The question McCain can't answer and no one has asked.

blackascoal said:
I'm not threatening 18 year olds with anything .. in fact, I'm looking out for them because I know that if a draft is called for, the war will be over.

Which war was it that we fought with an all volunteer army?

How can this fraud of a war continue without fresh troops?

Are you unaware of the condition of our military?
Click to expand...
I would be willing to bet I am more aware of the condition of our military than you are. I retired from a 40 year career a bit more than 2-1/2 years ago. After three tours of duty in Viet Nam I know first hand what fighting with conscripts is like compared to fighting with volunteers. A stretched-to-the-limit all volunteer force is in far better shape than any conscript force will ever be.

But it is immaterial that you want to ask a republican candidate why there is no draft. He'll tell you, also from his military experience, that a draft is unnecessary and ultimately harmful.

If there ever is another military conscription in the United States, it will come from the democrats, as has every recent piece of conscription legislation that has been proposed.
 
Epicurus said:
Completely and totally disagree.

That has not been our policy for years, and soldiers who willingly join our all-volunteer military are well aware of what they're getting into, unlike the scared and unwilling 18 year old kids you all love to threaten with the draft.
Click to expand...
If this is true I wonder how we ever won WWII?
 
Socrtease said:
If this is true I wonder how we ever won WWII?
Click to expand...
The selective service enacted in WWII was put in place to handle the influx of volunteers. The day after Pearl Harbor was attacked the recruiting offices nation wide were inundated. The training facilities were in no way able to handle all those volunteers. The recruiting offices were instructed to accept a limited number of volunteers, then tell the rest to go home and wait to be called. They quickly put together a system to accept a number of recruits weekly that the training facilities were able to handle. Of course they also really revved up the training facilities, too, over the course of the war so the number of people called per week slowly increased also.

I imagine when they got the selective service process running they probably grabbed a few that would otherwise not have been willing to go. But I also imagine that number was very small. Remember, at that time nationalism was not a nasty word.
 
Epicurus said:
Completely and totally disagree.

That has not been our policy for years, and soldiers who willingly join our all-volunteer military are well aware of what they're getting into, unlike the scared and unwilling 18 year old kids you all love to threaten with the draft.
Click to expand...

Umm a sacrifice does not have to be conscription. Perhaps a pay as you go war tax would be appropriate. Or at least on a 10 year finiance plan. And all get annual statements on how much we still personally owe.


how long do you think the war would last if we all were paying our share ($) for it.
 
Watch how fast Republicans vote against war mongers if they have to pay a war tax. Jesus. Each American family now owes an additional $16,000 because of this war. If they issued a tax to make people pay that as it was spent, wars would be rare and short.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Watch how fast Republicans vote against war mongers if they have to pay a war tax. Jesus. Each American family now owes an additional $16,000 because of this war. If they issued a tax to make people pay that as it was spent, wars would be rare and short.
Click to expand...


You know you can use that lame math to fool people but anyone who understands that the wealthy pay more as a percentage knows that the wealthy will pay MORE of the debt. So go ahead and try to fool stupid people. Oh you know, I didn't realize it was IBdumb. I bet you actually believe what you wrote.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Watch how fast Republicans vote against war mongers if they have to pay a war tax. Jesus. Each American family now owes an additional $16,000 because of this war. If they issued a tax to make people pay that as it was spent, wars would be rare and short.
Click to expand...
And with the ability to defend against any real threats for all practical purposes eliminated, the existence of your freedoms to spout off mindless shit on a BBS would be short, and somewhat less than rare (as in non-existent.) How long do you think it would take for some despotic government to take advantage of our economically crippled military?
 
"How long do you think it would take for some despotic government to take advantage of our economically crippled military?."

The bush government seems to have that covered.
 
Good Luck said:
And with the ability to defend against any real threats for all practical purposes eliminated, the existence of your freedoms to spout off mindless shit on a BBS would be short, and somewhat less than rare (as in non-existent.) How long do you think it would take for some despotic government to take advantage of our economically crippled military?
Click to expand...

The idea that you're still afraid of some foreign invasion is pretty revealing. You're disconnected from modern reality. You're probably an old-timer who's stuck mentally in the cold war era, which is why you're so willing to pass the costs of this war on to the next generation. You'll be dead and gone when the bill comes due for your $600 tax rebate and this war.
 
Good Luck said:
The selective service enacted in WWII was put in place to handle the influx of volunteers. The day after Pearl Harbor was attacked the recruiting offices nation wide were inundated. The training facilities were in no way able to handle all those volunteers. The recruiting offices were instructed to accept a limited number of volunteers, then tell the rest to go home and wait to be called. They quickly put together a system to accept a number of recruits weekly that the training facilities were able to handle. Of course they also really revved up the training facilities, too, over the course of the war so the number of people called per week slowly increased also.

