• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

If President Hilary Clinton bombs Iran's nuke site, would you be for/against a draft?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Suddenly the 2nd Amendment is my favorite.
Click to expand...

huh?

"A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state"

sounds like the ability to draft people into service, no?

edit:
eits said right to bear arms.

what does that have to do w/being drafted? unless you plan on barracading yourself at your mountain retreat, and threaten law enforcement when they come to arrest u for not showing up after being drafted?
 
Originally posted by: JEDI
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Suddenly the 2nd Amendment is my favorite.
Click to expand...

huh?

"A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state"

sounds like the ability to draft people into service, no?

edit:
eits said right to bear arms.

what does that have to do w/being drafted? unless you plan on barracading yourself at your mountain retreat, and threaten law enforcement when they come to arrest u for not showing up after being drafted?
Click to expand...

I avoid 2nd amendment arguments like the plague as anything that can be said has been said but don't folks find the phrasing bizarre? The founding dudes were a pretty articulate bunch but the grammatical disconnect between the first two clauses and the second two clauses and the comma between "Arms" and "shall" are screwy.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
 
Originally posted by: eits
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: palehorse74
The point is, Hillary Clinton is a gun-control nutcase, and it will be ironic when Eits finds that out the hard way after voting for her - given what Eits said above.
Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton is a nutcase, period. But yes, she supports strict gun controls, and would strip citizens of the 2nd Amendment if she were able to.
Click to expand...
Apparently folks like eits can live with that... :roll:
Click to expand...

uh, what? i said i was FOR the 2nd amendment. reading comprehension. this administration makes me appreciate our right to bear arms against a tyrannical minority.
Click to expand...
Will you be voting for Hillary if she gets the nomination? If so, be prepared to possibly give up that right and those arms...
 
Originally posted by: Aimster
Originally posted by: Noobtastic
As soon as a foreign country actually attacks the U.S. mainland or Alaska or Hawaii and as soon as the U.S. government announces that it will launch a no-holds barred war and that U.S. troops will be well armed and almost completely unrestricted and fully supported in their pursuit of the enemy and that American interests will not be sacrificed at the altar of political correctness and altruism...then we won't need a draft.
Click to expand...

This isn't the 1950s. A border attack wouldn't be some isolated bombardment. If Iran became nuclear capable, or the likelihood that other nations will join Iran's cause, an offensive against the United States (assuming we go neutral as all the other WW) would cause hundreds of thousands of deaths, maybe even millions.

Inactivity is never helpful.

In the meantime, as long as the government continues to sacrifice military victory and American lives and health in favor of altruism and political correctness, then a draft will be necessary.
Click to expand...

The Iraq War pales in comparison to almost all major conflicts in terms of scale. A world war would be a TOTAL WAR, not volunteer based.


When you go to war, you use everything you got. Penny scraping to appease naysayers only hurts the ones who are fighting. Regardless of the purpose, to win a war requires complete contribution from the native country.

I was never for the Iraq War...
Click to expand...

You said Iran supports AL Qaeda.

Who is going to take you seriously?
Click to expand...

You think they do not, who is going to take you seriously?

 
Originally posted by: jdelrio22
Honestly no war is worth fighting unless it is as a last resort.

World War II was necessary. People were dying purely for being affiliated with a specific ethnicity and that should never be allowed.
Click to expand...

So, are you saying that the U.S. should become the world's genocide policeman? Should the U.S. selflessly intervene in Sudan? Should the U.S. have gotten involved in Rwanda?

Is that type of involvement actually necessary or is it merely charitable?
 
Originally posted by: eits

dude, seriously. this administration has given me much more respect for what the framers meant when they included the 2nd amendment.
Click to expand...

True that. It's also given me much more respect for the Clinton Administration. But then again, the Bush Administration makes just about any other presidential administration look good.
 
Only an idiot will claim Iran supports Al Qaeda.

They see their friend get shocked to death from an electric fence. What do they do? They touch the fence.
Too bad there are not enough electric fences around. We'd solve the problem of the world.

 
Originally posted by: Aimster
Only an idiot will claim Iran supports Al Qaeda.

They see their friend get shocked to death from an electric fence. What do they do? They touch the fence.
Too bad there are not enough electric fences around. We'd solve the problem of the world.
Click to expand...


Their role in aiding the Taliban and Ansar Al Islam is enough proof.
 
Originally posted by: Alistar7
Originally posted by: Aimster
Only an idiot will claim Iran supports Al Qaeda.

They see their friend get shocked to death from an electric fence. What do they do? They touch the fence.
Too bad there are not enough electric fences around. We'd solve the problem of the world.
Click to expand...


