|
Post by oap001 on Nov 20, 2006 0:57:15 GMT -5
There are several news stories out there about reinstating the draft. Thoughts on this??
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 20, 2006 1:58:44 GMT -5
Since I didn't serve in the military and am now really too old to be caught in any likely draft, it would seem mighty hypocritical of me to support a draft. I don't even know that I think drafted soldiers make the best kind of army...then again some sort of requisite national service program might be a good idea. If everyone had to spend at least a year either serving in the military, or helping in urban renewal projects, or teaching, or whatever. I think I could get behind an idea like that.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 20, 2006 9:51:43 GMT -5
I have always liked the idea of compulsory military service for two years following high school graduation, but I think a draft would be a bad idea. One can plan for compulsory service, but not a draft.
Reality is this.....It's such a unpopular program that it is never going to get the support it needs to be enacted.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 20, 2006 15:36:03 GMT -5
I'm really bothered by the whole thing. I think that some kind of draft will eventually pass. But I think the real goal is to have some kind of non military compulsory service. Where our youth would be "brainwashed" into some sort of blind idealistic patriotism. I think the whole idea is to drum up broad support for the war. Or the future "war on terrorism".
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 20, 2006 15:41:02 GMT -5
I'm also no lover of the "war on terror" (about as effective as a "war on nightmares" would be). I don't think a national service program would necessarily mean some kind of brainwashing though. There are plenty of little eighteen-year-old brats out there who could really use a little humility and a year or two working for others instead of just their own advancement.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 20, 2006 16:50:16 GMT -5
I'm also no lover of the "war on terror" (about as effective as a "war on nightmares" would be). I don't think a national service program would necessarily mean some kind of brainwashing though. There are plenty of little eighteen-year-old brats out there who could really use a little humility and a year or two working for others instead of just their own advancement. Yes, but that is not the government's job to teach 18 year old brats, morality and values. What values would they teach...one world values I assume. I think it is a violation of the constution to force someone to "learn" humility. www.crossroad.to/articles2/2003/draft.htm
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 20, 2006 16:58:32 GMT -5
Well, that may be true in the most literal sense. It's probably legal to demand some kind of national service though, and I don't think spending a year teaching in an inner-city neighborhood or building houses for HUD or something is going to corrupt anyone's soul
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 20, 2006 17:14:54 GMT -5
I don't think that teaching morality and/or values is really the issue. I just think that everyone should have to participate in the protection that we enjoy from our military. I don't think anyone would be brainwashed either.....I joined voluntarily and I wasn't brainwashed, just needed a job and wanted to travel
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 20, 2006 18:33:49 GMT -5
I don't think that teaching morality and/or values is really the issue. I just think that everyone should have to participate in the protection that we enjoy from our military. I don't think anyone would be brainwashed either.....I joined voluntarily and I wasn't brainwashed, just needed a job and wanted to travel You believe there is a war on terror?
|
|
luvofchrist
Full Member
"Gibson" the wonder pup
Posts: 233
|
Post by luvofchrist on Nov 20, 2006 19:05:11 GMT -5
I spent seven years in a country (Hungary) where there was mandatory military service for most of that time. Hungary has since changed it's laws but here is what I see the pros and cons of any kind of cumpulsory service are:
1) You have a number of soldiers who really don't want to be there and may not "give a rip" about the conflict their country engages in. Thus they may not, for lack of better term, put their all into the battle. That endangers lives.
2) Compulsory service means you may have the majority of your populace who knows how to defend the country should the need arise. While this is important in tiny countries surrounded by hostile enemies, like Israel, it isn't really necessary here.
3) The strength of our military lies in the fact that we have an all volunteer armed forces. This means that those who have signed up know the risks and want to be in the military. The results of non-volunteer troops is reflected in point #1.
