loud cursing jag [if I'm alone in the house] at the scoundrel son-of-a-bitch of a Washington politician who is making that god-damned bullshit link once again, insulting my intelligence once again for the uphteenth time. What we're dealing with over in Iraq is a "pandora's box" (yes, we opened a pandora's box when we decided to invade and occupy that country) and the choices of remedy to address the problem are all 'evils' as in trying to choose the lesser of evils. This is true: we are in Iraq now because we're struggling to maintain stability in a region of the world where exists the largest supply of oil in the world. If we were to pull out of Iraq today and let the chips fall where they may in whatever new armed civil chaos erupts in the absense of a U.S. military presence (agreed: a low-grade civil war is already underway), chaos running amok in Iraq and possibly speading beyond the boarders of Iraq would likely have a major adverse impact upon the price of a barrel of oil on the world market. ...and that's why there's a U.S. military presence in Iraq today. And despite the promise of politicians to bring our soldiers home from Iraq, it's not going to happen. We are in Iraq today like we were in South Korea 50 years ago. And 50 years from now, our U.S. troops are still going to be occupying and holding ground on Iraqi soil. After the next Presidential election, expect to hear talk in Washington get underway on reinstating the draft. ...Oh, and I have no tolerance for any political candidate who uses fear mongering as a campaign tactic. Fear mongering expressed by a political candidate is the tactic of a scoundrel who does not have the best interests of the public at heart.
|
|
|
Post by ♥Ms J®♥ on Nov 15, 2007 9:37:11 GMT -5
Iraq would be fine without us. Why are we meddling in other foreign affairs when we have our own problems here at home?
I don't feel that we as a country should try to rule the world, we need to leave the other countries alone. We don't need to interfere with Iran, if they have Nukes then so be it, they aren't going to use them on us. I just don't see why we feel it is our right to be telling other nations what to do...it's ridiculous. Worry about the homeland, not some other countries. Sure they have oil, buy a hydrogen car then if that's such a problem.... We'll get there eventually if we don't end our world as we know it by being the stupid arrogant assholes that we are....
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 15, 2007 14:48:35 GMT -5
Here in the U.S, the U.K., Australia, Japan, South Korea, name any western european democracy - all of these modern cultures are now about as close to realizing the concept of "utopia" as the're ever going to get to (of course "utopia" is impossible), and, in these modern wealthy (healthy) cultures, our problems are so minor now compared to so many poor and failed nation-states in Africa, Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea, etc.
Your right about the people of Iraq doing fine without us. The only way the Iraqis are going to resolve their own religious and ethnic conflict problems is for the U.S. to get the hell out of their way (get the hell out of their hair) and leave then to their on devises to resolve it themselves. In order for the Iraqis to find their national identity and national pride again, the U.S. is going to have to "get out of the hair" of the internal affairs of the Iraqi people.
But, our military is not there to solve the religious and ethnic problems of the Iraqis. Our military is there because our government is spooked about the consequences of leaving Iraq in a failed nation-state status and the instability that that might cause in the price of oil coming out of the Persian Gulf. Whether or not our government is justified in its fear of what may happen to the price of oil if we leave Iraq in a failed nation-state status is another important question that needs to be vigorously debated. Because, if our government is not justified in it's fear of what may happen if we leave Iraq in a failed nation-state status, then we are needlessly placing the lives of our troops into harm's way in Iraq.
As for Iran, it's only a matter of time before they have nuclear bomb. And there's nothing that's going to stop that. And it's god-damned foolish of Bush to be threatening war on Iran over its aspirations to aquire a nuclear weapons arsenal. Besides, from what I've heard in the news, our military leadership also thinks it would be a god-damned foolish thing to conduct a military attack on Iran over this nukes issue. Thank God our military leadership is pushing back at Bush on this issue. After Bush leaves office, I'm expecting an avalanche of criticism of Bush to finally spill out from the mouths of our military leadership in this country.
|
|
|
Post by Madame Shimmy on Nov 15, 2007 15:33:05 GMT -5
Well, as far as I know the criticism from our high ranking military officials WON'T EVER happen because it will be they who will be in jeopardy of being charged with war crimes along side with Donald Rumsfeld. Let us not forget that it was OUR own government along with several others that sent the biological and chemical weapons (of mass destruction) to Iraq in 1983 to use against Iran. This is the reason that the WOMD were never found. Top ranking military officals and politicians don't want them found b/c it will prove that America sent the weapons to Iraq. The reason we knew they had WMD is b/c we sent about 80 shipments to Iraq. So when the 20,000+ page reports came back that the weapons couldn't be found, George W. Bush KNEW that theoratically Iraq could attack so he forged forward with his Shock and Awe as it was dubbed by the news. On the other hand knowing what we know now, Saddam wouldn't have attacked the US because his country wouldn't have had enough support.
In my opinion Presidents in the future have their work cut out for them when it comes to the Middle Eastern and Iran foreign policies. Those weapons will never be "found" b/c our government doesn't want them to be found, NO MATTER who the president is.
