Why Haven't You Enlisted?

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by billybob

'freedom' and 'duty' don't mix in a rational mind.
'duty' is mental slavery.

I pity you. Freedom and duty were indissolubly mixed in the rational minds of those who sacrificed to that you could spew sewage.

we all spew sewage. where do you think it comes from?
to the toilet, all a-holes are equal.

I wont enlist to fight in Iraq because Iraq had nothing to do with New York. Would I enlist if another nation attacked the US? In a heartbeat if they would let me (I am older now). My only reservation or holdback would be my family, I am the sole provider and that would weigh heavily on me.

Originally posted by skippytjc
I wont enlist to fight in Iraq because Iraq had nothing to do with New York. Would I enlist if another nation attacked the US? In a heartbeat if they would let me (I am older now). My only reservation or holdback would be my family, I am the sole provider and that would weigh heavily on me.

Would you enlist to fight iraq because they ignored 12 years of U.N. resolutions? that's the real reason we went to war, because eveyrone and their brother believed Iraq had WMD's, especially since they ignored the U.N. for so long. If you recall, Bush gave Sadam 1 last chance to cooperate. he didn't, so we went to war. Someone had to do something, because the U.N. wasn't backing up their own rules. Granted, there have been a lot of things stirred into the mix since then...claims of terrorist, and being forced to stay there to help rebuild. But we originally went to bat for the entire world because Sadam wasn't following the rules, and wasn't being punished for it.

Originally posted by Jaruseleh
Would you enlist to fight iraq because they ignored 12 years of U.N. resolutions? that's the real reason we went to war, because eveyrone and their brother believed Iraq had WMD's, especially since they ignored the U.N. for so long.

No, we went to war with Iraq because our "leaders" supported false intelligence, and ignored anything that didn't support their preconceptions. Many did not believe Iraq had WMD, such as Colin Powell, who finally caved in under the pressure of the war hawks. Apparently, almost all of the weapons were indeed destroyed, since we still have yet to find anything substantial. This being the case, Saddam was not in violation. It's tough to prove you don't have something, especially when that's never an acceptable answer to those asking the questions.

Jaruseleh,

The original poster likened this to what happened after Pearl Harbor. I do not agree with that analogy. Although I consider the 9/11 attacks to be just as significant in some ways, the enemy is not as clear and defined. And I don�t agree with our President on the "solution" to it. So my heart isn�t in the same place regarding our current situation as it would have been in a Pearl Harbor situation where things were much more defined and obvious.

And no, this isn�t a just war regardless of Saddam trying to avoid sanctions. ALL CURRENT analysis shows that the sanctions worked, even commissions by the president himself state that. So your logic is flawed.

If you want to enlist to fight for a people who don�t want you to fight for them, you go ahead. And please note there was not one single Iraqi, or agent of Iraq involved in any of the 9/11 attacks.

So Jaruseleh, if you want to criticize somebody�s position regarding a reply to a post, please keep your criticism based on the topic. And in this case comparing today�s enlistment mindset vs. the mindset after Pearl Harbor
.

my post IS on topic. And I stand by what I said. When we went to Iraq initally, it wasn't because of terrorism (completely) it's because Sadamn wasn't cooperating, and hadn't been cooperating for 12 years, and the U.N. wasn't doing anything about it. We didn't "support" false intelligence, we didn't KNOW it was false. Everyone is so hung up on 9/11 as being the reason for the Iraq war, when that just simply is not true. Everyone forgets that even the democrats were supporting military action against Iraq. Democrats and Republicans alike thought Iraq had WMD's, and that Sadam needed to be removed from power.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. When your head of CIA, along with intelligence from other nations tells you that Iraq has WMD's, you listen. That's what those people are there for. Even John Kerry himself was quoted as saying that Sadam Houssein was a direct threat to the USA. It wasn't until after we found out that the intelligence was wrong that everyone started changing their opinion, and adding into the mix the terrorism threat and what-not. I don't know about you, but when my government, democrats and republicans alike say that we're in immediate danger, I want that stuff taken care of, which gets back to the original topic: "Why didn't you enlist?" What I'm seeing in this thread is that people would not enlist to protect their country in the face of immediate danger. Hindsight is 20/20, and we can look back now and criticize it all we want, but the fact is, this war was started because everyone believed they had WMD's and they were an imminent threat to the USA. THAT is worth going to war for. There's a huge difference between supporting false intelligence, and NOT KNOWING it was false.

I think this thread still has pertinence, given that the jobs in Afghanistan and Iraq and indeed, anywhere else in the world that terrorism must be confronted, has not yet been completed. We now have some new members who might want to share the reasons why they have not enlisted in the war against terror.

I have one reason, I failed the test to get in and had to join the merchant navy. Wish I had passed and was really quite down abotu not passing the test when I did fail it.

Originally posted by devilwasp
I have one reason, I failed the test to get in and had to join the merchant navy. Wish I had passed and was really quite down abotu not passing the test when I did fail it.

DW, you can retake the test.

When I applied for the Navy, I believe, in individual circumstances, that you could get an immediate retest. Failing that, you could re-apply in another 12 months.

Personally, I aced the est, so I don't know the in's and out's, but you shouldn't resign yourself to the Merchants on the basis of one failed test.

Originally posted by devilwasp
I failed the test to get in and had to join the merchant navy.

I think the merchant marine, as we call it in the US, is an honorable service. WWII merchant marines are considered veterans of that war and receive all veterans' benefits. Of course, things are different now, but one does what one can.

[edit on 2005/12/18 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
We now have some new members who might want to share the reasons why they have not enlisted....

