Rangel says reinstate the Draft before Syrian war

Someone mentioned on another thread, I think, that getting involved in wars has not just historically been a Republican thing.

Chrissy wrote:Id like to know how knot thinks that the lawmakers would make different choices if there was a draft?

its well established that the left considers the right as warmongers.

its well established that the majority of military is republican. Its a little less republican than it was a few years ago as now many have moved to be independent. But never the less the % of people in the military that call themselves dems is and has been very low. about 14%.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/25/military-no-less-conservative-less-republican-surv/

^^^ some info to support my claim

so if a draft occurred, more dems would be in the military one could assume. Now how would that effect decisions made by law makers since the left considers themselves doves?

Im against a draft.

***********************************************

Not surprised at all that you would oppose the draft. Your comments regarding how our foreign policy would change if the all volunteer force abandoned I refer you simply to the military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, led by the Republicans. I'm not going to get into a left/right back and forth because both parties have recklessly led our country down the primrose lane by both. In the 60's it was JFK in Nam perpetuated by LBJ both Dems. and the Nam war was stopped more than anything else by political uprising here at home. Demographically our military was far more diverse then because of the draft but sure enough we fell off the slippery slope and lost over 55,000 men in one of the most ridiculous undertakings in our history. Americans have learned lessons from that experience but regrettably we forget over time the stupidity and irrational argument of the Domino effect, it was complete nonsense. I still believe we need to required every able bodied young person to serve a minimum of two years in the military or other national service programs. When kids from privileged families butts are on the line alongside kids from Appalachia and MS, we will not be so eager to exert our military might to solve the problems in Banana Republics, the Balkans, or the ME. It would eventually have a meaningful effect on foreign policy regardless of political stripes.

And to Neko, I am not being disrespectful to our military but I am telling and saying what I think needs to be said from my heart.

knothead wrote:

Chrissy wrote:Id like to know how knot thinks that the lawmakers would make different choices if there was a draft?

its well established that the left considers the right as warmongers.

its well established that the majority of military is republican. Its a little less republican than it was a few years ago as now many have moved to be independent. But never the less the % of people in the military that call themselves dems is and has been very low. about 14%.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/25/military-no-less-conservative-less-republican-surv/

^^^ some info to support my claim

so if a draft occurred, more dems would be in the military one could assume. Now how would that effect decisions made by law makers since the left considers themselves doves?

Im against a draft.

***********************************************

Not surprised at all that you would oppose the draft.  Your comments regarding how our foreign policy would change if the all volunteer force abandoned I refer you simply to the military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, led by the Republicans.  I'm not going to get into a left/right back and forth because both parties have recklessly led our country down the primrose lane by both.  In the 60's it was JFK in Nam perpetuated by LBJ both Dems. and the Nam war was stopped more than anything else by political uprising here at home.  Demographically our military was far more diverse then because of the draft but sure enough we fell off the slippery slope and lost over 55,000 men in one of the most ridiculous undertakings in our history.  Americans have learned lessons from that experience but regrettably we forget over time the stupidity and irrational argument of the Domino effect, it was complete nonsense.  I still believe we need to required every able bodied young person to serve a minimum of two years in the military or other national service programs.  When kids from privileged families butts are on the line alongside kids from Appalachia and MS, we will not be so eager to exert our military might to solve the problems in Banana Republics, the Balkans, or the ME.  It would eventually have a meaningful effect on foreign policy regardless of political stripes.

And to Neko, I am not being disrespectful to our military but I am telling and saying what I think needs to be said from my heart.  

why are you not surprised I don't support a draft?

What makes you think that wealthy kids do not serve in the military. Some do.

You think that forcing military onto our children is a good idea all of a sudden why? because the left is for it now....

There are plenty of people of all incomes and diversities that volunteer to serve. There is no reason to change that.

If you really want to mess the country up, go ahead, instill a mandatory military service on this generations children. you wanna talk about some messed up stuff that will happen, whew it will be ugly.

Im starting to feel like im talking to a group of communist on this forum with some of you.  

knothead wrote:

Chrissy wrote:Id like to know how knot thinks that the lawmakers would make different choices if there was a draft?

its well established that the left considers the right as warmongers.

its well established that the majority of military is republican. Its a little less republican than it was a few years ago as now many have moved to be independent. But never the less the % of people in the military that call themselves dems is and has been very low. about 14%.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/25/military-no-less-conservative-less-republican-surv/

^^^ some info to support my claim

so if a draft occurred, more dems would be in the military one could assume. Now how would that effect decisions made by law makers since the left considers themselves doves?

Im against a draft.

