I see over and over on these threads people trumping others debate or stance with thier position in the military. Or accomplishments in the military. Or losses. Calling names, or demeaning others.
Just curious. Do any of you think this nation should be ran, like that corny movie, "stormship troopers", can't remember its name. Where to have a right to vote or be a citizen, you have to serve? More you gave, the more you get? Or different levels of citizen.
Just curious. I know its a rather silly question. But it seems rather important on many on this page.
I see over and over on these threads people trumping others debate or stance with thier position in the military. Or accomplishments in the military. Or losses. Calling names, or demeaning others.
Just curious. Do any of you think this nation should be ran, like that corny movie, "stormship troopers", can't remember its name. Where to have a right to vote or be a citizen, you have to serve? More you gave, the more you get? Or different levels of citizen.
Just curious. I know its a rather silly question. But it seems rather important on many on this page.
I completely disagree with the notion that you have to serve to have a voice. The military is not designed for everyone.
At the same time if you are debating the military with someone who served then your argument may very well be trumped. It is the same as
if I was to debate medical care with a doctor.
Personally I'd like to see 1 year mandatory for every man and woman. Isreal I believe has 3yrs for men 2yrs for women. I think having to serve would make many others reconsider the whole sending troops into action ideas. Also this would mean many more politicians kids would be in the military a big influence if you asked me.
Also no excuses everyone would serve... very few exceptions.....
I do see the point made of politicians nowadays who avoided the draft/wars of the past who are now pro war as being chickenhawk ish, and that is a point to be made.
But just 2 citizens arguing with one another on the topic of politics, I don't see one or the other having any higher ground.
I do see the point made of politicians nowadays who avoided the draft/wars of the past who are now pro war as being chickenhawk ish, and that is a point to be made.
But just 2 citizens arguing with one another on the topic of politics, I don't see one or the other having any higher ground.
Good post
__________________
"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come."
- Joseph Biden
Associated Press 11/18/93
"Be thankful that we're not getting all the government we are paying for." Will Rogers
I see over and over on these threads people trumping others debate or stance with thier position in the military. Or accomplishments in the military. Or losses. Calling names, or demeaning others.
Just curious. Do any of you think this nation should be ran, like that corny movie, "stormship troopers", can't remember its name. Where to have a right to vote or be a citizen, you have to serve? More you gave, the more you get? Or different levels of citizen.
Just curious. I know its a rather silly question. But it seems rather important on many on this page.
I completely disagree with the notion that you have to serve to have a voice. The military is not designed for everyone.
At the same time if you are debating the military with someone who served then your argument may very well be trumped. It is the same as
if I was to debate medical care with a doctor.
Ok, lets change up the question a bit for fun. Maybe one should have to serve in the military before he could be senator, congressman, or before he could sit on the US Senate Arms Committee, etc. Or maybe show proof that you lost a brother, father, etc. So therefore you could understand what men and women go thru before you make a vote to go to war. Or maybe you should have to prove you have endured torture before you vote on the decision to use torture.
If service were mandatory this would solve this dilemna......but as of today, I say NO. Congress should be represented by both people who have served, and those that haven't.
If service were mandatory this would solve this dilemna......but as of today, I say NO. Congress should be represented by both people who have served, and those that haven't.
Ok, lets change up the question a bit for fun. Maybe one should have to serve in the military before he could be senator, congressman, or before he could sit on the US Senate Arms Committee, etc.
So would sitting deep within a hull of a ship scraping paint for 4 years qualify a person to be a leader?
Quote:
Or maybe show proof that you lost a brother, father, etc. So therefore you could understand what men and women go thru before you make a vote to go to war.
Then we would have nothing but Ted Kennedys running the country.[]
Quote:
Or maybe you should have to prove you have endured torture before you vote on the decision to use torture.
By the same logic, a person should have a felony on their record before serving as a judge sothey know what its like to endure a prison term[8D]
__________________
Obamanfreude - 1. taking pleasure from the misfortunes of an Obama supporter as he or she is adversely affected by the policies of their Dear Leader.
I believe that people who served in the military are special- just like everyone else.
__________________
Obamanfreude - 1. taking pleasure from the misfortunes of an Obama supporter as he or she is adversely affected by the policies of their Dear Leader.
Should Military Service Entitle People
]