Their role in aiding the Taliban and Ansar Al Islam is enough proof.
Click to expand...

They were fighting the Taliban long before the U.S even stepped foot inside Afghanistan.

By aiding you must be killing.

Iran is not Pakistan. That is why Iran is a close ally of India while Pakistan and Iran are silent neighbors
 
Originally posted by:
Is that type of involvement actually necessary or is it merely charitable?
Click to expand...


A) Sudan is not threatening U.S allies or U.S resources.

B) Wars mentioned are CIVIL and contained within state, and do not reflect in any way the economy or safety status of Americans or allies.

C) Iran is pursuing NUCLEAR CAPABILITY - weapons that have infinite range.


D) Iran is naming names. They've openly declared to the World their views of the U.S and Israel.

E) Iran is challenging Israel. A country that is an economic and social ally (whether you LIKE it or NOT).

F) Iran has been funneling money to global Islamic terrorism since the fall of the Shah. You can trace almost all funds from Hezbollah, Al Queda, Army of Islam, IJG, JEM, IMU, JI, EIJ, PKK, PLF and PIJ, to Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.


To equate the Iranian situation to the Sudan genocide (in terms of global danger) is ridiculous. Although the money that is funding the Islamists who are heading the genocide in Sudan is coming from the Middle East.

Oh the irony.

 
Originally posted by: Alistar7
They were fighting the Taliban, until we removed them from power. Now they are supplying weapons, not enough to truly empower the Taliban, their goal is to make life difficult for US troops.

Once again, their actions and intentions are clear, their effectiveness, limited.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1b96...9f47-0000779fd2ac.html

No repsonse on Ansar?
Click to expand...

They are not supplying weapons to the Taliban.

wtf is ft.com? You call that a source?

What is that another article of Iranian made weapons found in the hands of the Taliban? OMG NO WAY.

The Taliban probably got their hands on an M-16 too. Does that mean the U.S is arming the Taliban?

Give me a break. Those articles are for idiots.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
FT.com = Financial Times. It's a credible source, so quit spinning.
Click to expand...

The article has no proof Iran is doing anything other than the word of one man who says "Iranian Made weapons'.

Iran has millions of dollars worth of U.S weapons made after 1979. Are you suggesting the U.S gave Iran those weapons? Let's impeach Bush. Your favorite person if that is what you are suggesting.

What you are suggesting is that the weapons made in Iran must have come from inside Iran and ordered by the high-ups of Iran.

So it is safe to say that the greatest nation on this planet with laws and regulations far better than Iran is guilty of supplying Iran with weapons and those orders were given by none other than Bush.

When do we start impeacement?
 
There are plenty of other credible sources out there for the unbiased observer. Do they come with invoices signed by official party members, of course not. Is it possible such large quantities of arms and ammo could be ferreted out of Iran without the govt. and military being at least aware if not directly implicit, not likely. They are coming from within Iran, leaving their border, it hardly matters where they originated.

It is just a minor nuisance though, as pointless as your attempts to spin it otherwise. Next time you feel like calling someone an idiot at least be accurate and stand in front of a mirror. You're more like Bush than you will ever understand, thanks for the laughs your posts always provide.
 
Originally posted by: JEDI
Iran is 636,372 sq mi

in comparison, iraq is ~1/4 the size at 169,234 sq mi

Is US forces are currently stretched thin in Iraq, i could only imagine how bad we need troops for a war w/Iran.

For me, i would be ok with a draft. I see a legit reason to start the war, and since Iran is 4x larger (area wise), we absolutely need more troops.


So if Pres Hillary authorizes a draft, would you be for/against? WHY?
Click to expand...

I'm against the draft, but I am glad you recognize the inevitability of President Hillary.
If the need arises to go to war against Iran, pull the troops out of the quagmire in Iraq and send them to Iran.
But I don't think President Hillary will need to go to war with Iran, this can all be worked out diplomatically, something the cowboys in charge now have no concept of.
 
Originally posted by: Alistar7
There are plenty of other credible sources out there for the unbiased observer. Do they come with invoices signed by official party members, of course not. Is it possible such large quantities of arms and ammo could be ferreted out of Iran without the govt. and military being at least aware if not directly implicit, not likely. They are coming from within Iran, leaving their border, it hardly matters where they originated.

It is just a minor nuisance though, as pointless as your attempts to spin it otherwise. Next time you feel like calling someone an idiot at least be accurate and stand in front of a mirror. You're more like Bush than you will ever understand, thanks for the laughs your posts always provide.
Click to expand...

They are idiots.

Finding Iranian made weapons in another country does not signal Iranian involvement.