***********************************************

Not surprised at all that you would oppose the draft.  Your comments regarding how our foreign policy would change if the all volunteer force abandoned I refer you simply to the military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, led by the Republicans.  I'm not going to get into a left/right back and forth because both parties have recklessly led our country down the primrose lane by both.  In the 60's it was JFK in Nam perpetuated by LBJ both Dems. and the Nam war was stopped more than anything else by political uprising here at home.  Demographically our military was far more diverse then because of the draft but sure enough we fell off the slippery slope and lost over 55,000 men in one of the most ridiculous undertakings in our history.  Americans have learned lessons from that experience but regrettably we forget over time the stupidity and irrational argument of the Domino effect, it was complete nonsense.  I still believe we need to required every able bodied young person to serve a minimum of two years in the military or other national service programs.  When kids from privileged families butts are on the line alongside kids from Appalachia and MS, we will not be so eager to exert our military might to solve the problems in Banana Republics, the Balkans, or the ME.  It would eventually have a meaningful effect on foreign policy regardless of political stripes.

And to Neko, I am not being disrespectful to our military but I am telling and saying what I think needs to be said from my heart.  

When you suggest that volunteering for a task (such as our military does) somehow makes it a less admirable act, I think it's being disrespectful. When someone volunteers to jump in a lake and save a drowning swimmer and is applauded for his action, we don't hear anyone say: "Well, it really isn't that great that he saved that person because he volunteered to do it."

When you say that there is only a "remote" chance that a military person today will be deployed to a war zone, you are not speaking in realistic terms and I have to assume that you have no clue about what serving in today's military means.

im starting to feel like im talking to a group of communist on this forum with some of you.

Again I am not surprised that you now assert you are conversing with a group of commies! Wow . . .

When you suggest that volunteering for a task (such as our military does) somehow makes it a less admirable act, I think it's being disrespectful.

However you arrived at that conclusion I do not know . . . . if I confused you I take responsibility. The military, as a career, is an honorable and noble vocation . . . . I am sometimes in awe at the dedication of some of these people . . . . Seal Team 6 is a great example. This thread is a discussion about the merits or lack thereof of a all volunteer force v the draft.

It would be in our nation's interest to spread out these obligations of defending our nation evenly across the demographics and that's it in a nutshell. It is not about right vs left and all that nonsense but hey neko you're conversing with a Commie according to Chrissy.

Knot, you said this:

It would be in our national interest to re-instate the draft and make it mandatory to serve the nation in the best capacity a person can provide.  Today we have, in essence, a system that is centered on career orientation and like every other program people learn how to exploit it.  It would dramatically change the political dynamic as elected people would think more carefully if they were sending their kid off to a war zone but as of now the overwhelming majority of our military elected to do so as a career choice, for its benefits and perks not available to others.  

And this:

No neko, I'm sorry . . . . it's not the horror as it is portrayed but of course there is a remote chance that a military person could get sent to a war zone. Being in that war zone in today's military is so removed from the Korean war, WWII, etc. but today it is a career choice or put another way a career path to learn a skill that is usable in the private sector.

I completely understand . . .

And this:

As has been pointed out in this thread there are far more dangerous careers . . . . not dangerous as in being shot at but remember this was their decision . . . . the all volunteer force, right? My comments are not meant to be disrespectful at all . . . . we need a strong military without question but it should be spread across the demographic and representative of all classes . . . . that alone would alter our bellicose vein of foreign policy.

**********

Which on the whole, sounds kind of like:  Sure, you might be sent to a war zone, but probably not.  And even if you are sent to a war zone,  you volunteered, right?   It's not like it's 1942.  You really have it good compared to back then.  And just look at those fishermen, now they really live in danger.  So you need to just shut up because you chose this as a career and you get good benefits and perks that others don't get.

That's how you came over sounding to me, Knot.  I don't think you do understand, not completely or otherwise.

That's how you came over sounding to me, Knot.

I do not hear the same thing. However, I have been told in so many words that I am not entitled to an opinion in regard to the Military being a vocational choice because I do not understand the special conditions of the military.

As long as knot or I are civilians living under our constitution, we are entitled to our opinions. Less than 2% of all Americans have ever had employment in the Military. I think what both Knot and I are suggesting is that reverence for the military, or limiting criticism of military priorities are not limited to the 2%, and in my opinion, the tail has been wagging the dog, and civilian management of the military has bent over backwards to give respect and privilege to those who have served, but often criticism of policy somehow gets bootstrapped into criticism of military personnel. I did not see Knot or I being critical or disrespectful of those who have served.

Of course you're entitled to your opinions no matter what nonsense you post about the military experience.

