Originally posted by: ReiAyanami
4 MoRE WARS!! 4 MoRE WARS!!
ALL YOUR OIL ARE BELONG TO US!
if bush gets elected to a 2nd term, he can basically do anything he wants because he is no longer accountable as he wont be seeking re-election. quadruple tax cuts for the rich, corporate welfare for all
of course technically he never got elected to his first term...
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
What's wrong with the draft? I enlisted in '68, but we certainly had the draft. I have seen many young people today who would benefit greatly from the wisdom of drill sargents. I see no reason that young people could not be expected to serve their country for 2 years. Maybe they would appreciate it more if they had such a personal investment in it.
We have more than two million servicemen right now, including reserves, and 140,000 in Iraq, something like 20,000 in Afghanistan. Bush has already made for reallignments of troops from places such as Germany to come home so that there will be more troops in the rotation. People think the military is stretched so thin now because there have been rules put in place requiring that no unit be left deployed in a hostile zone for more than six months as a rule (extended in some cases as need dictates, up to a year). After a unit is rotated back, it is given preference over units that have not been recently deployed for at least six more months. Basically, this is to make sure all units are at a constant state of readiness and training and that no unit suffers from the various problems that arise from long term deployment. However, these rules would be modified long before a draft was instituted.Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
There will be a draft regardless of who is in charge. Kerry will institute a draft and so will Bush.
Originally posted by: Lovepig
But Hillary may crush in the 2008 election...
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
What's wrong with the draft? I enlisted in '68, but we certainly had the draft. I have seen many young people today who would benefit greatly from the wisdom of drill sargents. I see no reason that young people could not be expected to serve their country for 2 years. Maybe they would appreciate it more if they had such a personal investment in it.
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
What's wrong with the draft? I enlisted in '68, but we certainly had the draft. I have seen many young people today who would benefit greatly from the wisdom of drill sargents. I see no reason that young people could not be expected to serve their country for 2 years. Maybe they would appreciate it more if they had such a personal investment in it.
Do we really NEED more troops? Having a random draft for no good reason might seem like a good idea to beat a little respect into those damn kids (give me a break), but the army isn't some kind of life skills program. It exists to fight and win wars. Given everything I've learned about our modern military, thousands of draftees would not mesh very well with our idea of a highly trained, highly motivated fighting force.
Ancient Rome made all males serve a few years in the military, so there is precedent. However, as others have said, there is definitely something to be said for an all-volunteer military.Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
What's wrong with the draft? I enlisted in '68, but we certainly had the draft. I have seen many young people today who would benefit greatly from the wisdom of drill sargents. I see no reason that young people could not be expected to serve their country for 2 years. Maybe they would appreciate it more if they had such a personal investment in it.
Originally posted by: Lovepig
I wish I was wrong, but unless the rep's could get Colin Poweel to run against her .... she can beat anyone they can field. Or do you think Cheney is gonna beat her out with his (by then) 8 yeasr exp as VP)??
Ah, so you are Miss Cleo? My mistake.Originally posted by: Lovepig
Are you reading this!!?? I just said "Kerry has no chance"
Pay attention. At least be willing to scan the last few posts...
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Ancient Rome made all males serve a few years in the military, so there is precedent. However, as others have said, there is definitely something to be said for an all-volunteer military.
Amazing that you compare me to Alan Keyes simply because I referened the Roman Empire. We must be the only two people to have ever referenced the Roman Empire - maybe I'm Alan Keyes and not Riprorin after all... Wouldn't you be disappointed.Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Ancient Rome made all males serve a few years in the military, so there is precedent. However, as others have said, there is definitely something to be said for an all-volunteer military.
LOL -this reminds me of Alan Keyes drawing on Roman precedent for his newfound support of reparations for descendents of slaves.