I imagine when they got the selective service process running they probably grabbed a few that would otherwise not have been willing to go. But I also imagine that number was very small. Remember, at that time nationalism was not a nasty word.
Click to expand...
Or MAYBE during WWII we actually went to war against the people that attacked us. We had a clear enemy and knew what we had to do. After 9-11 we had a clear enemy as well, it was Al Qaeda, OBL was the leader of that movement. But INSTEAD we chose to go to war against Saddam Hussein that had NO CONNECTION with 9-11. We fought briefly in Afghanistan then left and now the Taliban is back in power almost everywhere BUT Kabul. Hell even if LBJ lied about the Gulf of Tonkin at LEAST we actually went to war against the Vietnamese. We couldn't even get the right enemy this time. I agree that a conscription army would be a bad idea. I too served in the all volunteer Army during Just Cuz and Desert Storm. The Reagan military was great as you know. But the Buffoon in Chief is no Ronald Reagan, nor even George H.W. Bush. Our own military leaders are concerned with our ability to fight another enemy somewhere else. You would think that as a Vietnam Vet you would know the folly of trying to force liberty on people at the point of a bayonet. You have to WANT to be free and earn it yourself. If not, freedom is not yours, it is a gift from someone else, and like lots of gifts you never really appreciate the cost of it. The Iraqi Government has no realization of the price.
 
ib1yysguy said:
The idea that you're still afraid of some foreign invasion is pretty revealing. You're disconnected from modern reality. You're probably an old-timer who's stuck mentally in the cold war era, which is why you're so willing to pass the costs of this war on to the next generation. You'll be dead and gone when the bill comes due for your $600 tax rebate and this war.
Click to expand...
The cold war is long over. We won.

Right now China is the only military threat, and they aren't gonna start anything with those who are keeping their economy from going splat.

But unlike those with little rose colored glasses and drug induced dreams, I also know that the political and military balance world wide is fluid, and can change quite rapidly. Far more rapidly than it would take to repeal a law such as you suggest.
 
Good Luck said:
I would be willing to bet I am more aware of the condition of our military than you are. I retired from a 40 year career a bit more than 2-1/2 years ago. After three tours of duty in Viet Nam I know first hand what fighting with conscripts is like compared to fighting with volunteers. A stretched-to-the-limit all volunteer force is in far better shape than any conscript force will ever be.

But it is immaterial that you want to ask a republican candidate why there is no draft. He'll tell you, also from his military experience, that a draft is unnecessary and ultimately harmful.

If there ever is another military conscription in the United States, it will come from the democrats, as has every recent piece of conscription legislation that has been proposed.
Click to expand...

Again, another ridiculous response. There is absolutely no question in ANYONE's mind that our troops are hurting badly and the military needs an influx of new bodies.

I bet you don't know more about the military than current military leaders, many of whom, including Colin Powell, have said that if the US were to face an additional threat, our military would not be able to respond. In fact, Powell said our military is "very, very, stretched."

Why ask the republican? .. Because the republican is the only one declaring Iraq to be a "defining moment" and the only one insisting that we remain in Iraq.

Additionally, I bet your 100 years in the military have not given you any insight into how the war in Iraq can be won, nor has it told you how we can extricate Iran from Iraq when in fact our mindless invasion has made Iran more powerful in the region than they could have ever accomplished on their own.

If you have the answers based on your military experience, I'd be glad to hear them.
 
Last edited:
Socrtease said:
Or MAYBE during WWII we actually went to war against the people that attacked us. We had a clear enemy and knew what we had to do. After 9-11 we had a clear enemy as well, it was Al Qaeda, OBL was the leader of that movement. But INSTEAD we chose to go to war against Saddam Hussein that had NO CONNECTION with 9-11. We fought briefly in Afghanistan then left and now the Taliban is back in power almost everywhere BUT Kabul. Hell even if LBJ lied about the Gulf of Tonkin at LEAST we actually went to war against the Vietnamese. We couldn't even get the right enemy this time. I agree that a conscription army would be a bad idea. I too served in the all volunteer Army during Just Cuz and Desert Storm. The Reagan military was great as you know. But the Buffoon in Chief is no Ronald Reagan, nor even George H.W. Bush. Our own military leaders are concerned with our ability to fight another enemy somewhere else. You would think that as a Vietnam Vet you would know the folly of trying to force liberty on people at the point of a bayonet. You have to WANT to be free and earn it yourself. If not, freedom is not yours, it is a gift from someone else, and like lots of gifts you never really appreciate the cost of it. The Iraqi Government has no realization of the price.
Click to expand...

Well stated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top