Total Posts:126|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

the draft

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 1:49:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why is conscription legal in the 21st century? I don't get it. The idea that the government can pull you from your home to go and fight for them is so disgustingly outrageous that I would expect massive resistance. Yet liberals don't talk about it. Libertarians are too busy whining over safety net programs. And Conservatives are actually trying to rationalize it. There's something ridiculous about deliberately dying for a country. Country's are empty political constructions - 99.9999% of the population full of people you've never even heard of. On what basis does this historically transient object take precedence over any human life? If it comes down to some massive war that threatens the continuity of the human species, then so be it. Existence is not an end in itself.

Why are people so complacent?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Niwsa
Posts: 161
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 1:54:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 1:49:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is conscription legal in the 21st century? I don't get it. The idea that the government can pull you from your home to go and fight for them is so disgustingly outrageous that I would expect massive resistance. Yet liberals don't talk about it. Libertarians are too busy whining over safety net programs. And Conservatives are actually trying to rationalize it. There's something ridiculous about deliberately dying for a country. Country's are empty political constructions - 99.9999% of the population full of people you've never even heard of. On what basis does this historically transient object take precedence over any human life? If it comes down to some massive war that threatens the continuity of the human species, then so be it. Existence is not an end in itself.

Why are people so complacent?

I would agree that it seems out of place in our modern society, atleast to me. However, it's easy to see why it's still around, the government might need it, and, as you said, political factions are off pressing for different things.

What fascinates me is how another draft would be executed, it's mind-boggling really at least to me and a fun scenario to imagine.
http://debate.org... <--- please vote!
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 2:00:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Libertarians don't exactly have a lot of pull in Washington to get anything done and most are, in rhetoric, against conscription.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
thett3
Posts: 14,375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 2:07:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The lack of resistance you see towards the draft can probably be attributed to the fact that the US doesn't have a functional draft. If they ever implement one again I'm sure there will be resistance like there was during the Vietnam war
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 2:13:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 2:07:18 PM, thett3 wrote:
The lack of resistance you see towards the draft can probably be attributed to the fact that the US doesn't have a functional draft. If they ever implement one again I'm sure there will be resistance like there was during the Vietnam war

This. I hate the fact that I had to register for Selective Service but I'd obviously never go if they started a draft. Canada's the way to go. Though I bet I could qualify as a conscientious objector. It's all hypothetical anyways I guess.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 2:14:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 2:07:18 PM, thett3 wrote:
The lack of resistance you see towards the draft can probably be attributed to the fact that the US doesn't have a functional draft. If they ever implement one again I'm sure there will be resistance like there was during the Vietnam war

The problem with that is that the draft will not be defeating in the middle of an escalating war. Now is the time to make it permanently illegal. The media seems only to bring up issues when they are at the height of relevancy/urgency and people are more divided than ever - that way, we can quibble over it for a few weeks, end up with nothing done, and then move on when the next thing catches their attention.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 2:20:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 2:14:23 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 12/26/2012 2:07:18 PM, thett3 wrote:
The lack of resistance you see towards the draft can probably be attributed to the fact that the US doesn't have a functional draft. If they ever implement one again I'm sure there will be resistance like there was during the Vietnam war

The problem with that is that the draft will not be defeating in the middle of an escalating war. Now is the time to make it permanently illegal. The media seems only to bring up issues when they are at the height of relevancy/urgency and people are more divided than ever - that way, we can quibble over it for a few weeks, end up with nothing done, and then move on when the next thing catches their attention.

That's true. Despite all the resistance during Vietnam conscription wasn't abolished so God knows what it would take to abolish it during another world war. Although I think most people, even in a time of peace, would want to keep the system for emergency purposes. You're right that they're just buying into the whole country thing but getting most people, conservatives or liberals or anything else, to shake off that assumption is very very difficult...especially since most of us went to state schools.

Have you registered for selective service yet?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 2:20:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 2:14:23 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 12/26/2012 2:07:18 PM, thett3 wrote:
The lack of resistance you see towards the draft can probably be attributed to the fact that the US doesn't have a functional draft. If they ever implement one again I'm sure there will be resistance like there was during the Vietnam war

The problem with that is that the draft will not be defeating in the middle of an escalating war. Now is the time to make it permanently illegal. The media seems only to bring up issues when they are at the height of relevancy/urgency and people are more divided than ever - that way, we can quibble over it for a few weeks, end up with nothing done, and then move on when the next thing catches their attention.

