Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: unclewest who wrote (17672)	11/25/2003 6:18:25 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793738

When your son, Kerry's son, Dean's son, and Daschle's son are not just eligible for the draft...but likely to be drafted...ya'll will have an entirely different view of the military. I understand where you are coming from, Mike, but I totally disagree. We don't need people who don't want to be there. lindybill@RA19482332.com

To: unclewest who wrote (17672)	11/26/2003 10:14:13 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 793738

If we can free up 100,000 troops simply by withdrawing them from cold war positions where they no longer serve any useful function, for what do we need to draft people? The only manpower-intensive role the military is being asked to take on these days is that of an occupation force, and I think practically everyone agrees that it’s a role we want to get out of as fast as possible and not repeat. Most of our current volunteers get 4 months of combat training, serve 3-4 years and get discharged. Training 4 months for 4 years of service is a much better ratio than training 4 months for 2 years of service, and morale and retention rates will be way lower – the latter probably near zero – among draftees. When your son, Kerry's son, Dean's son, and Daschle's son are not just eligible for the draft...but likely to be drafted...ya'll will have an entirely different view of the military. My son has little or nothing in common with Kerry’s, Dean’s, or Daschle’s. Not that the latter would have to worry – the sons of politicians generally find a way out (ask GB2 about that). Where, as well, did you get the impression that I have a negative view of the military? I have nothing against the military – it’s the civilians that tell them what to do that I’m not happy about. The military follows orders and does what it’s told to do, very efficiently. It’s not their fault that the orders are coming from posturing blowhards. You see the same syndrome in individuals. Give an insecure man a gun, and he’ll often turn into a swaggering jackass. That’s not the gun’s fault. Give a neocon an army to command, and he wants to go out and smack someone around, just because he can, and it permits a bit of macho strutting before the voters. Then the consequences set in, and everybody wonders why….