Draft...Would you serve or run?

[woodie1]

I already served. If there was a need for a slow, old man I'd do it again.

 

[EndGame]

Hey, like I said, some of you simply can not grasp any opinion except yours. I've already said I can see how and why you feel the way you do, but, your mindset will not allow anything but your ideas in. Oh well, no big deal, I couldn't care less as I've said, just consider what you're gonna have to give up should that .01% ever occur and a draft or mandatory military service ever become reallity.

Never said ANYTHING about killing "all muslims" or anything remotely similar. You state that our military is ONLY for national defense, well, that being the case, there are what, maybe 3 or 4 conflicts we should have ever been in since our country was founded?

 

[Spamela]

Originally posted by: FettsBabe
If you received a draft notice would you serve or would you run to the nearest border????

What about if your son was drafted....would you help them run or tell them to serve?

I believe that there should be a true cause for a war before the draft is ever used. I'm not sure Iraq is reason enough to enable the draft.

Why are we wanting to go there anyway? It certainly isn't for Saddam! I think we want to take over the Oil fields! I watched the news last night and they were discussing the plan to protect the oil fields and how the oil would be used/distributed.

i was too young for the vietnam war. i tried to volunteer during desert storm, but the recruiter told me i was too old. so, there's no chance of being drafted now.

my wife & i are baffled by bush's obsession with iraq & don't believe he has made a case strong enough for us to sacrifice our son. we certainly aren't going to take his word for it that iraq is an imminent threat to the USA.

 

[chemos]

Trollomancer, why do you live in the United States?

i seem to ask myself this question every single day...

 

[LongCoolMother]

ive been reading this thread and the way I interpret the arguments is...

you would serve because you want to keep your freedoms or you feel you owe it to your country. basically you feel it is the RIGHT THING TO DO. you dont have reasons for fighting, other than, its your DUTY, and are obligated somehow to do so.

you wouldn't serve under circumstances: you are fighting for your country, but for the wrong cause. you dont know what you're fighting for.

in my opinion, some people are definately brainwashed or have watched too many movies or something. becoming dramatic, and blindly choosing to fight without their own judgements, just because their country asked them to.

 

[dquan97]

I would definitely serve, as we need to protect ourselves from people like Saddam who use their power to hurt and destroy. I was so mad when I found out that he's paying $ to the family of suicide bombers!

 

[Dudd]

Originally posted by: BentValve


These words nearly bring tears to my eyes. Do you have any idea what our forefathers gave to make this counrty what is it today? I don't think you understand because nobody with a heart at all could have said such cold words as what you have just done.

Yeah, our forefathers would have loved going to war with Iraq. It fit right into Washington's isolationist ideals.

Come on people, everything that is happening today can't be rationalized by mentioning America's founding fathers.

Personally, I would go, but I wouldn't shoot anyone who didn't want to. Let them flee, would they really make the army better by showing up despite really not wanting to be there?

 

[Angrymarshmello]

I'm not Clinton

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: BoberFett
ffmcobalt

You can try to sound all tough and righteous, but how much time have you put in the military?

I spent a few years there, and I'd still not fight if I were recalled for a war that I wouldn't volunteer for. If I can't be bothered to VOLUNTEER for a war, then I'm not going to stand for being ORDERED to fight in one.

And if you think you could hunt me down and kill me, think again you weasally little punk.

Don't play that crap either Bober. Regardless of the military experience you have, the draft made it possible to keep Europe from being all German. Besides, the 1980 selective service reinstated by Carter is way different than the Vietnam Draft or the WW2 draft.

You are arguing a moot point anyway. There will be no draft. I am curious anyhow as to why you think a war that you wouldn't volunteer for wouldn't be worth fighting? Should all wars be Bober approved? Now I am not saying you don't have valid points but you are acting as if you wouldn't go if you were drafted to any fight unless it had your stamp of approval. Who decides if a war is good enough for you? Popular sentiment(which rarely supports ANY war) or you?