Generally, I'm against a draft.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 20, 2006 20:17:19 GMT -5
Pacp---yeah, I believe that there is a program with that title, but I'm not sure to what end it serves. Remember our "war on drugs" I think we are still fighting that one. As far as terrorism, I'm not sure why there needs to be a special slogan or title for fighting terrorism. Shouldn't we always be doing that? This is just a personal opinion based on my limited knowledge, but it seems that the current administration has tried very hard to blur the lines between the war on terror and the war in Iraq. Based on what we saw in the recent elections, folks aren't buying it anymore.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 20, 2006 21:54:50 GMT -5
I joined the military when I was 17 years old and very idealistic and ended up in an armored, forwardly deployed battalion. I have been deployed to the middle east before.
Since then I've watched our troops being ordered to wear blue berets, I've watched our rights being taken away, one by one and I've watched the supreme court supplement our constitution with the laws of other countries. I'm watching now as they attempt to enact hate crime laws that would make me a criminal.
No....I don't believe there is a war on terror and I don't believe they have "defending" my rights and the rights of other Americans in mind when they tell us we must surrender yet another generation of young people to a draft, or as some may say "national service".
We are to be free for the pursuit of happiness as we see fit. What right does the government have in telling us how we should "feel". How does a biblical separatist fit into this?
I am very proud to be American....but we must also realize that our enemies are among us.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 20, 2006 22:18:41 GMT -5
I joined the military when I was 17 years old and very idealistic and ended up in an armored, forwardly deployed battalion. I have been deployed to the middle east before. Since then I've watched our troops being ordered to wear blue berets, I've watched our rights being taken away, one by one and I've watched the supreme court supplement our constitution with the laws of other countries. I'm watching now as they attempt to enact hate crime laws that would make me a criminal. No....I don't believe there is a war on terror and I don't believe they have "defending" my rights and the rights of other Americans in mind when they tell us we must surrender yet another generation of young people to a draft, or as some may say "national service". We are to be free for the pursuit of happiness as we see fit. What right does the government have in telling us how we should "feel". How does a biblical separatist fit into this? I am very proud to be American....but we must also realize that our enemies are among us. Are there some specific things that you can share. I have no idea what you are talking about at this point.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 20, 2006 22:21:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 20, 2006 22:34:21 GMT -5
Ok, got it now. Is this the UN turning into the NWO taking over the world type of stuff. I'm not trying to make a insulting generalization at all, just looked at that article and some others on that website and it seemed to fit the bill.
I personally don't subscribe to that line of thinking, but there seem to be many as of late who do.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Nov 20, 2006 22:40:13 GMT -5
This is really bad. I've been saying there would be draft for years.
Typically the draft would start with 20 year olds and then move on to 21 and so on. Thankfully I turn 22 in about a month which would put me just a little bit down the list. I think being married puts you as a runner up to opt out. Men, you better start getting older or find yourself a wife.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 20, 2006 22:44:21 GMT -5
Ok, got it now. Is this the UN turning into the NWO taking over the world type of stuff. I'm not trying to make a insulting generalization at all, just looked at that article and some others on that website and it seemed to fit the bill. I personally don't subscribe to that line of thinking, but there seem to be many as of late who do. If that's your view, I understand Tony and I respect that. But I don't understand why you don't see it. It's right there...you honnestly trust government in all this?
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Nov 20, 2006 22:47:48 GMT -5
today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-11-20T175623Z_01_N20280714_RTRUKOC_0_US-DRAFT.xml&src=rss&rpc=22It most likely isn't going to happen. Pro-draft legislation has been introduced in the last few years (I don't remember when) for the sole purpose that it would get smacked down, keeping the idea a thoroughly dead one, if I don't remember incorrectly. No worries, you guys. I don't think the military is going to introduce a draft anytime soon for any reason other than all-out World War 3, because a volunteer military is the best kind there is, and morale/quality kinda tend to plummet when we introduce conscripts who don't want to be there... I especially don't think the military would introduce a draft for the purpose of trying to make it more proportional to the numbers of whites, blacks, hispanics, etc. who are in the country like Rep. Rangel wants to.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 20, 2006 22:58:23 GMT -5
Couple of reasons, but here are a few of the frontrunners.