More pressing to me are the active military campaigns overseas that are resulting in thousands of innocent deaths, not the possibility that someday some arse might try to re-institute the draft. It's legal technically but current social attitudes basically make it so that it would never be successfully re-instituted today.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
thett3
Posts: 14,375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 2:22:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 2:13:57 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/26/2012 2:07:18 PM, thett3 wrote:
The lack of resistance you see towards the draft can probably be attributed to the fact that the US doesn't have a functional draft. If they ever implement one again I'm sure there will be resistance like there was during the Vietnam war

This. I hate the fact that I had to register for Selective Service but I'd obviously never go if they started a draft. Canada's the way to go. Though I bet I could qualify as a conscientious objector. It's all hypothetical anyways I guess.

For us it is. It's ridiculously unlikely that US heg will deteriorate to the point of a draft being needed when were young...although there's a reasonable chance our kids could get called up
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 3:10:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
You know, for one who talks about the 'social contract' which justifies taxes, i also feel that the same reasoning can be used to justify the draft as well.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 3:16:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 3:10:49 PM, darkkermit wrote:
You know, for one who talks about the 'social contract' which justifies taxes, i also feel that the same reasoning can be used to justify the draft as well.

I was thinking this too. It's interesting when a liberal tries to discern what rights of aggression the State does and does not have over the individual.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 3:20:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Scarier than the draft is the methods the government is using to avoid it: making enlistment an appealing alternative to finding a real job, by lying about facts on foreign policy, and other measures such as suggesting that enlisting is honorable, necessary, or a viable career choice (with benefits, increased incentives, etc.). A military should be used for protection only. By eliminating some of the incentives to join, ours would be a lot smaller (safer and cheaper) though not necessarily less efficient. If our safety were truly threatened, we should expect that people would join to protect and serve as needed.
President of DDO
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 3:50:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 2:13:57 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 12/26/2012 2:07:18 PM, thett3 wrote:
The lack of resistance you see towards the draft can probably be attributed to the fact that the US doesn't have a functional draft. If they ever implement one again I'm sure there will be resistance like there was during the Vietnam war

This. I hate the fact that I had to register for Selective Service but I'd obviously never go if they started a draft. Canada's the way to go. Though I bet I could qualify as a conscientious objector. It's all hypothetical anyways I guess.

Why wouldn't you go? It would be criminal, with exceptionally severe consequences if you were drafted and didn't find a "legitimate" reason to dodge it.

Conscientious objectors can still get shot on the battlefield (medics). They just don't carry a gun. You're screwed both ways IMHO.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 3:57:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 3:20:14 PM, Danielle wrote:
Scarier than the draft is the methods the government is using to avoid it: making enlistment an appealing alternative to finding a real job, by lying about facts on foreign policy, and other measures such as suggesting that enlisting is honorable, necessary, or a viable career choice (with benefits, increased incentives, etc.).

I think the draft is a far more frightening option than any government attempts to avoid it. As a woman, sorry to say, your opinion in this matter is at this point of time still largely irrelevant to the discussion. I expect some terse feedback on this comment.

A military should be used for protection only.

Are preemptive wars a complete and utter anathema to protection?

By eliminating some of the incentives to join, ours would be a lot smaller (safer and cheaper) though not necessarily less efficient. If our safety were truly threatened, we should expect that people would join to protect and serve as needed.

Wholly disagree. By highlighting a sizable pay differential between a soldier's pay and equivalent public/private sector jobs (equivalency determined by education, etc), you decrease morale to an unacceptable degree. Morale is very important when it comes to whether or not you are willing to pull the trigger, or jump on a grenade to save your unit. You do not want soldiers lamenting their decision to join when other occupations would be able to better care for their families and loved ones.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 3:59:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 1:54:58 PM, Niwsa wrote:
At 12/26/2012 1:49:46 PM, 000ike wrote:

What fascinates me is how another draft would be executed, it's mind-boggling really at least to me and a fun scenario to imagine.

This comment is frightening in its naivety. There is nothing "fun" about the necessities of war.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 4:30:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 3:20:14 PM, Danielle wrote:
Scarier than the draft is the methods the government is using to avoid it: making enlistment an appealing alternative to finding a real job.

The military should certainly be scaled down to at least a fifth of the size it is now and I can certainly agree that the military does some ridiculous things to make it appealing for kids. When I got my physical for the Air Force, the military actually set up a bunch of gaming consoles and had the kids play COD or something in the hotel lobby, and the Army recruiting office had a arcade game called, "America's Army", and most of the applicants I met were Army recruits who were talking about being infantrymen. Go figure.