Not trying to beat a dead horse here but while I am grateful for our service men and women, your portrayal of their service is so lofty and above other citizens who chose NOT to do the military gig . . . it was their decision and we both know decisions have consequences, right? Lemme see, if I sign up for the Marine corp with a high school diploma I just might learn a skill I can use when I grow up, right? But there is a catch and you could get shot or have to shoot someone else if you become a grunt, understand? Yes sir! Sign right here son and welcome to the club! The indoctrination begins turning a immature kid into a man and doing a lot of growing up in a short period of time. This is a good thing for our youth . . . . every Israeli, except for the ones with the dread locks and beat their head into a wall, must serve . . . . . men and women and they have one of the world's fiercest militarys except for perhaps North Korea. So, this kid has volunteered, been advised of the risks and the benefits and he is now serving his nation, all a good thing.

Take the same kid with that HS diploma and he opts to apply for a position with an offshore drilling company as an example. The company explains this is hard and dangerous work kid are you sure you can be gone from home and work these long hours under these conditions? Yes sir! Sign right here and show up Monday morning . . . .wait, this really is a dangerous job are you sure? Yes sir!

Both of these examples are young Americans serving their country. One could be injured or killed on both career paths but both are in service to the country. The difference is when the oil rig explodes and kills dozens, it is of course a tragedy, but there will not be any parades or flag draped coffins and politicians exploiting the tragedy throwing the hero bit in for national unity . . . . . they are soon forgotten even though our nation depends on an industrial base to function and people die in that service . . . .same is true for a multitude of jobs . . . . the nation could not function without them no more than they could survive without a strong national defense. The flag draped coffins arriving at Andrews are a testament to these young men and women who gave their life for their country but why can't we concede the same for the hazardous duties that are performed here at home for those who keep our nation in oil, gas, coal, transportation, construction . . . .America is a tapestry and we should celebrate them all as heroes instead of reserving that lofty term for only the military?

Mr Ichi wrote:Knothead says.
It would be in our nation's interest to spread out these obligations of defending our nation evenly across the demographics and that's it in a nutshell. It is not about right vs left and all that nonsense

I have to agree.  When I went to basic training they were people from many different races and different sections of the Country.  In a matter of days we had to learn to get along and share duties and responsibility.  That was the biggest lesson I have ever had to learn.  For me it was a transformation into how others live and act.
Seaoats and many others of you did not serve in the Military.  I would be less than honest than to say I wish I could have joined you.  My point is that having served doesnt not make me or any of my fellow vets "special".  
The answer is in how we communicate to each  other.  I will never know the feeling of landing a multi million dollar business deal or making a 3 point jump shot that wins a game.  I think I do, but I dont.  It does not make me less of a man for not doing so.
98% of my Military career did not place me in harms way. I planned it that way. Many others were no so lucky.  But there was the same feeling of victory when we completed some small task that we thought was important to the Health of America.  Sounds very trite, but it is the truth.

We are all Americans, we have the good of our nation in our efforts and thoughts.  This we can agree on.  All is good.

Words of great wisdom HM and thank you for your service and your honesty. . . . good post!

knothead wrote:Not trying to beat a dead horse here but while I am grateful for our service men and women, your portrayal of their service is so lofty and above other citizens who chose NOT to do the military gig . . . it was their decision and we both know decisions have consequences, right? Lemme see, if I sign up for the Marine corp with a high school diploma I just might learn a skill I can use when I grow up, right? But there is a catch and you could get shot or have to shoot someone else if you become a grunt, understand? Yes sir!  Sign right here son and welcome to the club! The indoctrination begins turning a immature kid into a man and doing a lot of growing up in a short period of time. This is a good thing for our youth . . . . every Israeli, except for the ones with the dread locks and beat their head into a wall, must serve . . . . . men and women and they have one of the world's fiercest militarys except for perhaps North Korea.  So, this kid has volunteered, been advised of the risks and the benefits and he is now serving his nation, all a good thing.


Take the same kid with that HS diploma and he opts to apply for a position with an offshore drilling company as an example.  The company explains this is hard and dangerous work kid are you sure you can be gone from home and work these long hours under these conditions? Yes sir! Sign right here and show up Monday morning . . . .wait, this really is a dangerous job are you sure? Yes sir!

Both of these examples are young Americans serving their country.  One could be injured or killed on both career paths but both are in service to the country.  The difference is when the oil rig explodes and kills dozens, it is of course a tragedy, but there will not be any parades or flag draped coffins and politicians exploiting the tragedy throwing the hero bit in for national unity . . . . . they are soon forgotten even though our nation depends on an industrial base to function and people die in that service . . . .same is true for a multitude of jobs . . . . the nation could not function without them no more than they could survive without a strong national defense.  The flag draped coffins arriving at Andrews are a testament to these young men and women who gave their life for their country but why can't we concede the same for the hazardous duties that are performed here at home for those who keep our nation in oil, gas, coal, transportation, construction . . . .America is a tapestry and we should celebrate them all as heroes instead of reserving that lofty term for only the military?