Leaving for Lackland AFB April 18th (hopefully I will get another date and not have to wait that long)

[edit on 18-12-2005 by andpau66]

Good for you. The Air Force has some of the best duty of all the services and really looks after its troops.

Originally posted by stumason
DW, you can retake the test.

I know, but when I took it I was leaving school and they only take ones who are still learning.
Well atleast for the one I went for, I plan on finishing the officer cadetship here then going in after it.

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by stumason
DW, you can retake the test.

I know, but when I took it I was leaving school and they only take ones who are still learning.
Well atleast for the one I went for, I plan on finishing the officer cadetship here then going in after it.

What did you go for? The Navy will take anyone up to the age of 55. even if you want to be an apprentice, they will take you up to 22 or something and I knwo your not that old DW, not like myself at a creaky 23....

Originally posted by stumason
What did you go for? The Navy will take anyone up to the age of 55. even if you want to be an apprentice, they will take you up to 22 or something and I knwo your not that old DW, not like myself at a creaky 23....

Artificer, doesnt exist anymore.
Creaky 23? Come on man, your not that old!
I know they will take anyone up to 55 but its the specifc job, I want to work with the very best and be the very best.

I am past the age of enlistment but i tried to get a job with a local co. to do security work in Iraq. For some reason I wasnt accepted despite my special forces training. I am a Vietnam vet(I volunteered instead of getting drafted) and I was willing to serve my country then and still am despite the fact that I dont agree with the current administrations policies. And my dad served in the army as well in Hawaii honorably. We both still have all our appendages as well as our faculties.
Go figger.

[edit on 18/12/05 by longhaircowboy]

We all have to stand down eventually. I know that there are those who serve who are my age, but the way it works is that those individuals have continuous service, I do not. I may not get overseas, but I may be able to serve in some capacity using my educating. Time will tell. We veterans have done our part, I think.


[edit on 2005/12/18 by GradyPhilpott]

I have tried to join the Marines. My heart and mind say yes, but my knee says no. That same damned knee cost me a full football scholarship as well.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
I have tried to join the Marines. My heart and mind say yes, but my knee says no. That same damned knee cost me a full football scholarship as well.

Why not try out for a military contractor role?
Or a reservist, I know the secretary at rosyth naval base has a back problem which is genetice but still serves, mabye the corp or the navy can do something?

Warning: The following post contains views and opinions that might be used against the poster under the USA Patriot Act.

"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy" - Henry Kissinger

To fight and die for one's country is honorable and noble. However, to fight for your Lord's and master's profits and bottomline is stupid and idiotic. Let's be honest here. I live in NYC and in some strange way, that day woke me up and I have been following these events ever since. Now to my main point.

9/11 has NOTHING to do with the current War on Terror. All actions in Iraq are illegal. No one can connect 9/11 to Iraq which is why the name Osama Bin Laden has gone AWOL not unlike Bush/Cheney and the other Republikrats when it came to military service.

America is fighting wars of imperial dominance. While the reasons for this are varied as they are hard to swallow, it is the truth. 9/11, and the events afterward (Patriot Act, Afghanistan, Iraq, domestic turmoil) are indications of an inside job. Just ask yourself this question.

We can take down multiple countries, fight wars on multiple fronts, have the biggest and most expensive military in history and several times more funding than the next leading nation but we cannot find the posterboy, the most wanted man in the world (apparently), Osama Bin Laden?

Our electronic surveillance can track and trace almost anyone and everyone in the world but we cannot locate an abnormally tall and physically disabled Arab?

Maybe we should check during Carlyle Group meetings to see if Mr. Bin Laden is present?

Or maybe we shouldn't have let the Bin Laden family "escape" from this country days after the attacks on 9/11? No American could fly in the skies but the closest relatives and family members of Osama Bin Laden were not only let go but also given private charter flights back to Saudi Arabia. I wonder what the in-flight movie was? Pearl Harbour?

Speaking of Saudi Arabia, weren't the majority of the terrorists "Saudis"? Shouldn't we have invaded that pathetic theocratic monarchy if we truely wanted revenge? Oh thats right, the Saudi's supply us with lots and lots of oil.

If you want to fight in imperialistic wars so your emperor can have his way then sign up today. You can fight alongside the armed forces which are overrun by poor minorities, illegal aliens, and the bottom of the social barrel. Most of the military recruitment these days is woefully underqualified but bodies are bodies as the old saying goes.

Because who else is going to fight? The rich?

Bush? AWOL. Cheney? Deferrment after deferrment after deferrment. The only time Rumsfeld has been in Iraq was to greet and discuss matters with Saddam Hussein, a cleverly engineered American/CIA assest used to keep that large portion of Earth under despostic control.

Don't worry all you wannabe Rambo's and assassins. If you don't make it to the nuclear desert in time, you will have your chance to fight but it will likely be on American soil against enemies born and raised in America. In the end, those who support terrorists will lose. But do you know for sure which side you stand on because the rug has been pulled out from under you in 9.2 seconds, the same amount of time it took the WTC to collapse under controlled demolition.

9/11 was the pretext. Figure out 9/11. Then you will see why everything after 9/11 has come to pass. So when the next 9/11 comes and IT WILL because the war drums for Iran and Syria are beating heavy already, you will understand the game your masters play with your lives.

9/11 is the key. 9/11 is the answer to everything. When the world brings to justice the REAL masterminds of the largest mass murder in American history then and only then will the War on Terror end.

But that will never happen because Osama Bin Laden and the boogeyman are impossible to capture therefore the PNAC doctorine lives.

Oh and democrats are even worse and have become the scapegoat party ala the communists and liberals in Germany. All are accountable. All are guilty.