However, I'd rather have the military full of idealistic teens who think they're going to be the next Rambo as opposed to rounding up people at gunpoint who don't want to serve at all.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 4:35:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 4:30:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 12/26/2012 3:20:14 PM, Danielle wrote:
Scarier than the draft is the methods the government is using to avoid it: making enlistment an appealing alternative to finding a real job.

The military should certainly be scaled down to at least a fifth of the size it is now and I can certainly agree that the military does some ridiculous things to make it appealing for kids. When I got my physical for the Air Force, the military actually set up a bunch of gaming consoles and had the kids play COD or something in the hotel lobby, and the Army recruiting office had a arcade game called, "America's Army", and most of the applicants I met were Army recruits who were talking about being infantrymen. Go figure.

However, I'd rather have the military full of idealistic teens who think they're going to be the next Rambo as opposed to rounding up people at gunpoint who don't want to serve at all.

Agree with everything in this comment except for the proposed size of the military. If you're talking about a military 20% of its current size, I think you will be emboldening anyone and everyone to usurp the power vacuum left in its wake. Many of our allies, including NATO and Korea/Japan, rely on our military presence in order to affirm/legitimate these alliances to their people. We are also deploying marines to Australia. Justifications for military spending is an extremely complicated topic.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 4:38:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 4:30:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 12/26/2012 3:20:14 PM, Danielle wrote:
Scarier than the draft is the methods the government is using to avoid it: making enlistment an appealing alternative to finding a real job.

The military should certainly be scaled down to at least a fifth of the size it is now and I can certainly agree that the military does some ridiculous things to make it appealing for kids. When I got my physical for the Air Force, the military actually set up a bunch of gaming consoles and had the kids play COD or something in the hotel lobby, and the Army recruiting office had a arcade game called, "America's Army", and most of the applicants I met were Army recruits who were talking about being infantrymen. Go figure.

However, I'd rather have the military full of idealistic teens who think they're going to be the next Rambo as opposed to rounding up people at gunpoint who don't want to serve at all.

I don't see why anybody would voluntarily join infantry over any other specialty. I mean if they couldn't get another position or were put in that position, alright. But it offers no real career opportunities in the civilian world (besides basic work experience) and more likely to kill someone or be killed or injured.

I do see the benefits of joining the military for career oppporutnites though and the pay isn't that bad. Better then some private sector industries.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 4:46:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Anyways, If the US didn't have such an agressive military then there would be no need for any military at all, with the exception of the national and coast guard. Before, the Us military was only 1% of GDP.

http://upload.wikimedia.org...

Military is all about political influence and little to do with actually defense.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 4:50:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 4:38:54 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/26/2012 4:30:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
I don't see why anybody would voluntarily join infantry over any other specialty. I mean if they couldn't get another position or were put in that position, alright. But it offers no real career opportunities in the civilian world (besides basic work experience) and more likely to kill someone or be killed or injured.

I know right? I'm sure it's because they get an idealistic view of shooting guns, blowing up tanks, and killing bad guys in a warzone from movies, tv, and video games. They don't know that they'll be doing, practically nothing off the sort. There's an idiot in my DEP call who turned down the Army because they didn't offer him an Infantry job, but they did have a medical job available. So he joined the Air Force to be an MP claiming, and I quote, "I don't wanna be a pvssy medic, I wanna carry a gun."

I do see the benefits of joining the military for career oppporutnites though and the pay isn't that bad. Better then some private sector industries.

That's why I joined. I wanted to be an Air Traffic Controller, the Air Force said they would make me one if I joined, so I accepted.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 5:00:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
1. Libertarians openly oppose conscription.

2. They're not up in arms about it because it isn't happening and hasn't happened in a long time.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 5:18:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 4:35:04 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Agree with everything in this comment except for the proposed size of the military. If you're talking about a military 20% of its current size, I think you will be emboldening anyone and everyone to usurp the power vacuum left in its wake.

Disagree. What are our "enemies" going to do? We have more WMDs than every other country in the world combined. As such, we could still turn just about any other country into a parking lot at the push of a button. I highly doubt other countries are going to be messing with us. Our military is bigger than those of the next 25 nations' combined.

Many of our allies, including NATO and Korea/Japan, rely on our military presence in order to affirm/legitimate these alliances to their people. We are also deploying marines to Australia. Justifications for military spending is an extremely complicated topic.