I said early in this thread that military people shouldn't be revered just because they're in the military. Go back to the first page or so and you'll see where I posted that.   Lofty is your word, no mine.  What I have said is that the military cannot be compared to civilian occupations and that military members and their families face challenges that no civilian job requires.  That's it.  Not lofty, not revered, not worshiped.  Just respect for what they do without the but...but...buts......

If I was talking about what those firefighters out west do and how a bunch of them lost their lives doing their jobs I wouldn't say: BUT--this or that occupation has it more dangerous and those firefighters volunteered, and they chose a career path...blah, blah, blah.  Their families and the families of other firefighters would probably think I was being disrespectful and that I didn't have a clue....and they'd be right.

Due to its size and location and population and all the countries that hate it...I can very well see why Israel has mandatory service.

Nekochan wrote:Due to its size and location and population and all the countries that hate it...I can very well see why Israel has mandatory service.

Which proves my point that required national service (draft) could be executed as a better alternative to an all volunteer force.

knothead wrote:im starting to feel like im talking to a group of communist on this forum with some of you.

Again I am not surprised that you now assert you are conversing with a group of commies! Wow . . .

Im not surprised either about your views.

For you and the likes of you doing the right thing needs to be commanded by a gov entity.

You don't have faith in people, you have faith in GOV

If you see things that don't mesh with your utopian ideals your first answer is GOV needs to do something to fix it.

Just like this thread about a draft. Youre all for a draft because you think that when the GOV demands everyone to serve it will make things better between views.

I on the other hand do not think the GOV needs to tell people what to do. I also think that not everybody is cut out to be in the military.

Anyone who wants a draft is an asshole as far as I am concerned.

Anyone who wants a draft is an asshole as far as I am concerned.


Well, most people have one..........that is an opinion.

knothead wrote:

Nekochan wrote:Due to its size and location and population and all the countries that hate it...I can very well see why Israel has mandatory service.

Which proves my point that required national service (draft) could be executed as a better alternative to an all volunteer force.

I don't think it proves your point. Israel is a much, much smaller nation than the US with a population of what--under 10 million? I don't think it's a good comparison at all to the US. They probably have to have mandatory service just to have a large enough military to defend themselves.

Chrissy wrote:Anyone who wants a draft is an asshole as far as I am concerned.

I would agree that anyone who wants a draft like all the ones we've had before is just that.

But if we can remove all the deferments and exceptions,  and make it a felony for ANYONE who tries to avoid it,  and apply that to every able-bodied man or woman regardless if he/she is the son/daughter of presidents,  congressman,  state politicians and local politicians and the CEO's and the wealthiest amongst us,  I would be in favor of doing this...

Whenever any military action against another nation is proposed,  a national draft lottery will immediately be activated.  And EVERY able-bodied individual of draft age will be eligible.  And "able-bodied" will be defined as anyone who does not have an illness or disability which makes military service impossible.  And those with cysts on their butts like Rush Limbaugh and those with "flat feet" will still be eligible.  

I have every confidence that there will be far fewer vietnams and iraqs after that proposal is implemented.  Which of course is the whole point.

Bob is not quoting people correctly......bad form.

Chrissy wrote:Bob is not quoting people correctly......bad form.

Sorry, I have now edited my post and attributed that quote to the correct poster.

Bob wrote:

Chrissy wrote:Anyone who wants a draft is an asshole as far as I am concerned.

I would agree that anyone who wants a draft like all the ones we've had before is just that.

But if we can remove all the deferments and exceptions,  and make it a felony for ANYONE who tries to avoid it,  and apply that to every able-bodied man or woman regardless if he/she is the son/daughter of presidents,  congressman,  state politicians and local politicians and the CEO's and the wealthiest amongst us,  I would be in favor of doing this...

Whenever any military action against another nation is proposed,  a national draft lottery will immediately be activated.  And EVERY able-bodied individual of draft age will be eligible.  And "able-bodied" will be defined as anyone who does not have an illness or disability which makes military service impossible.  And those with cysts on their butts like Rush Limbaugh and those with "flat feet" will still be eligible.  

I have every confidence that there will be far fewer vietnams and iraqs after that proposal is implemented.  Which of course is the whole point.

why do we need a draft? do we not have enough volunteers?

knot not only is in favor of a draft, knot is in favor of a national mandatory service.

now, bob... don't I recall that you avoided the draft? but yet you are in favor of one as long as they are no simple exclusions so certain republicans would get sent off.

im starting to see the patern here of why yall want a draft. you think that the wealthy assed republicans need to be hauled off into military service...

even though it is already a fact that more republicans are in the military now lol but that's not good enough, no no , you guys want to punish the wealthy again, and this time its by making them go to war. because after all its the wealthy peoples fault we fight wars anyway, right?

am I close????  

Oh shit, I agree with Chrissy. No draft. Only reason we should ever require anyone to serve is if our shore's are being invaded.