New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

The Draft

Arkady said:
There's a move to have women register for the draft. The gender issue doesn't interest me much, since I think it's obvious that if there is a draft, it should be applied fairly to both genders. The thornier issue is whether a draft makes sense at all.

It's one of those few remaining issues where you find a lot of liberals and conservatives on both sides. Liberals who object to the draft tend to do so on the moral grounds that forcing someone to kill and die for a cause he doesn't agree with is wrong, while liberals who support the draft tend to do so on the grounds that without it the real burden of our wars will tend to fall mostly on the children of the working class, since rich kids don't tend to go into the military (other than the National Guard, to dodge a draft), so a draft promotes economic fairness. As for conservatives, supporters of the draft tend to support it based on the practical issue of how to make sure we have an adequate stream of high-quality bodies to throw at our military adventures, while opponents see it as the ultimate example of Big Brother infringing on individual liberties.

In my case, I oppose the draft on the grounds that it distributes the burden of a national project unfairly. Think about it in terms of the alternative. The alternative is to pay enough that you get an adequate supply of quality volunteers. This distributes the cost -- it constitutes a net transfer of the wealth to those who serve in the military from those who don't. If the cause is sufficiently popular, you may not need to pay a lot. If the cause is unpopular, you'll have to pay a lot more, but either way, at the end of the day, the only people killing and dying for it are those who believed themselves adequately compensated to choose to take the risk.

In the big picture, the draft is a way for older people (who dominate the government) to force younger people (who do the fighting) to do the work for them at whatever price the older people feel like paying. It's like saying "you'd charge too much to do this voluntarily, so I'll just force you to do it at a price I dictate, and if you don't like it, you can go to jail." It's essentially a limited form of slavery. This is one of those areas where I'm more of a free-market guy: let the market set the price for the work. If the price ends up being higher than taxpayers think is worth it to them, then don't go to war.
Click to expand...

The draft is now, and has been since 1867, unconstitutional. It is involuntary servitude banned under the 14th Amendment. That it has been permitted does not make it right.
 
The Thinker said:
I take it you don't want to talk about Barack Obama tripling the death rate in Afghanistan, his war for oil in Libya nor his unwillingness to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, correct?

Could you end two wars in less than seven years? I could do it in six months.
Click to expand...
I'm happy to criticize Obama's foreign policy. Yes, the death rate in Afghanistan did, in fact, go up on Obama's watch -- and could be said to have tripled depending on how you do the calculation. However, it's also true we're on track to lose only about six Americans there this year, which would be half as many as the lowest annual toll of the Bush years (2001). He has made many missteps in foreign policy, by way of being too quick to get us militarily involved and too slow to extricate us. But, overall, the situation has improved in terms of the cumulative cost of such interventions (both the tax dollar costs and the US body count), relative to the Bush era.
 
trapdoor said:
The draft is now, and has been since 1867, unconstitutional. It is involuntary servitude banned under the 14th Amendment. That it has been permitted does not make it right.
Click to expand...
I haven't really looked into that -- do you know whether any courts have taken up the question of the 14th amendment's effect on the permissibility of conscription?
 
Arkady said:
I'm happy to criticize Obama's foreign policy. Yes, the death rate in Afghanistan did, in fact, go up on Obama's watch -- and could be said to have tripled depending on how you do the calculation. However, it's also true we're on track to lose only about six Americans there this year, which would be half as many as the lowest annual toll of the Bush years (2001). He has made many missteps in foreign policy, by way of being too quick to get us militarily involved and too slow to extricate us. But, overall, the situation has improved in terms of the cumulative cost of such interventions (both the tax dollar costs and the US body count), relative to the Bush era.
Click to expand...

Given that he campaigned on ending the wars, I'd call it a fail. I guess eight years wasn't enough. Maybe if he had a third term...
 
<<<<There's a move to have women register for the draft. The gender issue doesn't interest me much, since I think it's obvious that if there is a draft, it should be applied fairly to both genders. The thornier issue is whether a draft makes sense at all. >>>>

You'll notice that movement is from the same movement that wanted women in combat in the first place: Liberal Democrats. They have ALWAYS supported the military draft.

<<<<It's one of those few remaining issues where you find a lot of liberals and conservatives on both sides. Liberals who object to the draft tend to do so on the moral grounds that forcing someone to kill and die for a cause he doesn't agree with is wrong, while liberals who support the draft tend to do so on the grounds that without it the real burden of our wars will tend to fall mostly on the children of the working class, since rich kids don't tend to go into the military (other than the National Guard, to dodge a draft), so a draft promotes economic fairness. As for conservatives, supporters of the draft tend to support it based on the practical issue of how to make sure we have an adequate stream of high-quality bodies to throw at our military adventures, while opponents see it as the ultimate example of Big Brother infringing on individual liberties.>>>>

Ayn Rand once looked at the military draft as a violation of the Fifth Amendment, which states one cannot be denied life liberty or property without due process.

<<<<In my case, I oppose the draft on the grounds that it distributes the burden of a national project unfairly. Think about it in terms of the alternative. The alternative is to pay enough that you get an adequate supply of quality volunteers.>>>>

Yet your left wing side of the aisle wants to cut military spending.

<<<In the big picture, the draft is a way for older people (who dominate the government) to force younger people (who do the fighting) to do the work for them at whatever price the older people feel like paying.>>>>

Older people like Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Barak Barack Obama.

<<<It's like saying "you'd charge too much to do this voluntarily, so I'll just force you to do it at a price I dictate, and if you don't like it, you can go to jail." It's essentially a limited form of slavery.>>>

Rand also called it that.

<<This is one of those areas where I'm more of a free-market guy: let the market set the price for the work. If the price ends up being higher than taxpayers think is worth it to them, then don't go to war.>>>

Then we should have NEVER gone to war with Germany and Japan. They were on the other side of the world.
 