I don't think it's that complicated. I would gladly argue in defunding the military significantly.
President of DDO
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 5:25:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think there is an argument to be made that the draft issue is less important now, cause when a government (read those who have the power to call the shots) decide on war, the technology available means you can do more with less man power.

As such technology has made manpower less of an issue to excute a war compared to say a few hundred years ago.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 6:23:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 4:38:54 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/26/2012 4:30:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 12/26/2012 3:20:14 PM, Danielle wrote:
Scarier than the draft is the methods the government is using to avoid it: making enlistment an appealing alternative to finding a real job.

The military should certainly be scaled down to at least a fifth of the size it is now and I can certainly agree that the military does some ridiculous things to make it appealing for kids. When I got my physical for the Air Force, the military actually set up a bunch of gaming consoles and had the kids play COD or something in the hotel lobby, and the Army recruiting office had a arcade game called, "America's Army", and most of the applicants I met were Army recruits who were talking about being infantrymen. Go figure.

However, I'd rather have the military full of idealistic teens who think they're going to be the next Rambo as opposed to rounding up people at gunpoint who don't want to serve at all.

I don't see why anybody would voluntarily join infantry over any other specialty.

Job qualifications. Anyone can be infantry. Not anyone can operate radio equipment, be a nurse/doctor, engineer, etc...Air Force requirements are generally much higher than the Army's...last I heard the Army was taking people with misdemeanors and possibly felonies on their record.

I mean if they couldn't get another position or were put in that position, alright. But it offers no real career opportunities in the civilian world (besides basic work experience) and more likely to kill someone or be killed or injured.

Security-related industries. Managerial/supervisory experience depending on your rank. Ability to consistently perform under what most civilian jobs would deem extenuating circumstances.

I do see the benefits of joining the military for career oppporutnites though and the pay isn't that bad. Better then some private sector industries.

Military pay is deceptively good. Most military benefits (such as free housing, even when you receive a pocket-able allotment to rent off-base, free meals, etc) are not taxable and not included as income.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 6:24:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 5:11:32 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/26/2012 5:00:12 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
1. Libertarians openly oppose conscription.

2. They're not up in arms about it because it isn't happening in the United States and hasn't happened in the United States in a long time.

Truth. Nice corrections.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 6:27:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 5:18:25 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 12/26/2012 4:35:04 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Agree with everything in this comment except for the proposed size of the military. If you're talking about a military 20% of its current size, I think you will be emboldening anyone and everyone to usurp the power vacuum left in its wake.

Disagree. What are our "enemies" going to do? We have more WMDs than every other country in the world combined. As such, we could still turn just about any other country into a parking lot at the push of a button. I highly doubt other countries are going to be messing with us. Our military is bigger than those of the next 25 nations' combined.

I think I did not assert my point strongly enough. Many of our allies are allies precisely because of our military presence. What seem like ironclad alliances around the world would become much less ironclad without our gigantic military presence. It was not that long ago that we were at war with half of Europe.

Regarding WMD, would we nuke Germany? Italy? France? We may have to ask such questions if we draw down our military significantly.

If you draw down spending by 80%, our military would no longer be larger than the next 25 nations combined.


Many of our allies, including NATO and Korea/Japan, rely on our military presence in order to affirm/legitimate these alliances to their people. We are also deploying marines to Australia. Justifications for military spending is an extremely complicated topic.

I don't think it's that complicated. I would gladly argue in defunding the military significantly.

Hmm...
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 6:40:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 5:25:44 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
I think there is an argument to be made that the draft issue is less important now, cause when a government (read those who have the power to call the shots) decide on war, the technology available means you can do more with less man power.

As such technology has made manpower less of an issue to excute a war compared to say a few hundred years ago.

This is a fallacious argument. War is an existential threat. Most countries that have faced an invading army have indeed armed every man, woman, and children lest they face the common atrocity of the rape, pillage, and sacking of major cities.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 7:09:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/26/2012 5:18:25 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 12/26/2012 4:35:04 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

I don't think it's that complicated. I would gladly argue in defunding the military significantly.

The wording of the resolution is going to be key. I'd also gladly argue that we cannot afford to draw down military funding by 80% (i.e., to only 1/5 of what it is today). I'd be curious to see what your justification might be.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/26/2012 8:37:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Idk. Liberals generally aren't too down on deontological rights. Conservatives are too big on patriotism and honor and libertarians don't have a big enough voice.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)