Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Draft, Charlie Rangel...What Think You?  
User currently offlinesoon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks ago) and read 2083 times:

Once again the tax evading Charlie Rangel is once again pushing the Draft. He is very much in favor of specifically sending sons of affluent America rather than the "poor" as he put it. Not only is this an insult to our men and women currently in uniform as many come from all walks of life, but this seems to have an underlying agenda rather than being a solution to low recruitment.
If amnesty is granted to 25,000,000 illegals, howz about mandating two years mandatory service in the US Military to prove you want to be an American...Then and only then will you have earned your Flag...any thoughts, (and no fighting...just my opinion, but one I feel strongly about). I'm interested in Viet vets remarks on this issue especially. I have a 21 year old and given the past record of conflicts this country has been involved in...It would be difficult for me to sanction my son going to war for a government that can't tie its own shoelaces. On the other hand, if we are attacked here at home, I will personally thrust a rifle in my sons hands and tell him...lets get to work...in a heartbeat!

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8269 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks ago) and read 2066 times:

The need for a draft was pretty evident when Bush had to use excessive individual deployments and Stop Loss (a "draft at the end of an enlistment") to maintain troop strengths in Iraq. Our troops were deployed for too long and had too short a time back home to rebuild and prepare for the next deployment. The draft also ensured that after your two years of active duty you were sent home. With Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld a soldier only thought he (or she) would be released from active duty when their commitment was completed. The political retention of these soldiers was only needed to avoid the political problems of a draft.

I do disagree with Charles about the poor serving. For many this was the path out of poverty because they qualified for the GI Bill with their two year service. The two big points in my day were the education support and home loans. That was a huge leverage for many. Today the education part of the GI Bill is a major help even to the middle class, simply because college is so overpriced.

The one thing I would have liked to have seen was a law that required anyone receiving a deferment for college being committed to service after they graduated.

Another thing I would like to see is the return of the 2 year active duty period for a "basic enlistment". Personally I believe that would be a wise idea for many young kids leaving high school.


User currently offlinePacNWjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 980 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks ago) and read 2066 times:

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
but this seems to have an underlying agenda rather than being a solution to low recruitment.
Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
It would be difficult for me to sanction my son going to war for a government that can't tie its own shoelaces.

Hence the underlying agenda. Representative Rangle opposes the current U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. He believes that a majority of Americans would also oppose these operations if they or their loved ones were in jeopardy of being drafted. Rangle calculates that as long as Americans can sit safely at home while others (often individuals with few economic options who join the military for financial reasons) fight America's wars, most Americans are happy to sit back and do nothing. But if everyone and their family were subject to the possibility of dying on the battlefields of unwisely waged wars, opposition to those wars would be undeniable. The main flaw in Rangle's theory is his belief that the U.S. military today is mostly comprised of individuals who see military service as their only option to earn a living (as if the entire military today was made up of characters in the Bill Murray movie "Stripes"). There are plenty of people who join the military in the U.S. because they value military service in and of itself and/or because they support the causes of U.S. foreign policy.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25370 posts, RR: 49
Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks ago) and read 2063 times:

Maybe forced national service (note I did not say military necessarily) would be good for society and our youth.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2053 times:

Quoting PacNWjet (Reply 2):
Hence the underlying agenda. Representative Rangle opposes the current U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. He believes that a majority of Americans would also oppose these operations if they or their loved ones were in jeopardy of being drafted.

I know the families of a number of soldiers who either have gone or will go to the mideast, and as it happens all of them are well-off families. Their families are supportive and proud, although the mothers tend to get worked up a bit. I think Charlie is wrong if he really thinks that drafting these guys is going to cause an upsurge of antiwar sentiment.

It has been proven over the past 100 years that a volunteer military is far more effective than an army made of draftees, both in terms of getting the job done and with the minimum of friendly losses. Rangle apparently doesn't give a damn about that, so I have a better plan for Rangle that would cost far less money and have exactly the same effect as a draft. He can sponsor a law that bans the use of body armor by our troops and the use of armored vehicles.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4385 posts, RR: 19
Reply 5, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2044 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
Maybe forced national service (note I did not say military necessarily) would be good for society and our youth.

Compulsory national service (and I agree, it should be necessarily of a military nature) would work wonders for American society.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently onlinesw733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6324 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2042 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
Maybe forced national service (note I did not say military necessarily) would be good for society and our youth.

If so, let the USA please take Israel's policy and make it mandatory for BOTH genders. I mean, this IS 2010...

Several successful countries have conscription. Besides Israel, there is South Korea, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey, Colombia, Brazil, and several others.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2039 times:

Quoting avek00 (Reply 5):
Compulsory national service (and I agree, it should be necessarily of a military nature) would work wonders for American society.