All I'm saying is that those who want to fight in a war will fight regardless of a draft. If the government who was elected BY THE PEOPLE, can't get those same people to volunteer when it comes to to fight, then that's THE PEOPLE telling the ELECTED that the war is unwanted.

So by your reasoning then we shouldn't be in Afghanistan.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer

Originally posted by: BoberFett

All I'm saying is that those who want to fight in a war will fight regardless of a draft. If the government who was elected BY THE PEOPLE, can't get those same people to volunteer when it comes to to fight, then that's THE PEOPLE telling the ELECTED that the war is unwanted.

So by your reasoning then we shouldn't be in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was harboring a group who ALREADY DIRECTLY attacked the United States. Has sufficient evidence been gathered that Saddam is involved in directly hurting or plotting to hurt the United States or it's allies? I guess that's what we're all hoping the weapons inspectors will clear up.

So I'm not allowed to choose whether or not fight based on my own belifes. But apparently, some of you feel that your own personal dislike for Hussein is reason enough to destroy their country.

 

[EndGame]

Originally posted by: LongCoolMother
ive been reading this thread and the way I interpret the arguments is...

you would serve because you want to keep your freedoms or you feel you owe it to your country. basically you feel it is the RIGHT THING TO DO. you dont have reasons for fighting, other than, its your DUTY, and are obligated somehow to do so.

you wouldn't serve under circumstances: you are fighting for your country, but for the wrong cause. you dont know what you're fighting for.

in my opinion, some people are definately brainwashed or have watched too many movies or something. becoming dramatic, and blindly choosing to fight without their own judgements, just because their country asked them to.

No, actually it appears you've missed the original point of the thread: "Would you serve or run if drafted into the military".

Now, that being the case, I'll stand by what I've said, If the cause was enough that a draft became neccessary, I would go without a doubt.

What is baffling is those whom say that if they are drafted, the would not go because the are against killing, against the particular war going on, or feel they are free to make their own decsion as to whether they would serve. What they don't seem to be able to comprehend is they would be giving up just as much or possibly more by running. They would be a fugative of the US and hhave to spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulder, or, they could come back and serve a term in prison. Either way, in this day and age, I don't think the chances/end results are much worse by serving! I managed to serve and was active during Desert Storm and managed to come back without a scratch so.

 

[Gnurb]

would you really want people to fight alongside you because they were threatened to fight by a government order or by some crazy looney conservative with a shotgun

 

[Aceshigh]

I would serve. And if my son was drafted I would encourage him to serve. But he would be an adult and have to make that decision on his own. If he chose to run I would be disappointed.

 

[EndGame]

Originally posted by: Gnurb
would you really want people to fight alongside you because they were threatened to fight by a government order or by some crazy looney conservative with a shotgun

I never said i would want them alongside me, what I am saying is that I can not relate to their opinions on the matter. I can not see how running away from something and becoming a fugative, giving up your life and family as you've known it, or going to jail is a better alternative than serving in the military.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer

Originally posted by: BoberFett

All I'm saying is that those who want to fight in a war will fight regardless of a draft. If the government who was elected BY THE PEOPLE, can't get those same people to volunteer when it comes to to fight, then that's THE PEOPLE telling the ELECTED that the war is unwanted.

So by your reasoning then we shouldn't be in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was harboring a group who ALREADY DIRECTLY attacked the United States. Has sufficient evidence been gathered that Saddam is involved in directly hurting or plotting to hurt the United States or it's allies? I guess that's what we're all hoping the weapons inspectors will clear up.

So I'm not allowed to choose whether or not fight based on my own belifes. But apparently, some of you feel that your own personal dislike for Hussein is reason enough to destroy their country.