Even the generals in the U.S when asked directly "Is there any hardcore evidence of Iran involvement inside Iraq" they say No. The British have said "There are no signs Iran is doing anything inside Iraq".

Only recently the media is pumping out this B.S of Iranian arms found in Iraq.

OH NO. They found Iranian made weapons. Big freaking Deal. 30 nations have Iranian made weapons. Anyone can be guilty. Nice case.
 
Originally posted by: Aimster
Originally posted by: Alistar7
There are plenty of other credible sources out there for the unbiased observer. Do they come with invoices signed by official party members, of course not. Is it possible such large quantities of arms and ammo could be ferreted out of Iran without the govt. and military being at least aware if not directly implicit, not likely. They are coming from within Iran, leaving their border, it hardly matters where they originated.

It is just a minor nuisance though, as pointless as your attempts to spin it otherwise. Next time you feel like calling someone an idiot at least be accurate and stand in front of a mirror. You're more like Bush than you will ever understand, thanks for the laughs your posts always provide.
Click to expand...

They are idiots.

Finding Iranian made weapons in another country does not signal Iranian involvement.

Even the generals in the U.S when asked directly "Is there any hardcore evidence of Iran involvement inside Iraq" they say No. The British have said "There are no signs Iran is doing anything inside Iraq".

Only recently the media is pumping out this B.S of Iranian arms found in Iraq.

OH NO. They found Iranian made weapons. Big freaking Deal. 30 nations have Iranian made weapons. Anyone can be guilty. Nice case.
Click to expand...


They were brought in over the IRANIAN BORDER, nice case. Why is everyone, and any facts, that don't match your opinion "idiots"? This is hardly recent BTW, you live in a bubble?

Useless trying to discuss geopolitical events with anyone harboring such bias and disregard for reality. Do yourself a favor, move to Iran.....


 
Originally posted by: Alistar7
Originally posted by: Aimster
Originally posted by: Alistar7
There are plenty of other credible sources out there for the unbiased observer. Do they come with invoices signed by official party members, of course not. Is it possible such large quantities of arms and ammo could be ferreted out of Iran without the govt. and military being at least aware if not directly implicit, not likely. They are coming from within Iran, leaving their border, it hardly matters where they originated.

It is just a minor nuisance though, as pointless as your attempts to spin it otherwise. Next time you feel like calling someone an idiot at least be accurate and stand in front of a mirror. You're more like Bush than you will ever understand, thanks for the laughs your posts always provide.
Click to expand...

They are idiots.

Finding Iranian made weapons in another country does not signal Iranian involvement.

Even the generals in the U.S when asked directly "Is there any hardcore evidence of Iran involvement inside Iraq" they say No. The British have said "There are no signs Iran is doing anything inside Iraq".

Only recently the media is pumping out this B.S of Iranian arms found in Iraq.

OH NO. They found Iranian made weapons. Big freaking Deal. 30 nations have Iranian made weapons. Anyone can be guilty. Nice case.
Click to expand...


They were brought in over the IRANIAN BORDER, nice case. Why is everyone, and any facts, that don't match your opinion "idiots"? This is hardly recent BTW, you live in a bubble?

Useless trying to discuss geopolitical events with anyone harboring such bias and disregard for reality. Do yourself a favor, move to Iran.....
Click to expand...

Not my fault you are an idiot.

Arms are smuggled from the U.S to Mexico.
Is the U.S involved?

Arms are smuggled from U.S to Canada.
Is Canada involved?

Iran has been against the Taliban and everything Iran stands for says they are against the Taliban.

Who the hell are you to suggest otherwise with ZERO facts? Exactly. You lack common sense.
 
From your little article:

"However, one former senior official in Tehran said Taliban fighters might get Iran?s weapons from other Islamic groups, Sunni or Shia, with whom Iran has good relations in the region."

There are plenty of groups and nations that Iran arms. Iran does not control their decisions and their actions. You cannot sit here and prove otherwise.

Just like the U.S does not control Israel and their actions. The amount of military secrets and weapons that Israel has given China has given the U.S a big migraine that will not go away.
 
Aimster your defense of Iran is so sad.

If Ahmadinejad himself came out and claimed they were supporting terrorists you would claim that he had no real power so his statements don't count.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Aimster your defense of Iran is so sad.

If Ahmadinejad himself came out and claimed they were supporting terrorists you would claim that he had no real power so his statements don't count.
Click to expand...

Your support for Bush is the saddest example of anything I have ever seen.

Prove me wrong. You can't. You can only show me articles that show no solid evidence at all and you call me sad?

HAHA. You are one of those fools who swore Iraq had WMD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top