Even given what I said before, I would agree. I would not necessarily put them on the front lines, but there is a huge logistical "tail" in any military that they can work in.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15744 posts, RR: 27
Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2033 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
Maybe forced national service (note I did not say military necessarily) would be good for society and our youth.

Well, if the choice is join the Army or go paint fences in a ghetto, I would join the Army. At least in Baghdad I would get to shoot back.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2032 times:

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
He is very much in favor of specifically sending sons of affluent America rather than the "poor" as he put it.

Just like a good elitist.

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
If amnesty is granted to 25,000,000 illegals, howz about mandating two years mandatory service in the US Military to prove you want to be an American...Then and only then will you have earned your Flag...any thoughts

Great idea, would weed out the ones who just want to use this country as an ATM machine.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
Well, if the choice is join the Army or go paint fences in a ghetto, I would join the Army. At least in Baghdad I would get to shoot back.

Post of the week!


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8269 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2001 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
It has been proven over the past 100 years that a volunteer military is far more effective than an army made of draftees, both in terms of getting the job done and with the minimum of friendly losses.

The draft for WW II resulted in a pretty effective military. Vietnam was a different story because the reason for being there and the low quality of a lot of the leadership were a force dragging the standards down. Iraq was a volunteer force, but long term the military was severely damaged by extended tours, too little time at home between deployments and the Stop Loss program. Again, bad leadership - this time at the very top.


User currently offlinesoon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1957 times:

How typically beaurocratic...lets induce another draft to fight wars with "empty rifles", against the "really don't exist, Islamic radicals" so in the end we can be "non Victorious" and postumously issue "restraint" medals to our sons and daughters......What are we fighting for?, ...frankly I don't give a damn,...next stop is Vietnam...and it's one two three...blah blah...

I really feel sorry for the brave men and women that are stuck in this vortex of blunder...they are good people which brings me to this question...Given the climate of everything in the US, isn't it easier to send and keep the generally conservative, honorable men and women of our Military out of Obamas hair by keeping them overseas. Am I the only one that thinks such things?   


User currently offlineus330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3871 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1945 times:

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
He is very much in favor of specifically sending sons of affluent America rather than the "poor" as he put it

Kind of like how he is very much in favor of everybody in America paying taxes and being honest with the IRS rather than himself?


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26493 posts, RR: 75
Reply 13, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1942 times:

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):

If amnesty is granted to 25,000,000 illegal

25 million now? When did FOX News make this new number up?

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
howz about mandating two years mandatory service in the US Military to prove you want to be an American...Then and only then will you have earned your Flag..

Yeah, because military are somehow "better" Americans than the rest of us   

Quoting avek00 (Reply 5):
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
Maybe forced national service (note I did not say military necessarily) would be good for society and our youth.

Compulsory national service (and I agree, it should be necessarily of a military nature) would work wonders for American society.

No thanks. I like freedom.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9):

Great idea, would weed out the ones who just want to use this country as an ATM machine.

As opposed to weeding out us as a country who love cheap labor and low food prices?



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5274 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1922 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
Yeah, because military are somehow "better" Americans than the rest of us

Exactly. I'm tired of this myth. Military service in this country is paid, and is a career choice for many people. It's certainly a career choice that many of us would never make, but it's not as though military men and women are serving out of kindness and selflessness.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
As opposed to weeding out us as a country who love cheap labor and low food prices?

Let's not cloud the argument with facts of any kind. Politicians and ordinary citizens can grandstand against illegal immigration all they want, our economy would take a major hit if illegal immigrants were sent home tomorrow. Let's face it, no one's lining up to take the jobs they perform, and I'm fairly certain that no one is prepared to pay $10/pound for oranges at the grocery store.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1913 times:

Quoting OA412 (Reply 14):
Exactly. I'm tired of this myth. Military service in this country is paid, and is a career choice for many people. It's certainly a career choice that many of us would never make, but it's not as though military men and women are serving out of kindness and selflessness.

Meet a soldier home from Iraq who has lost a leg in service to his country, and who is anxious to finish his rehab so that he can go rejoin his unit which is now in Afghanistan, because he does not want to let his buddies down. Such people are not uncommon in the military. Meet one of them and tell me that they are not selfless. Your attitude is disappointing.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26493 posts, RR: 75
Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1902 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 15):
Meet a soldier home from Iraq who has lost a leg in service to his country, and who is anxious to finish his rehab so that he can go rejoin his unit which is now in Afghanistan, because he does not want to let his buddies down. Such people are not uncommon in the military. Meet one of them and tell me that they are not selfless. Your attitude is disappointing.

That makes someone brave, but it doesn't make them more of an American.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlinesoon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1893 times:

Quoting us330 (Reply 12):

Bingo!   