You're obviously not smart enough to read your own post. What you said was that if we can't get people to volunteer then we shouldn't fight. There was no rush to the recruiting offices after 9/11 so by your reasoning then we shouldn't be in Afghanistan and like I said before there was no great rush to go and fight Hitler so obviously we should never have fought the war in Europe. Using your criteria for worthiness, of course.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: FettsBabe
I wish I could locate a link to the news I saw on TV last night. The Oil Field Plan wasn't a plan to "protect" the oil fields. It was more like we were going in and taking them over. The US should give the Oil Fields to whomever is in power because it is Iraqi oil. If we want to eliminate Saddam that is ok with me, but to take over the Oil Fields and for the US to make all the decisions is "commy" within itself.

Yes, Saddam is evil and has turned on his people many many times. His son is worse than him though. If we were there because he was "inhumane" that would be different, but we aren't. We are there for the oil. As a note, Afghanistan had numerous "inhumane" problems for many years (prior to 9-11);however, we sat on our butts and didn't do a thing. Tajikastan is the poorest country in the world. We aren't there helping them.

I couldn't serve right now because I am pregnant, but if I weren't pregnant, I would serve IF it there was a valid reason to go to war. If not, I would leave. I'm not dying nor will I kill other people for oil or any other inappropriate reason. Only drafting men is sexist. If we are going to have a draft lets draft men and women.

Heh, the rest of the world figured this out a long time ago, that is why any other nation (with the exception of the US wannabe GBR) is reluctant to participate in this political and money based war...

It's about oil and politics, a threat? LMAO, yeah, and other nations who say that war is inevitable and do have nukes are ignored...

But i am quite sure there will be a war, whatever Irak does, there will be a war...

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer

Originally posted by: BoberFett

All I'm saying is that those who want to fight in a war will fight regardless of a draft. If the government who was elected BY THE PEOPLE, can't get those same people to volunteer when it comes to to fight, then that's THE PEOPLE telling the ELECTED that the war is unwanted.

So by your reasoning then we shouldn't be in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was harboring a group who ALREADY DIRECTLY attacked the United States. Has sufficient evidence been gathered that Saddam is involved in directly hurting or plotting to hurt the United States or it's allies? I guess that's what we're all hoping the weapons inspectors will clear up.

So I'm not allowed to choose whether or not fight based on my own belifes. But apparently, some of you feel that your own personal dislike for Hussein is reason enough to destroy their country.

You're obviously not smart enough to read your own post. What you said was that if we can't get people to volunteer then we shouldn't fight. There was no rush to the recruiting offices after 9/11 so by your reasoning then we shouldn't be in Afghanistan and like I said before there was no great rush to go and fight Hitler so obviously we should never have fought the war in Europe. Using your criteria for worthiness, of course.

And apparently you too goddam stupid to understand a word spoken in this thread.

Obviously, they military had the resources to go into Afghanistan without a draft. If a draft was instituted, it means there aren't enough people volunteering to fight in the particular war that the gub'ment is waging at the time. And if there aren't enough people volunteering to fight, then it's not a popular war and perhaps the gub'ment should re-evaluate whether it should actually be in that war or not.

You're a f@cking moron. No wonder you're a military lifer.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

What's a popular war? Is it fought only by jocks and cheerleaders?

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
What's a popular war? Is it fought only by jocks and cheerleaders?

Nah, it's a war agains any arab nation...

 

[Darein]

I would serve, but the first thing I would do would be to go to a recruiter and try to get a better deal. I would hate to be a grunt on the front lines when I know I could do better than that. If I knew I was going to get drafted, I would just go and enlist so they would at least pay for my college. If there is a draft, doesn't matter the reason because the president and congress thinks its important enough, I would sign up.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
You're a f@cking moron. No wonder you're a military lifer.

This is just sad, completely disrespecting our men/woman in uniform past and present ,
who would die and died for our country and you is just outrages and it says lot about
you as a person.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: BoberFett
ffmcobalt

You can try to sound all tough and righteous, but how much time have you put in the military?

I spent a few years there, and I'd still not fight if I were recalled for a war that I wouldn't volunteer for. If I can't be bothered to VOLUNTEER for a war, then I'm not going to stand for being ORDERED to fight in one.