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 15, 2007 20:07:07 GMT -5
There is one all encompassing word that adequately explains the entire mess that we've gotten ourselves into in Iraq:
HUBRIS
What kind of President do we currently have in the White House who makes a public declaration that he doesn't read the newspaper? ...Well, there you are, kids. Your President has just told you that it's ok to be dumb and ignorant as to what's going on in the world around you. Your President has just told you that it's ok to slack off on your school studies and slide by on a 'C' grade. Your President has just told you not to trouble your mind about the problems that are happening outside the borders of this country, ...cuz here in the USA, we are the greatest country in the world, ...and that's all you need to know, kids!
...and the end result of this kind of attitude is ... HUBRIS.
"No child left behind" ...and President Bush is the poster child of a child who got left behind in his formal education, ...and we elected this person to be our wise sage to lead our country?
Remember Katrina? Remember how the White House was totally in the dark about that disaster unfolding in New Orleans while we in the rest of the country were watching that disaster unfolding live on our TV sets?
Under the definition of HUBRIS should be all the faces of the Bush administration cabinet members and all the neo-con players in Washington who were pushing for an invasion of Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by BTweety04 on Nov 15, 2007 22:52:36 GMT -5
There is no way Iraq would be ok with us leaving. They are a new struggling democracy and just like a new baby, it has to be nurtured and cared for long enough to become a thriving success. If we pulled out of the area all the work of the military and the deaths of the men and women thus far would be in vain.
And even if the whole reason for all of this was oil supplies, everything gas goes above $3.00 a gal everyone is bitching. So if you aren't personally driving a car that isn't dependent on oil and aren't using any petroleum-based product then quite frankly you are just as well contributing to the problem and not part of any solution.
I find it funny how people wish to move away from big government, but want all the perks and protections that it provides.
But that is all I really have to say about that.
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 16, 2007 19:27:27 GMT -5
I'll be breathing a gigantic sigh of relief when I finally see the images on my TV of George Bush making his departure from Andrews AFB in his final flight on board Air Force One heading for his home in Texas in January 2009.
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 17, 2007 1:37:18 GMT -5
Ok, so this is "Politics. The debate thread" ...ummm...
By the words in the 14th Amendment in our U.S. Constitution - the equal protection clause - a girl or a woman has a constitutionally secured liberty to bare her chest wall in any public venue (any public place) that a boy or a man is witnessed to be baring his chest wall.
...and while you're showing the world your tits, if anyone takes offence, for Christ's sake, show the world your middle finger too.
|
|
|
Post by Ass Turkey on Nov 17, 2007 1:39:42 GMT -5
Well the aforementioned child left behind act..is the worst thing bush has done in his time in office.
I am sorry in theory it might be great but in practice it is a complete failure. It means a lot of things:
1. Standardized tests for every student in every grade level 2. Decide if someone is smart based off those results 3. If results are too low make the classes go more in depth and the ones who were doing fine are now bored out of their minds and not allowed to move ahead
I know this from my own school and friends I have in different parts of the country.
The worst thing is I hvae a younger cousin, nine years old, and she's doing things in fourth grade that I was doing in first. A lot of it has to do with the no child left behind act.
|
|
|
Post by tetherednchained on Nov 19, 2007 16:24:47 GMT -5
Ok, so this is "Politics. The debate thread" ...ummm... By the words in the 14th Amendment in our U.S. Constitution - the equal protection clause - a girl or a woman has a constitutionally secured liberty to bare her chest wall in any public venue (any public place) that a boy or a man is witnessed to be baring his chest wall. ...and while you're showing the world your tits, if anyone takes offence, for Christ's sake, show the world your middle finger too. There are some men that should put their shirt back on. lol
|
|
|
Post by BTweety04 on Nov 19, 2007 20:37:40 GMT -5
And some women too....
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 19, 2007 21:53:33 GMT -5
To paraphrase Rodney King, "Can't we all just grin and bear it?"
|
|
|
Post by tetherednchained on Nov 19, 2007 22:24:07 GMT -5
To paraphrase Rodney King, "Can't we all just grin and bear it?" Thats what I have been doing. Listen, I'm all for attractive people taking off their shirts. Its just that some people need to cover up a little. I have a right to not see that. lol Also, I just like to complain and bitch about it. I have that right too. You have to remember that rights are for people on both sides of any issue.
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 20, 2007 3:20:16 GMT -5
To paraphrase Rodney King, "Can't we all just grin and bear it?" Thats what I have been doing. Listen, I'm all for attractive people taking off their shirts. Its just that some people need to cover up a little. I have a right to not see that. lol Also, I just like to complain and bitch about it. I have that right too. You have to remember that rights are for people on both sides of any issue. I'm all for attractive people. It's just that some people need to cover up. I have a right not to see unattractive people.
|
|
|
Post by Dance Away on Nov 20, 2007 14:05:19 GMT -5
Life's a bitch being a fat person in this culture. For many people, their genetics are working against them. And it can be said that eventually genetics conquers us all in robbing our bodies of asthetically appealing beauty.
When I see a vacationing Italian fat man wearing a speedo brief on a beach in Miami, I say all the more power to you sir, and you're making me miss Italy (I lived in Italy from '67 to '70; I was 4 to 7 in age then).
|
|
|
Post by tetherednchained on Nov 20, 2007 14:57:21 GMT -5
I'm happy you enjoy seeing that. I'd rather not.
I'm not saying the government should have a say in what we should or shouldn't wear, I'm just saying not everyone feels the way you do about the overweight guy, in a speedo, on the beach.
|
|