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
25 million now? When did FOX News make this new number up?

Really, who's counting?...does it matter at this point?

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
Yeah, because military are somehow "better" Americans than the rest of us

Wrong...it would help to clarify the agendas of those that WANT to enter this country. Nothing wrong with earning your keep.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1861 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 16):
That makes someone brave, but it doesn't make them more of an American.

It marks the difference between those who have earned their rights versus those who enjoy them on the backs of others. It's the difference between those people who are charitable in their private lives, and those who give little or nothing but complain about inequities.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11657 posts, RR: 15
Reply 19, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1828 times:

Quoting avek00 (Reply 5):
Compulsory national service (and I agree, it should be necessarily of a military nature) would work wonders for American society.

Isn't that socialism? Everyone working toward the greater good?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 18):
It marks the difference between those who have earned their rights versus those who enjoy them on the backs of others.

Like...? Are you refering to those who stand in front of Home Depot? Do they vote? Can they hold public office? Last I checked, here in California, they pay sales tax when they purchase things, meaning they do contribute in some way. Granted, they probably don't file an income tax return (not all of them are illegal) but look at some of the CEOs. A few of them are paid very very little income and pay very little if any income tax. If they do their accounting right, they will get back what they paid in capital gains neting them very little in tax in all facits of the game. Yet, they can vote. They can hold office but contribute little financially. What right have they earned? They were born with a sliver spoon in their mouth in the United States. That is the only difference.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 18):
It's the difference between those people who are charitable in their private lives, and those who give little or nothing but complain about inequities.

Because those that complain might not be able to give because they have no private funds to give?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1814 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 19):
Like...? Are you refering to those who stand in front of Home Depot? Do they vote? Can they hold public office? Last I checked, here in California, they pay sales tax when they purchase things, meaning they do contribute in some way. Granted, they probably don't file an income tax return (not all of them are illegal) but look at some of the CEOs. A few of them are paid very very little income and pay very little if any income tax. If they do their accounting right, they will get back what they paid in capital gains neting them very little in tax in all facits of the game. Yet, they can vote. They can hold office but contribute little financially. What right have they earned? They were born with a sliver spoon in their mouth in the United States. That is the only difference.

Count on you to completely miss the point entirely.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 19):
Because those that complain might not be able to give because they have no private funds to give?

A waitress on minimum wage can be more charitable than Bill Gates simply by putting $10 a week into the collection plate at church. Again, you miss the point.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently onlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3646 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1785 times:

Does he have a plan on how to pay for it?

User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4385 posts, RR: 19
Reply 22, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1781 times:

I should have proofread more carefully - I support national service, but not necessarily mandatory military service. I will say there are far too many people in my age range who are a) completely without meaningful direction in their lives, and b) disengaged beyond belief from the goings-on of the society. Neither is healthy for America's short- and long-term survival, much less prosperity.


Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5646 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1763 times:

Several of the members posting on this board have no idea what they're talking about. I won't point out specifics, because we don't really need another flame-fest. You know who you are.

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
On the other hand, if we are attacked here at home, I will personally thrust a rifle in my sons hands and tell him...lets get to work...in a heartbeat!


Appalling.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5274 posts, RR: 24
Reply 24, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1750 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 15):
Meet a soldier home from Iraq who has lost a leg in service to his country, and who is anxious to finish his rehab so that he can go rejoin his unit which is now in Afghanistan, because he does not want to let his buddies down. Such people are not uncommon in the military. Meet one of them and tell me that they are not selfless.

But that's not selflessness. It's bravery and devotion, but selflessness would imply that they are acting without reward, which our troops are not.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 15):
Your attitude is disappointing.

Why? I make no apologies for the fact that I will not participate in the deification of the military that has been in vogue for the last decade or so in this country. The men and women serving in the armed forces perform an important role, and do something that many of us are unwilling to do, but they are not better than you or I for having done it.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 23):
Several of the members posting on this board have no idea what they're talking about. I won't point out specifics, because we don't really need another flame-fest. You know who you are.

Then why bring it up? If you think you know better than several members posting in this thread, why not discuss specifics rather than just dancing around the issue?



