And they wouldn't have continued committing atrocities if we just decided to not join the war? They would've had a change of heart and decided that they loved jews and would've let the millions of the death camps, right? We freed millions of people, and freed many countries from Germany...
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,081
- 136
Dont often post in P&N so I'll just say my piece simply.
I am a volunteer, no judge forced me into service. Was in Kosovo and the mid east.
I can honestly say the idea of taking someone who does not want to fight and making them fight is wrong. Both morally and practically. You dont get good results and it abuses the freedom I fought to protect.
Granted, I believe the only freedom I protected was the right to cheap gasoline but thats one of the reasons I got out. (Honorable by the way.)
WWI and WWII were not major issues because people wanted to join up and fight.
Incidentally, my pappy joined the Navy during Vietnam, (so he wouldnt get drafted into the army) and he shares the same viewpoint. Making people fight when they dont want to is a bad idea and not very effective anyway.
Which is probably why Bush Sr and Bush Jr want so badly to glorify our activities in the middle east. They need to make people enthusiastic about it because they know darn well they couldnt get a draft going.
In case anybody missed it, I am one of the handful of Vets who is NOT a staunch republican. I dont care for politicians (of ANY party) abusing the rights and power I joined to protect.
I am a volunteer, no judge forced me into service. Was in Kosovo and the mid east.
I can honestly say the idea of taking someone who does not want to fight and making them fight is wrong. Both morally and practically. You dont get good results and it abuses the freedom I fought to protect.
Granted, I believe the only freedom I protected was the right to cheap gasoline but thats one of the reasons I got out. (Honorable by the way.)
WWI and WWII were not major issues because people wanted to join up and fight.
Incidentally, my pappy joined the Navy during Vietnam, (so he wouldnt get drafted into the army) and he shares the same viewpoint. Making people fight when they dont want to is a bad idea and not very effective anyway.
Which is probably why Bush Sr and Bush Jr want so badly to glorify our activities in the middle east. They need to make people enthusiastic about it because they know darn well they couldnt get a draft going.
In case anybody missed it, I am one of the handful of Vets who is NOT a staunch republican. I dont care for politicians (of ANY party) abusing the rights and power I joined to protect.
You're absolutely right, people who want to be there fight much better than people forced to be there. That's one big reason I doubt we'll ever see a draft for Iraq, Afghanistan, or ANY war not with China or Russia. The last thing any politician wants to do is implement a draft.
To quote sources already posted:
"Before the lottery was implemented, local Draft Boards determined who would serve. This system was criticized for inequities, and resulted in uncertainty for the potential draftees during the entire time they were within the draft-eligible age group."
Basically the local draft boards had discretionary power to exclude influential people's kids from being drafted. They also allowed people in college to avoid the draft, which obviously favored the wealthy, as poor people rarely have the opportunity to attend college. In many states the state militia became a rich kids club for draft dodging. For case studies in how to draft dodge for the wealthy, see George Bush and Clinton. The corruption of the draft was primarily at state and local levels rather than national (though it was nationwide). Laxity of federal laws allowed the corruption to occur.
"Before the lottery was implemented, local Draft Boards determined who would serve. This system was criticized for inequities, and resulted in uncertainty for the potential draftees during the entire time they were within the draft-eligible age group."
Basically the local draft boards had discretionary power to exclude influential people's kids from being drafted. They also allowed people in college to avoid the draft, which obviously favored the wealthy, as poor people rarely have the opportunity to attend college. In many states the state militia became a rich kids club for draft dodging. For case studies in how to draft dodge for the wealthy, see George Bush and Clinton. The corruption of the draft was primarily at state and local levels rather than national (though it was nationwide). Laxity of federal laws allowed the corruption to occur.
Technically it was a random draw. It just ended up screwing over those toward the end of the year. Draft rules have changed a lot since then and you can look up the exact procedure online.
http://www.sss.gov/fslottery.htm
You can also reference the changes made since Vietnam( http://www.sss.gov/viet.htm ), along with stats on the draft then on the site (http://www.sss.gov/lotter1.htm )
http://www.sss.gov/fslottery.htm
You can also reference the changes made since Vietnam( http://www.sss.gov/viet.htm ), along with stats on the draft then on the site (http://www.sss.gov/lotter1.htm )
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
And the alternative to going to Vietnam was...?
Why isn't kidnapping and enslaving people and then forcing them to put themselves in great bodily harm murder? Just what exactly was the alternative (without the benefit of hindsight) for someone who was drafted back then?
There were alternatives--seek shelter in Canada, try to convince the military that you are homosexual, or just become a conscientious objector and languish in a prison. Regardless, it's still an attrocity committed by the government against its people.
Having a voluntary military is also a check against the government getting the nation involved in foolish conflicts because no one wants to enlist for little pay to die for nothing. (Somehow, we're able to keep the operation in Iraq afloat.)
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
It was justified, but only with voluntary forces. What you're putting forth is a belief in communism. In this case, the notion that the individual is the property of the state and that the state should be able to dispose of the life of the individual as it sees fit. Individuals don't have any self-owernship in your view; rather they are really just slaves to the state.