1) Americans of all shape and forms do NOT like the government getting too close. I see that some of the "signs of things to come" are out there, but there is a clear line that we (Christians, Muslims, atheists, everyone) don't like crossed. The wire tapping scandal was a good example.
2) Government competance. To pull of the things that we speculate, we first have to assume the government is competent enough to pull it off. Back to the wire tapping scandal. They couldn't even manage to keep that a secret.
3) The military won't turn on it's own. That is a important factor for any New World Order stuff to work and it just won't happen. I served in the Navy for 5 years and the sailors and marines that I knew would be happy to disobey orders if something like this started to happen.
4) The UN is becoming more insignificant, not more powerful. North Korea ignores them, Iran ignores them. They just don't have the power to get much of anything done.
5) Our government. See what happened when the people thought that the government was getting to big for it's britches? We totally took away the power that they held in Congress. I would dare say that unless the Democrats pick a total goofball, we probably won't be seeing another republican president. My point here isn't about partisan politics, its just to say that American people won't put up with a whole lot of nonsense.
Just my opinion here.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 21, 2006 0:32:15 GMT -5
Couple of reasons, but here are a few of the frontrunners. 1) Americans of all shape and forms do NOT like the government getting too close. I see that some of the "signs of things to come" are out there, but there is a clear line that we (Christians, Muslims, atheists, everyone) don't like crossed. The wire tapping scandal was a good example. 2) Government competance. To pull of the things that we speculate, we first have to assume the government is competent enough to pull it off. Back to the wire tapping scandal. They couldn't even manage to keep that a secret. 3) The military won't turn on it's own. That is a important factor for any New World Order stuff to work and it just won't happen. I served in the Navy for 5 years and the sailors and marines that I knew would be happy to disobey orders if something like this started to happen. 4) The UN is becoming more insignificant, not more powerful. North Korea ignores them, Iran ignores them. They just don't have the power to get much of anything done. 5) Our government. See what happened when the people thought that the government was getting to big for it's britches? We totally took away the power that they held in Congress. I would dare say that unless the Democrats pick a total goofball, we probably won't be seeing another republican president. My point here isn't about partisan politics, its just to say that American people won't put up with a whole lot of nonsense. Just my opinion here. Well that's interesting. I can't say I can explain everything. But what about the hate crime laws. They are being instituted world wide. Who's behind that? And now that the democrats are in power, they will surly be passed here. I've always felt that the right left paragram was phony. I mean...the republicans further a different aspect of things. But what is weird is that they (Democrats and republicans) share a lot of things in common. A lot of these one world policies are the same in both camps. Like immigration, NAFTA and so on. It's like there is really only one party. As for a "conspiracy" I am convinced that we are in spiritual battle. There is no doubt that true Bible believing Christianity will always be suppressed by the world. National service initative...lets wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 21, 2006 9:40:15 GMT -5
Oh sure, I agree that the Democrat and Republican parties have really blurred the lines in the last 20 years or so. The point really wasn't that one party is that much better than the other, just that the American people are more than willing to effect change when they see something they don't like.
I think it's important not to look at every international cooperative effort as another "chop of the ax". From a business persepective, NAFTA is fine. I deal with international companies and I can certainly say that I appreciate the lack of headaches involved in dealing with Mexico and Canada. Much less paperwork, fewer restrictions, etc.
Hate crimes legislation? Are we talking about what we have seen in Canada (Dan, could you correct me if I have thought of the wrong country here) where preaching against homosexuality can be considered a hate crime? I'm in wait and see mode on that one also. I don't think that it is neccesarily a international agenda as much as it is something gaining popularity here in our own country as we become more and more tolerant of everything.
We certainly agree on Bible believing Christianity being suppressed by the the world. Always has been and unfortuantley probably always will be. The world hates a message that tells us that we are lowly, underserving despicable sinners in need of a Savior.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 21, 2006 13:32:11 GMT -5
Why do the nations rage,
And the people plot [conspire] a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
And the rulers take counsel together,
Against the Lord and against His Anointed...."
"Blessed are all those who
put their trust in Him."
Psalm 2:1-2, 12
|
|