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
25 Mudboy : I think he was trying to say, if they want to be Americans that bad, this is a good way to earn it, just as other FNs that join the US Military do. B
26 DocLightning : The agenda is that it will make the country much more personally invested in the idea of sending our troops abroad because that will mean that everyo
27 Yellowstone : Enough of the shallow Starship Troopers philosophy, okay? No US soldier has fought or died to defend the rights of Americans since at least WW2. And
28 Mudboy : An exactly who is going to stand between you and whatever force does decide to invade our country, if it should ever happen, because obviously you wi
29 Yellowstone : You should read what I wrote a bit more carefully. Yes, the presence of a military that can fend off foreign invasion is necessary to the defense of
30 Maverick623 : Ah, historical revisionism at its best.
31 DocLightning : What's appalling is what happened after 9/11: we invaded Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.
32 Slider : Well, yeah, actually it does. Or at least it gives those who have sacrificed a FAR deeper and more profound appreciation of liberty and of the sacrif
33 Lufthansa411 : Here in Germany it has had its good and bad sides for sure. There is mandatory military and civil service for 6 months after you finish Gymnasium (hi
34 soon7x7 : Problem with 9/11 is we were not attacked by an advisorial government/country... unlike Pearl Harbor, we knew what we had to do and where to do it. T
35 Post contains images MadameConcorde : What Think You? What think me? I have got only one thing to say: Stop the war.
36 Post contains images soon7x7 : Do you think that we are not on the threshold of something like this now?...IMO, the globe is as unstable as nuclear fission on too many levels. Ener
37 Post contains images Maverick623 : Somewhat agreed, in that we went into Iraq at the wrong time for the wrong reasons, basically alone. However, my comment was directed at soon's obvio
38 Post contains images dxing : More like CNN or MSNBC. No one should have a problem with giving 2-4 years of their life in service to their country. No, because after you have done
39 D L X : And the people that did that... are they in Iraq?
40 Dreadnought : And the people who attacked Pearl Harbor... were they in Germany? Silly question.
41 Post contains links Slider : Have you ever watched Jay Leno's recurring bit he has called "Jaywalking?" He goes on the street and talks to various idiotic mouthbreathers who are
42 Maverick623 : Even Jay screwed it up. We didn't "get" our independence in 1776, but in 1783 with the Treaty of Ghent. We did however declare independence on July [
43 JBirdAV8r : I believe you're thinking of the Treaty of Paris. The Treaty of Ghent ended the War of 1812 (in 1814). But "get" vs "declare" in this context is a po
44 BMI727 : We should have sealed the deal back in 1991. Let's just forget nation building and just go kill terrorists.
45 soon7x7 : Sounds like a plan..first lets give back our soldiers their rounds!
46 Post contains images D L X : Umm... I'm pretty sure they were an alliance... Yeah, pretty sure. Silly answer. No, I didn't. My personal thoughts are that we should have been ther
47 DeltaMD90 : Ugh this draft talk again. It really isn't my place to talk policy, but I will tell you, when I was in basic training, there was this one kid that did
48 Yellowstone : Not only that, but here's how the series of events went... December 7 - Japan attacks US. December 8 - US declares war on Japan December 11 - Germany
49 Slider : Solid post....really good points.
50 D L X : Same here. My dad grew up in the hood. Now he's Lt. Col. (retired). A faaaar cry from the hood he grew up in. And because the military lifted him up,
51 merlot : Nixon got rid of the draft for precisely this underlying agenda - wars against nations that have no possibility to hurt America (Vietnam, Iraq, Afgha
52 Maverick623 : I'm sorry, where did the 9/11 hijackers get their support from? Not revered. Respected. There's not a whole lot of career choices where you knowingly
53 Post contains links merlot : Great point! The police officers ARE actually fighting a the biggest threat average Americans face = other Americans. By my rough estimate 150000 Ame
54 cws818 : Since the troops would likely have the same political leanings whether overseas or on base state-side, I am not sure what your point is. Plus, troops
55 Maverick623 : It wasn't Bush's report, it was Congress's. The actual report was rather interesting, if a little bit skewed to Western attitudes. Your Wikipedia art
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Do You Think? Does Charlie Have A Point? posted Mon Apr 14 2003 02:54:50 by Thumper
WWF Draft. What Do You Think? posted Thu Mar 28 2002 08:34:21 by B747ca
What Do You In The US Think Of Us In The UK? posted Fri Nov 16 2001 16:59:36 by VS744
What Do You Think Of Hate-Crime Laws In The US posted Mon Jul 17 2000 16:45:41 by Hole_Courtney
The Marriage Ref - What Do You Think? posted Fri Mar 12 2010 12:26:29 by AMX
New Bentley Mulsanne - What Do You Think? posted Fri Aug 21 2009 22:07:13 by Kaitak744
District 9 - The Movie... What Do You Think? posted Tue Aug 11 2009 16:26:02 by Vio
Michelle Obama-What Do You Think? posted Wed Aug 5 2009 14:09:59 by EA772LR
Six Flags Great Avdenture: What Do You Think? posted Sun Jul 26 2009 12:48:40 by F.pier
The Tudors: What Do You Think? posted Mon Apr 6 2009 23:22:21 by BN747