Draft/Armed Forces Question

Damn. Too many good arguments. I think the pro-War people are trying to say that we pacifits can be pacifists, but we have to join 'the cause' weather we like it or not. Which sucks becase this is supposed to be a democracy where everybody has some influence on decisions rather than the supreme rule of the majority whos uninformed, ignorant votes affect everyone. *chimes glass with fork* Collective Tyranny anyone? So, I guess if and when the draft is reinstated, off we go to Iraq to get ambushed, killed, and/or blown up. We don't have to or want to kill, but the Baath Party resistance fighters don't know that and probably wouldn't give a # if they did know. They only know one thing - kill American infidel. What an ironic end this will be to the 1st and only fifth of my life.

[Edited on 5/5/04 by xenophanes85]

Originally posted by mauskov
What are you, daft? I'm not saying you have to hold a blade to your throat for America, I'm saying that it wouldn't be such a bad idea for you to consider doing something selfless: That is, not for your own profit. It's fine and well that you've been working since you were twelve, or what have you. But joining the military doesn't mean getting yourself blown up or suddenly turning into a killing machine.

..so if i were to work for NASA, that would not be beneficial to other people? or if i were to work for lockheed, would that not benefit other people? why is it i have to put my life on the line for it to count?

if it's selfish of me not to want to risk my life, than so be it. i value my life more than george's little dream of no terrorism aka taking over the damn world. i'm sorry if that comes off selfish or spoiled.

like i said, if they ask me to help doing something which didn't risk me being killed by someone i dont even know, than i am more than willing to do that. but when they tell me that i'm going out to fight an enemy i've never seen that wants to kill me much more than i do him, then no, sorry.

Originally posted by xenophanes85
Damn. Too many good arguments. I think the pro-War people are trying to say that we pacifits can be pacifists, but we have to join 'the cause' weather we like it or not. Which sucks becase this is supposed to be a democracy where everybody has some influence on decisions rather than the supreme rule of the majority whos uninformed, ignorant votes affect everyone. Collective Tyranny perhaps? So, I guess if and when the draft is reinstated, off we go to Iraq to get ambushed, killed, and/or blown up. We don't have to or want to kill, but the Baath Party resistance fighters don't know that and probably wouldn't give a # if they did know. They only know one thing - kill American infidel. What an ironic end this will be to the 1st and only fifth of my life.

[Edited on 5/5/04 by xenophanes85]

this post is much more fun when it's not people just making fun of each other, and people making actual good points.

Originally posted by dz

..so if i were to work for NASA, that would not be beneficial to other people? or if i were to work for lockheed, would that not benefit other people? why is it i have to put my life on the line for it to count?

You're missing the point entirely.
Hell, I'm looking at a career with either/or the aforementioned companies. I'm not saying you have to put your life on the line, something you keep implying I've said: Frankly, I haven't.

Rather - and let me spell this out to you -
There is a lot to the military or to the government or what have you, more than killing. You don't seem to quite grasp it; are you wholly unable to wrap your mind around the fact that - gasp - the military might not be the bloodthirsty babykilling backwards archaic monstrosity which you seem so consistently to project?

if it's selfish of me not to want to risk my life, than so be it. i value my life more than george's little dream of no terrorism aka taking over the damn world. i'm sorry if that comes off selfish or spoiled.

Again, I haven't said that you need to risk your life - hell, at this point, I'd fear to see someone like you put in a situation of potential bravery or...gasp...selflessness. You seem to consistently miss the point: Fact is, you don't have to risk your life to serve the people.

but when they tell me that i'm going out to fight an enemy i've never seen that wants to kill me much more than i do him, then no, sorry.

So let me get this straight:
It's acceptable - even laudable - for you to contemplate a career with Lockheed, one of the largest civil defense and offense contractors, and one fo the military's great purveyors of weaponry. Oh, so designing circuitry to blow a place back to the stoneage is so obviously morally superior to ripping someone apart with a thirty calibre bullet. Right.

Originally posted by mauskov
So let me get this straight:
It's acceptable - even laudable - for you to contemplate a career with Lockheed, one of the largest civil defense and offense contractors, and one fo the military's great purveyors of weaponry. Oh, so designing circuitry to blow a place back to the stoneage is so obviously morally superior to ripping someone apart with a thirty calibre bullet. Right.

She has a point there dz. But mauskov, IF (and this is a big if) all the "fighting-men" are killed off, who's next in line to fight? That's right. The guys not on the front line but still in the vicinity of the Theater (of War) - the guys indirectly involved in the War. Guys (and girls) like dz (and me and Kay).