Do you really think that if our homeland were being directly attacked that we would have a shortage of Americans willing to fight to defend it? If North Korea invaded Washington State and started sending Americnas to concentation camps, do you think Ameicans would just sit by idly? I think the recruitment offices would explode from the flood of people coming in.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
Are you suggesting that our troops should be in the Sudan right now? It sounds like you're saying that we have a duty to act as the world's policeman and peacekeeper.
I keep hearing from posters saying we lose our freedom from this or that. Let me ask, were we ever free? Are there any countries out there that is truly free? I don't know any countries where I have the freedom to kill people. I know my example is extreme but I'm trying to prove a point. All countries are bound by law which limits freedom for the safety and protection of the country. Some countries are more free than others. From my understanding, the United States gives individuals the most freedom out of any other countries. Correct me if I'm wrong. And if you believe this country limits your freedom too much then find one that you are happy with and move there.
I was eligible for the draft in 1973 and on the drawing held on March 8 of that year my number came in 362. Lucky me, I was a college freshman and would have been really pissed if I had to go to Viet Nam. Just another war we didn't have any business being in. How times have changed. LOL
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
LOL you're a fool. WWII was the greastest mistake we ever made. A complete waste of lives an surrender of freedoms permanently. Lead to hundreds of millions of deaths accross asia and europe since nothing was there to balance out russian and chineese thugs. Not to mention the 500,000 wasted american lives on the alter of billions reaped by Hughes and buddies.
As Russians "liberated" the Finns, Estonians, Czechs, Hungarians, Romanians etc etc etc. they pillaged, raped, and murdered its way westward across Europe. Chineese did the same south. The communist idealogy was allowed to suceeed in over half the world and untold trillions of tax dollars wasted to fight it for 60 years.
That's a joke right? While Hitler killed his millions, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, and Castro murdered their tens of millions. With our help. All we did was trade a small thug for bigger thugs. Our freedoms and money for a permanet state of militarism. And made some billionaires in the process.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Absolutly because most Americans could think with thier brain back then - and wanted no part of "europes problem" .. headed the wise words or Adams.
" But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.... She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. .... She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication"
So FDR pulled a scam/treason to mobilize people. I have no doubt Bush/Clinton did as well "overlooking" the threats even when the cells were infiltrated by the FBI.
If we hadn't gone to war then Russia would have taken over alot more of europe and things would have been even worse then they became. In a germany loosing senario. In a germany winning senario things could have been even more devistating.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
The US is still pretty free. But when people refer to "freedom" they are taking into account natural law in which murder/rape/theft and other crimes would be illegal.
As far as just up and moving - that a rediculous statement too. Most contries you'd want to live in only allow the investor class in, which means be rich - which excludes 99% of americans. Which means you're really free in the USA anyway with a couple million dollars so why leave - almost any otherwise "illegal activty" is made available to you, for example abortion back in the 60's where the wealthy had no problems getting first rate doctors to preform them while the poor made due with a the child or a coat hanger. Second most people have emotional ties to thier country you know like family and freinds they could'nt just abandon in thier quest for more free.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
OK Miss Cleo anything of substance to back up this prediction?
I suggest you read about the winter war to see how crappy russians were at conquering anything. Lost millions to a hundred thousand finns armed with essentially just hunting rifles. w/o our help russia would have gone no were. Incompitant/yellow to the extreme. Very good at raping and killing the unarmed ashes we left behind though.
I had edited my post some before you wrote that...might want to take a quick look.
I have stuided WWII fairly extensivly. Although I can not predict the outcome had we not gone in, I would say that Russia would most likely have done a fine job of invading. Though the fronts were split more on Germany with the US fighting, Russia still had a massive force and had already started to gain ground by the time that we entered the war.
I have stuided WWII fairly extensivly. Although I can not predict the outcome had we not gone in, I would say that Russia would most likely have done a fine job of invading. Though the fronts were split more on Germany with the US fighting, Russia still had a massive force and had already started to gain ground by the time that we entered the war.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
They must not teach history anymore - Germany stopped in 1939 at the territories stolen from them after WWI - it was only after attacked by France, britain and others did they continue thier war of arggession (defense?). They had no choice. I leave the predictions to you if they would have won cause it's not like I care I'm not german or french I do care about wasting lives one someone who never attacked me as an american.
I should say I do care but not enough to waste Americans lives, freedom, and tax dollars to fight these foreign monsters.
I should say I do care but not enough to waste Americans lives, freedom, and tax dollars to fight these foreign monsters.
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 52,767
- 46,574
- 136
A few would be more accurate and there were a few instances of our destroyers (thay were escorting the ships to Iceland where British escorts took over) came under fire as well. The USS Ruben James was actually torpedoed by a U-boat and sunk in late October of 1941.
I would put 24 into the many catagory. A few implies around 3 or 4. I guess that is pretty much a person to person conseption though. But I personally would say many.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter