[Doctor Wu]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>caffeinated</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718159"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Most of your facts are wrong. Especially the Army consisting of low income young people with few opportunities.<br>
But I know nothing I say will change your mind.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Don't say that. I'd like to hear your opinion.

 

[runbill]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>caffeinated</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718163"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I trust my fellow Soldiers to watch my back. Soldiers and civilians are different.<br>
The current stereotype of Soldiers who only join because they are too stupid for college isn't insulting?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I don't think soldiers only join because they are too stupid for college and I have never said that. I don't think our soldiers only come from our underclasses. I have read that it absolutely isn't true.<br><br>
As to soldiers v. civilians, draftees are every bit as much soldiers as volunteers. Take Israel's army as an example.

 

[caffeinated]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>runbill</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718134"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">No, I don't know it.<br><br>
I don't know that our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan want to be there. I don't know that the National Guard troups on their 3rd tour want to be there. I was drafted in 1966, I enlisted. But, I knew if I didn't enlist I would be drafted, so no glory there. I didn't see any difference between soldiers who enlisted and soldiers who were drafted. In WWII, everyone was drafted. So, MG, you can explain what Antag meant by "everyday piece of shit of shit on the street."</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Bill, you served in a different Army, a different time. That was tough duty, and I respect it.<br><br>
I can't say that every member of the military wants to be in Iraq or Afghanistan, but think about this:<br>
Every single Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine serving today either enlisted or reenlisted after 9/11. Every one. In fact, most Soldiers sign up for a first enlistment of four years. So the majority of our young enlisted troops signed up since 2005. You can argue that they had some misguided notion of the "romance" of war, but in 2006 70% of eligible Soldiers reenlisted, exceeding the Army's reenlistment goal by 134%. And there is no stop-loss, it's gone.<br>
I had a Soldier (an Iraq vet, FWIW) decide not to reenlist before we go to Afghanistan, and he's staying back. I then had three mechanics from another unit volunteer to take his place.<br><br>
The Army is not broken or on the verge of breaking. Far from it. I don't think I can explain what drives most of us to seek deployment. But we do. There it is.

 

[Doctor Wu]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>caffeinated</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718172"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;"><br>
The Army is not broken or on the verge of breaking. Far from it. I don't think I can explain what drives most of us to seek deployment. But we do. There it is.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
But don't you think it's unwise and unfair to make these troops serve three or four tours while there are millions of young people back in the US not contributing?<br><br>
I'm not looking for an argument, but I'd like to hear your reasoning especially because you are in the service. And a big thank you for your service, BTW. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.kickrunners.com/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Smile">

 

[muzicgrl]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>runbill</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718157"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Wow. What did I say to deserve that? I don't think I have ever been disrespectful to you. When I said you can't just quit, I wasn't being snarky. Ask Caff. Once you are in the military, you have an obligation to fulfill your tour. You can't quit.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
You are right...I misread what you said and Antag is a little accurate about me. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.kickrunners.com/forum/images/smilies/uhoh2.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="uhoh2"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.kickrunners.com/forum/images/smilies/surprised.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Surprised">

 

[caffeinated]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Doctor Wu</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718174"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">But don't you think it's unwise and unfair to make these troops serve three or four tours while there are millions of young people back in the US not contributing?<br><br>
I'm not looking for an argument, but I'd like to hear your reasoning especially because you are in the service. And a big thank you for your service, BTW. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.kickrunners.com/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Smile"></div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I had a bunch of stuff written out with stats on graduation rates and income and stuff... then somehow I closed Firefox and it was all gone. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.kickrunners.com/forum/images/smilies/sad2.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="sad2"> That's what I get for trying to quote four different web pages in a post.<br><br>
I did get upset with your characterization of Soldiers as low-income and not having other options. That's inaccurate. I hate what I see as an attempt to portray troops as victims. Most new Soldiers come from middle class families and have a high school diploma. In fact a 20 year old Soldier is more likely to have a high school diploma than a 20 year old civilian. Even in the hardest recruiting years 06/07, when the Army lowered it's standards the most, the percentage of recruits with diplomas was 79%.<br>
On top of that, kids from low-income areas - rural poor or inner city kids, are more likely to be obese, be dropouts or have criminal records. All of which can make them ineligible to serve. I know recruiters and they hate trying to enlist poor kids, it's just too hard to get them waivers to get past these issues. Plus the recruiters are accountable for kids who drop out of basic training, so it's not in their interest to try to recruit borderline kids.<br><br>
I don't think it's unfair to make someone serve multiple tours in combat. Not in the current situation.<br>
Now, is it unwise... that's another question. The answer is probably yes. War is bad for you.<br><br>
As for all the kids back home, I told my troops recently to put blinders on from now until we get back. We have work to do and it doesn't do them any good to worry about where those guys with the bong are going...

 

[JackDuggan]

I strongly disagree with this bit about "civilians" not being worthy soldiers. What elitist bullshit. It's the armed forced job to turn those civilians from draft inductees into solders. Of course some will not make the grade or be as motivated as volunteers, but most would.<br><br>
Of course, if the draft is meant to produce fodder for a war that should not have been fought and for which there is little public support...<br><br>
I am obviously for a draft. But hey, I am too old to be drafted so there is that bit of possible hypocrisy.<br><br>
Antag - your descriptions of the people on the street only diminish you. Yes, we know there are skels in the world, but you being in your position likely need to look at things differently or you risk burning out. You sound a lot like friends of mine on the NYC force during their early days...

 

[JackDuggan]

I have no problem reciting the Pledge. I suppose it could use some updating and God removed from it, but I have no personal issue with it being there. Yes, of course there is separation of church and state - doesn’t necessarily mean that there is no place for God in civil life though.<br><br>
I have no issue with declaring ones alliance to this country - it's an acknowledgement that citizenship is a privilege that carries responsibilities with it. It is not something to be taken for granted. The Pledge is a reminder of that.

 

[caffeinated]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>JackDuggan</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718189"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I strongly disagree with this bit about "civilians" not being worthy soldiers. What elitist bullshit. It's the armed forced job to turn those civilians from draft inductees into solders. Of course some will not make the grade or be as motivated as volunteers, but most would.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
There is a difference between Soldiers and civilians. All Soldiers were once civilians and not everyone who joins the military really should. But among professional military people there is just a different mind-set, a different way of seeing things. A willingness to take personal responsibility for things that other people assume is somebody else's job. A belief that some things are worth sacrificing for. The ability to place the needs of the mission or your fellow Soldiers above your own.<br><br>
FWIW, I know civilians who would have made good Soldiers, but couldn't join for one reason or another (and many of them become firefighters and cops.) And don't take this as my saying only Soldiers have good qualities, that's not my point.

 

[wyrillco]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>caffeinated</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718338"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">There is a difference between Soldiers and civilians. All Soldiers were once civilians and not everyone who joins the military really should. But among professional military people there is just a different mind-set, a different way of seeing things. A willingness to take personal responsibility for things that other people assume is somebody else's job. A belief that some things are worth sacrificing for. The ability to place the needs of the mission or your fellow Soldiers above your own.<br><br>
FWIW, I know civilians who would have made good Soldiers, but couldn't join for one reason or another (and many of them become firefighters and cops.) And don't take this as my saying only Soldiers have good qualities, that's not my point.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Again, I'm thrilled you are a leader in our military. You echo a lot of things my brother says, and I'm proud to know both of you.

 

[runfishhunt]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>caffeinated</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718338"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;"><b><i>There is a difference between Soldiers and civilians. All Soldiers were once civilians and not everyone who joins the military really should. But among professional military people there is just a different mind-set, a different way of seeing things. A willingness to take personal responsibility for things that other people assume is somebody else's job. A belief that some things are worth sacrificing for. The ability to place the needs of the mission or your fellow Soldiers above your own.</i></b><br></div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I see this reflected in both of my sons.<br><br>
I am all for the mandatory two (or four) years of service to your country in some form. I don't want to see a draft that forces youngsters into the military.

 

[wyrillco]

What kind of other service would you guys consider to be acceptable?

 

[JackDuggan]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>caffeinated</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718338"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">There is a difference between Soldiers and civilians. All Soldiers were once civilians and not everyone who joins the military really should. But among professional military people there is just a different mind-set, a different way of seeing things. A willingness to take personal responsibility for things that other people assume is somebody else's job. A belief that some things are worth sacrificing for. The ability to place the needs of the mission or your fellow Soldiers above your own.<br><br>
FWIW, I know civilians who would have made good Soldiers, but couldn't join for one reason or another (and many of them become firefighters and cops.) And don't take this as my saying only Soldiers have good qualities, that's not my point.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
My point comes from the perspective that I feel it is important to have citizen-soldiers. Most in this country haze zero stake in whether we got to war and way too many are not expected and are not encouraged to make any sort of sacrifice. Participation in a democracy comes with responsibilities; one of those should be participation in the armed services. This works in many countries and can work for us as well. The armed services does not decide this, this is a civilian decision.<br><br>
Anything worthwhile is worth sacrificing for - we need to expect more of the people in this country - likely they would surprise many and rise to the occasion.<br><br>
I heard something on the radio today about the last of the WWII generation dying out - I do think it was our finest generation. This country is at a crossroads and I want to be sure we take the right road. Excluding or "forgiving" people their responsibilities is not helpful. Too many forces speak to the segregation of our society. This is true in education, in economics and for illegal immigrants. We will survive and thrive as one or we will become just another limping former great power.

 

[OakDawg]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Doctor Wu</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718111"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">You don't think the American public would have a different opinion on waging war if there was a draft? If you really don't believe that then I don't see any sense in discussing this any more.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I don't know that it would change the polling numbers (for, against, indifferent) all that much, but even if it did, its just trading one influencing factor for another. I understand the argument that making sons and daughters of influential people have at least the possibility of being drafted would cause a more cautious use of our military, but I cannot say for certain that cautious is better. I also can't say it isn't better because I just don't know. My point is that instituting a draft simply as a means to exert pressure on the government to bring our troops home is a bad idea.

 

[OakDawg]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>JackDuggan</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718431"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">My point comes from the perspective that I feel it is important to have citizen-soldiers. Most in this country haze zero stake in whether we got to war and way too many are not expected and are not encouraged to make any sort of sacrifice. Participation in a democracy comes with responsibilities; one of those should be participation in the armed services. This works in many countries and can work for us as well. The armed services does not decide this, this is a civilian decision.<br><br>
Anything worthwhile is worth sacrificing for - we need to expect more of the people in this country - likely they would surprise many and rise to the occasion.<br><br>
I heard something on the radio today about the last of the WWII generation dying out - I do think it was our finest generation. This country is at a crossroads and I want to be sure we take the right road. Excluding or "forgiving" people their responsibilities is not helpful. Too many forces speak to the segregation of our society. This is true in education, in economics and for illegal immigrants. We will survive and thrive as one or we will become just another limping former great power.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
It seems like a large philosophical leap to go from a country that doesn't require voting (participation in a representative democracy at its most basic level) to begin requiring participation in armed services.

 

[kerfwango]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>jcumming</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718124"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;"><img alt="" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v705/jcumming/Pledge_of_Allegiance2.jpg" style="border:0px solid;"><br><br>
I think they need to get the Pledge back like they used to do it in schools. It was a pretty chickenshit move to pander to the Third Reich, assign them importance and change the salute.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Heh....perfect.

 

[runbill]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>OakDawg</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718543"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">It seems like a large philosophical leap to go from a country that doesn't require voting (participation in a representative democracy at its most basic level) to begin requiring participation in armed services.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
When had a draft, we didn't require voting. I guess we were philosophically unsophisticated in WWII. I think Jack Duggan did a good job presenting the case for a draft. Speaking from experience, I did not find drafted soldiers inferior to those who enlisted.

 

[OakDawg]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>runbill</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718800"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">When had a draft, we didn't require voting. I guess we were philosophically unsophisticated in WWII. I think Jack Duggan did a good job presenting the case for a draft. Speaking from experience, I did not find drafted soldiers inferior to those who enlisted.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Its a fine case and as to the previous draft, I think that was a mistake. The debate comes down to whether you think service to your country should be a requirement or not. If you're going to make the case that it should be because a good citizen has a responsibility to do so, then I would make the argument that there are many other things that also should be. I don't believe it is the governments job to tell me what a good citizen is obligated to do, that should be up to me to determine and to carry out. Its part of a truly free society and it has its drawbacks, certainly. I'd love to force everyone to vote, to manage their money properly, to only have as many kids as they are capable of taking care of, to eat and excercise properly and not to smoke. All of these things are in their best interest and the best interest of the country, but we don't get to impose these things because to do so would compromise the spirit our nation was founded under.

 

[Mrtambalynman]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>caffeinated</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718338"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">There is a difference between Soldiers and civilians. All Soldiers were once civilians and not everyone who joins the military really should. But among professional military people there is just a different mind-set, a different way of seeing things. A willingness to take personal responsibility for things that other people assume is somebody else's job. A belief that some things are worth sacrificing for. The ability to place the needs of the mission or your fellow Soldiers above your own.<br><br>
FWIW, I know civilians who would have made good Soldiers, but couldn't join for one reason or another (and many of them become firefighters and cops.) And don't take this as my saying only Soldiers have good qualities, that's not my point.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Caff, while I appreciate this point, from my reading of history it is frequently the civilans that were brought into the military structure during the major conflicts that were free thinking enough/not tied to traditional miltary thinking to innovate the practice of war. One specific example is the Canadian corps and Vimy Ridge.

 

[runbill]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>OakDawg</strong> <a href="/forum/post/1718914"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Its a fine case and as to the previous draft, I think that was a mistake. The debate comes down to whether you think service to your country should be a requirement or not. If you're going to make the case that it should be because a good citizen has a responsibility to do so, then I would make the argument that there are many other things that also should be. I don't believe it is the governments job to tell me what a good citizen is obligated to do, that should be up to me to determine and to carry out. Its part of a truly free society and it has its drawbacks, certainly. I'd love to force everyone to vote, to manage their money properly, to only have as many kids as they are capable of taking care of, to eat and excercise properly and not to smoke. All of these things are in their best interest and the best interest of the country, but we don't get to impose these things because to do so would compromise the spirit our nation was founded under.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
The defense of our Country is clearly for the common good, more so then things like voting, managing money, etc. If we were under attack, clearly we would expect everyone to help defend the country. I think the issue of draft only becomes confusing when the threat to our country becomes more and more attenuated.<br><br>
As to the spirit our Nation was founded under, at the onset of the Revolutionary War, George Washington issued a draft order, which was a call to "all young men of suitable age to be drafted, except those with conscientious scruples against war."