[Edited on 5/5/04 by xenophanes85]

cute how you conveniently forgot to quote a piece of what i said. let me help you:

like i said, if they ask me to help doing something which didn't risk me being killed by someone i dont even know, than i am more than willing to do that. but when they tell me that i'm going out to fight an enemy i've never seen that wants to kill me much more than i do him, then no, sorry.

let me show you the part you conveniently forgot.

like i said, if they ask me to help doing something which didn't risk me being killed by someone i dont even know, than i am more than willing to do that.

Originally posted by mauskov
So let me get this straight:
It's acceptable - even laudable - for you to contemplate a career with Lockheed, one of the largest civil defense and offense contractors, and one fo the military's great purveyors of weaponry. Oh, so designing circuitry to blow a place back to the stoneage is so obviously morally superior to ripping someone apart with a thirty calibre bullet. Right.

please, any job that you get if you trace it back can lead to someone dieing. if i work for nasa, i will be helping put up satellites that can be used to kill people. if i work for lockheed, i will be helping make weapons that kill people. if i work for mcdonalds, i will be helping to make food that will make people fat and eventually kill them. it just so happens that the fields i want, are in those companies.

like i've said before which you keep forgetting to grasp: if they ask me to help with something which didn't involve me dieing, than that is fine. if it involves me dieing, than it's not. i agree with your notion that you fear someone like me being put out on the battlefield. i do too. why would you want someone that doesn't believe in a cause fighting for it? it doesn't make sense, and neither does the draft.

Originally posted by xenophanes85
She has a point there dz. But mauskov, IF (and this is a big if) all the "fighting-men" are killed off, who's next in line to fight? That's right. The guys not on the front line but still in the vicinity of the Theater (of War) - the guys indirectly involved in the War. Guys (and girls) like dz (and me and Kay).

[Edited on 5/5/04 by xenophanes85]

yes i agree with that point. that is something that can't be dealt with though. i can't control how the company i work for does their business. all i can do is work for another company, and frankly that's not really an option.

Originally posted by dz
cute how you conveniently forgot to quote a piece of what i said. let me help you:

Or maybe that part of your statement was so wholly vestigial that I chose to ignore it. That could be the case, as well...

please, any job that you get if you trace it back can lead to someone dieing. if i work for nasa, i will be helping put up satellites that can be used to kill people. if i work for lockheed, i will be helping make weapons that kill people. if i work for mcdonalds, i will be helping to make food that will make people fat and eventually kill them. it just so happens that the fields i want, are in those companies.

Don't try to pin your bumper-sticker, pachouli-soaked morals to what I've said. Fact is, these companies which you've named are those which are quite happily contracted to build weapons for the United States military. You'd write code to bomb the tar out of these places, but wouldn't pick up a gun to defend yourself.
Oh, the duality of man!

like i've said before which you keep forgetting to grasp:

It only works the first time it's used. Sorry, kiddo, I had dibs.

if they ask me to help with something which didn't involve me dieing, than that is fine. if it involves me dieing, than it's not. i agree with your notion that you fear someone like me being put out on the battlefield. i do too. why would you want someone that doesn't believe in a cause fighting for it? it doesn't make sense, and neither does the draft.

It has nothing - and at the same time, everything - to do with the draft. The fact that people like yourself exist are a perfectly example of precisely why there never will be another draft, at least not in the sense that there was in Vietnam: If someone doesn't want to fight, it's abhorrent to put them out in the field with an M16. That is, you'd be put to work elsewhere.

You know what, Dz...just nevermind. Don't even reply to these guys anymore because they just DO not get it.

It's completely beyond me why some people think it's ok to plot and plan other peoples lives, and Goddess help them if they dare to object.

But this is getting nowhere.

Both sides have good arguments, and both could stand side by side if we had reliable and trustworthy leaders.

We would rely on our trustworthy leaders to decide which wars are necessary in defense of the State.

The average hard working guy would only have to goto war if was absolutly necessary, the decision would be that of the State's. And if you were called, you would go and do what you were assigned, or be shot for cowardice.

Now, consider my method of chosing and keeping leaders:

Leaders would be put into positions by merit, and would be killed if they perform badly. This would discourage momma's boys and help to weed out the weaklings and morons.

This way, we would rarely goto war, but if our leaders decide war is necessary, than off we go. There just needs to be some fear when someone is in charge. These days a politician can cheat millions of dollars out of the government or people and get away with a small penalty or none at all.
Our leaders are not scared of paying for their crimes because they are on top. We just need to spill a little blood to send a chill up their spine.

If they mess up, they die! I love it!

So if the hand plays right, you stop violence WITH violence (killing the leader)? Oh thats right, it already happens - it's called the Philosophy of the US Military.