And if you think you could hunt me down and kill me, think again you weasally little punk.

Don't play that crap either Bober. Regardless of the military experience you have, the draft made it possible to keep Europe from being all German. Besides, the 1980 selective service reinstated by Carter is way different than the Vietnam Draft or the WW2 draft.

You are arguing a moot point anyway. There will be no draft. I am curious anyhow as to why you think a war that you wouldn't volunteer for wouldn't be worth fighting? Should all wars be Bober approved? Now I am not saying you don't have valid points but you are acting as if you wouldn't go if you were drafted to any fight unless it had your stamp of approval. Who decides if a war is good enough for you? Popular sentiment(which rarely supports ANY war) or you?

All I'm saying is that those who want to fight in a war will fight regardless of a draft. If the government who was elected BY THE PEOPLE, can't get those same people to volunteer when it comes to to fight, then that's THE PEOPLE telling the ELECTED that the war is unwanted.

Not necessarily true. Just because John Smith doesn't volunteer, doesn't mean that he doesn't support the war or think it to be a just war.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: BoberFett
You're a f@cking moron. No wonder you're a military lifer.

This is just sad, completely disrespecting our men/woman in uniform past and present ,
who would die and died for our country and you is just outrages and it says lot about
you as a person.

Piss off, ass-loaf. Had you read the thread you'd know that I did time in the military, so I think I have a little different perspective than some little acne-ridden geek hiding behind his monitor.

 

[Soybomb]

Originally posted by: EndGame

Originally posted by: Gnurb
would you really want people to fight alongside you because they were threatened to fight by a government order or by some crazy looney conservative with a shotgun

I never said i would want them alongside me, what I am saying is that I can not relate to their opinions on the matter. I can not see how running away from something and becoming a fugative, giving up your life and family as you've known it, or going to jail is a better alternative than serving in the military.

Guess it all depends on how important your ideals are and to what extent you feel as though you must be true to what you believe in especially opposed to what someone tells you you're supposed to believe.

But hey I already think sometimes of leaving due to wonderful legislation like the DMCA, USA Patriot act etc.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: BoberFett
ffmcobalt

You can try to sound all tough and righteous, but how much time have you put in the military?

I spent a few years there, and I'd still not fight if I were recalled for a war that I wouldn't volunteer for. If I can't be bothered to VOLUNTEER for a war, then I'm not going to stand for being ORDERED to fight in one.

And if you think you could hunt me down and kill me, think again you weasally little punk.

Don't play that crap either Bober. Regardless of the military experience you have, the draft made it possible to keep Europe from being all German. Besides, the 1980 selective service reinstated by Carter is way different than the Vietnam Draft or the WW2 draft.

You are arguing a moot point anyway. There will be no draft. I am curious anyhow as to why you think a war that you wouldn't volunteer for wouldn't be worth fighting? Should all wars be Bober approved? Now I am not saying you don't have valid points but you are acting as if you wouldn't go if you were drafted to any fight unless it had your stamp of approval. Who decides if a war is good enough for you? Popular sentiment(which rarely supports ANY war) or you?

All I'm saying is that those who want to fight in a war will fight regardless of a draft. If the government who was elected BY THE PEOPLE, can't get those same people to volunteer when it comes to to fight, then that's THE PEOPLE telling the ELECTED that the war is unwanted.

Not necessarily true. Just because John Smith doesn't volunteer, doesn't mean that he doesn't support the war or think it to be a just war.

Actually, it is true. Assume that we're fighting war that is right and justified, yet so hard that we've lost all of our first-line troops and they need to institute a draft to keep fighting it. If John Smith did say he supports it yet didn't volunteer to fight in it himself, then he'd better have a serious medical condition preventing him from joining the combat. Otherwise he is a hypocrite and only supports the war when others stand to lose something in it.

A popular war is one which has backing by the majority of Americans. If it doesn't have the backing of the majority of Americans, we will have problems. Look to Vietnam.