Arkady said:
Call it what you will but it was clearly a huge improvement.
Click to expand...

First of all, let's clear up ONE major fcking LIE right here and now. Obama campaigned on getting us out of Iraq and then he bragged that he made good on that promise.

THAT'S A FCKING LIE.

President George W. Bush is the one who got our soldiers out of Iraq by signing the SOFA accord.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.–Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.–Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement
The U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq) was a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008. It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. combat forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.[
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.–Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement#cite_note-sofatext-1
Why did Bush sign that?

The pact required criminal charges for holding prisoners over 24 hours, and required a warrant for searches of homes and buildings that were not related to combat.[1] U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces would have been subject to Iraqi criminal law, while contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. agencies would retain their immunity. If U.S. forces committed still undecided "major premeditated felonies" while off-duty and off-base, they would have been subjected to an undecided procedures laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. certified the forces were off-duty

So what did Obama do?

HE ANNOUNCED THE DATE OF WITHDRAWAL, GIVING ISIS PLENTY OF TIME TO RETRENCH AND REGROUP.
 
Arkady said:
I haven't really looked into that -- do you know whether any courts have taken up the question of the 14th amendment's effect on the permissibility of conscription?
Click to expand...

I don't know. My guess is that it was never challenged on those grounds. I think the underpinning for it is the executive mandate to call forth the militia.
 
Arkady said:
I'm happy to criticize Obama's foreign policy. Yes, the death rate in Afghanistan did, in fact, go up on Obama's watch -- and could be said to have tripled depending on how you do the calculation. However, it's also true we're on track to lose only about six Americans there this year, which would be half as many as the lowest annual toll of the Bush years (2001). He has made many missteps in foreign policy, by way of being too quick to get us militarily involved and too slow to extricate us. But, overall, the situation has improved in terms of the cumulative cost of such interventions (both the tax dollar costs and the US body count), relative to the Bush era.
Click to expand...

OK.... who are you and what have you done with Arkady???????? :)
 
reason10 said:
President George W. Bush is the one who got our soldiers out of Iraq by signing the SOFA accord.

Click to expand...

Bush signed a status of forces document. Would he actually have pulled out, or would he have found an excuse for keeping the fighting going? It's impossible to say. All we know for sure is that he dying was still happening when he left office -- 314 Americans killed in Iraq in 2008 alone. Fortunately, the US death toll in Iraq has fallen, under Obama, to a mere trickle.
 
Arkady said:
Bush signed a status of forces document. Would he actually have pulled out, or would he have found an excuse for keeping the fighting going? It's impossible to say. All we know for sure is that he dying was still happening when he left office -- 314 Americans killed in Iraq in 2008 alone. Fortunately, the US death toll in Iraq has fallen, under Obama, to a mere trickle.
Click to expand...

Unlike Obama he would have looked at whether Iraq was stable enough to support itself..Obama did not look at now it's all fvcked up, and it's all his fault.
 
<<<<Bush signed a status of forces document. Would he actually have pulled out, or would he have found an excuse for keeping the fighting going?>>>>

You didn't read the link. He signed the agreement because Iraq was about to start arresting our soldiers for trumped up crimes. Bush was smart enough to get our men OUT of that clusterfuck.

<<<It's impossible to say.>>>

I just told you the facts. I never find the facts impossible to say.

<<<All we know for sure is that he dying was still happening when he left office -- 314 Americans killed in Iraq in 2008 alone.>>>>

And SIXTY MILLION DIED in Roosevelt's quagmire. (since you're keeping score.)

<<<<Fortunately, the US death toll in Iraq has fallen, under Obama, to a mere trickle.>>>

1. Obama had nothing to do with any death toll falling since HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TROOP REMOVAL, AND

2. By trying to take credit for Bush's actions and announce the exact date of the withdrawal AND STUPIDLY LEAVING ALL OUR HARDWARE BEHIND, Obama succeeded in ARMING AND SUPPORTING ISIS.

And now ISIS has taken American casualties on our own fcking soil. And that's ALL ON THE KENYAN SHOESHINE BOY.
 
Drumcollie said:
Unlike Obama he would have looked at whether Iraq was stable enough to support itself..Obama did not look at now it's all fvcked up, and it's all his fault.
Click to expand...

Bush wasn't looking at Iraq in that fashion when its government began threatening to arrest our soldiers and civilian forces. He saved the men. That's what SOFA was all about.

And here's the REAL kick in the ass:

Obviously nobody here had ever heard of SOFA before I brought it up. I hadn't heard of it until a soldier who had been in Iraq brought it up. And this soldier (who by the way is also a flaming liberal, a Bernie Sanders supporter, and thanks to a restaurant manager who cruises Craigslist, we now know this guy was also a flaming fag) brought me up to speed on the truth. I thought he was full of shit.

I went home and looked it up. He was right. That means OBAMA IS A [Unwelcome language removed] LIAR.
 
reason10 said:
Bush wasn't looking at Iraq in that fashion when its government began threatening to arrest our soldiers and civilian forces. He saved the men. That's what SOFA was all about.

And here's the REAL kick in the ass:

Obviously nobody here had ever heard of SOFA before I brought it up. I hadn't heard of it until a soldier who had been in Iraq brought it up. And this soldier (who by the way is also a flaming liberal, a Bernie Sanders supporter, and thanks to a restaurant manager who cruises Craigslist, we now know this guy was also a flaming fag) brought me up to speed on the truth. I thought he was full of shit.

I went home and looked it up. He was right. That means OBAMA IS A [Unwelcome language removed] LIAR.
Click to expand...

Obama is a born liar...it's why one becomes lefty...to lie!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top