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: The Dodgy Ticker who wrote (243300)	3/24/2008 4:25:20 AM
From: unclewest	Respond to of 794033

I like your idea. Although if everyone had to serve, 12-18 months would probably be sufficient.

To: The Dodgy Ticker who wrote (243300)	3/24/2008 8:16:53 AM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794033

Could you at least allow that a Constitutional Amendment would be required to empower the government to take away the liberty of every single 18 year old citizen? Or do you think that authority already exists? Or don't you give a damn as long as the collective reap marvelous benefits?

To: The Dodgy Ticker who wrote (243300)	3/24/2008 10:22:04 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794033

The professionalism, pride and effectiveness of the armed services today is directly related to three things. 1. It's voluntary. Young people enlist motivated to serve. 2. Aggressive drug testing. 3. Leadership. The dope smoking unmotivated armies of the past are gone, hopefully forever. All we need to do is provide the right kind of incentive for young people, such as the ability to go to college and earn a decent paycheck while serving. The all-volunteer military works, what didn't work was the draft. When we had the draft, leadership tossed bodies over the side at the drop of a hat. Thousands died needlessly, because generals thought they had an unlimited supply of people. If the same media scrutiny were applied during WW2 that applies today, the memory of military competence would be completely different. We are winning this war with an all-volunteer force. Think of how remarkable that is. Many never thought we could sustain a lengthy engagement and still meet recruiting goals. Yes, it has been a struggle, but with creative use of talent, and by integrating more closely all the branches of the service, the job is getting done. Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it until proven otherwise. Oh, one last thing.... We need our media, Hollyweird and clowns like Reverend Wright to stop running down the pride young people have for our country, so more would be inclined to serve and enlist. Patriotism is not Jingoism. And if I hear another leftist whine about how jingoistic everyone is I may puke. Never apologize for being patriotic! That last sentence I stole from Toby Keith as he said farewell at his concert here recently. We need more Toby Keith's influencing young people and less Paris Hilton's. Sorry Robert, I didn't mean to insinuate you were shared those views, just bouncing off your post to rant a bit..

To: The Dodgy Ticker who wrote (243300)	3/25/2008 11:58:35 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794033

I'm against the draft in principle. Something like WWII might make me accept it where the practicality of the situation overcomes the principle, but even then its not like I see the draft as actually being a good thing, it would just be a necessary evil. Which doesn't mean that there is no benefits from a draft, or that the benefits can't possibly extend beyond having more people in the military when we need them. The draft may indeed have helped reduce racial prejudices and helped reduce discrimination, but even if it has some good results that doesn't mean it isn't an injustice. It is forced labor. I've got a problem with that.