The Draft: Should it be brought back?

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by KnightWriter, Apr 25, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ImperialMarchFace Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2002
    star 4
    I haven't read any of this thread, but if the draft comes back I will break as many bones as I need to in order to not go. I refuse to fight a war I don't agree with.
  2. Gandhi Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2004
    star 1
    America and other western countries do not need it. Drafts come in handy in World Wars, or for countries constantly in conflict on their home turf, like Israel.

    That said, those who would refuse the draft are merely pansy hippies, too scared to fight for their country, and hiding behind the "I dont believe in the war" bullcrap. WOuld you rather die a coward, or fighting for your country? Damn.
  3. Special_Fred Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2003
    star 4
    The soldiers who are fighting in Iraq right now are not fighting for our country, they're fighting for our President. Iraq posed no threat whatsoever when Bush gave his 48-hour ultimatum. If I had to join a fight, it would be for America, not for the President. That's the difference between a just war (WWII) and a bull**** war (Vietnam, Iraq).
  4. Blue_Jedi33 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 12, 2003
    star 5
    I think there is a big difference between a coward and an educated person who excerses his free will to say no this is wrong. For example a 20 year old police officier who gets drafted says no I do not agree with this I won't do it. Police are not cowards in most cases. It's about freedom of choice, not being a coward.
  5. dizfactor Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 12, 2002
    star 5
    iirc, Tolstoy argued that military service was inherently immoral because the soldier surrenders his moral judgment to another person, who tells him whom he should and should not kill. to him, it was essentially an attempt to get out of making the hard decisions in life. i don't agree with him that all military service is inherently immoral, but i think his point about deferring moral responsibility onto the shoulders of another is still very insightful.

    avoiding a draft for a war you feel to be unjust is the opposite of cowardice, IMHO. what's cowardly to me is the refusal to take responsibility for one's own moral decisions and the inability to handle dissent and disagreement. people who comply with a draft are essentially trying to shirk their moral responsibilities in the manner Tolstoy described, and to me that indicates a cowardly type of surrender, rooted in fear of responsibility. it's easier and much less scary to presume that the people in your government know what's right and what needs to be done, and that as a result you don't have to come to your own conclusions, but rather you only need to do whatever they tell you it is your duty to do. what a relief!

    that's not to say that that bravery and individual heroism aren't part of actual wartime service also, but to me the "i don't know if the war is right or wrong, but i don't care. i just follow my 'duty' and come when 'my country' [read: 'my government'] calls me" attitude also contains a certain degree of implicit cowardice. that's not a contradiction, as some people can be brave in certain circumstances and total cowards in others; it's not an all-or-nothing thing.
  6. BenduHopkins Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2004
    star 4
    Gandhi, you are funny. I like the sig. Continue the crazy right wing mockery!
  7. DarthBud Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 16, 2003
    star 2
    The draft shouldn't and isn't coming back.
    How come I haven't seen anyone bash the 2 democrats who proposed to bring back the draft, then voted against their own bill?
    Instead most of these messages seem to imply it was President Bush who wanted the draft, even though he says the draft won't be re-instated because there isn't the need.
  8. Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 1999
    star 5
    Those 2 democrats did it for political reasons, to make a point.

    Their bills never had any real chance of passing; what they were trying to do was to get Bush to come clean about the possible need for a draft in the forseeable future.

    Peace,

    V-03
  9. DarthBud Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 16, 2003
    star 2
    Exactly the 2 dems were trying to scare voters into thinking there might be a draft.
    And President Bush did come clean about the draft, there isn't going to be one.
  10. Special_Fred Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2003
    star 4
  11. Lost-in-Translation Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Oct 6, 2004
    A draft for the war in Iraq? No way, hello Canada! A draft for the war on terror? Sign me up.
  12. Special_Fred Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2003
    star 4
    :confused: If you're so willing to 'sign up', there's no need for a draft, is there?

    EDIT: And you won't have to flee to Canada, either. Amendment XIII to the Constitution clearly states that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Don't run. Stand up and condemn the draft for what it is.
  13. Jediflyer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 5, 2001
    star 5
    I love libertarians.

    There are so cute and cuddley and fill me with such warm and fuzzy feelings.

    If only there were more of them :(

  14. DeathStar1977 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 31, 2003
    star 4
    That said, those who would refuse the draft are merely pansy hippies, too scared to fight for their country, and hiding behind the "I dont believe in the war" bullcrap. WOuld you rather die a coward, or fighting for your country? Damn.

    So what would you call those who refuse the draft that are not 'pansy hippies' and aren't hiding behind 'I don't believe in the war' bullcrap...but instead generally are pro-war yet are 'too scared to fight for their country'? Because there are MANY people on the far right who despite their 'pro-war' stances and tough talk, have been strangely absent from 'fighting for their country'.
  15. Gandhi Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2004
    star 1
    Well DeathStar, they arent peace hippies. Theyre just cowards. And should be shot.
  16. DeathStar1977 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 31, 2003
    star 4
    Whoa...I sense much anger in you. ;)
  17. Jediflyer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 5, 2001
    star 5
    Ghandhi said: "They should be shot"

    [Jon Stewart]Whhaaaaaaa?!?![/Jon Stewart]
  18. Special_Fred Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2003
    star 4
    I love libertarians. There are so cute and cuddley and fill me with such warm and fuzzy feelings.

    [face_laugh] [face_laugh] I think that was a joke. Right? [face_plain] [face_laugh]

    Well DeathStar, they arent peace hippies. Theyre just cowards. And should be shot.

    Are you in the military right now? Back up your tough talk, Gandhi.
  19. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Those 2 democrats did it for political reasons, to make a point.

    Their bills never had any real chance of passing; what they were trying to do was to get Bush to come clean about the possible need for a draft in the forseeable future.


    And then the question becomes, how do you personally feel about this practice?

    Let's set aside the GOP-democrat issue.

    If what you say is true, Congressmen shouldn't be proposing bills just to trap who they see as their opponent.

    I've seen the mass email that was sent out. The one that says "Draft Bill proposed under Bush's presidency."

    Except the email makes no mention of the fact:

    1) the bill was proposed by 2 congressmen who had no connection to the current administration

    2)The bill is dead in subcommittee with no chance of getting approved.

    3)Both the President and the military do not want a draft.

    I think it is a discordant practice, and one which shouldn't be accepted by members of either party.

  20. darth_paul Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2000
    star 5
    Completely agreed. It's completely inappropriate for people to propose bills they don't intend to see pass. For one thing, it ties up time and resources (at taxpayer expense!) that could be spent dealing with legitimate proposals. But the practice of proposing legislation you don't actually support into a system designed to pass laws for the benefit of all, merely for the purpose of scoring political points by making your opponent take the blame, is unethical and repulsive to me in a way deeper than that.

    Additionally, we all know politicians are famed for their honesty.... I think a person's actions are generally a safer thing to judge than his excuses. ("But I didn't mean to hurt him!") If I lived in any of these Congressmen's disricts, I would take note of the fact that they proposed draft bills -- and associated them with helping President Bush's war! -- and proceed to vote them out of office. If they didn't mean it, they shouldn't have proposed it in anything other than hypothetical terms: That is all.

    -Paul
  21. Pelranius Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2003
    star 5
    Well, when was the last time Congress actually acted on a legitimate proposal?
  22. Master_SweetPea Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 2002
    star 4
    okay first
    Libertarians aren't cowards...Try and shoot me, Ever had an Angry Marine on your tail?

    second
    There will not be a draft anytime soon. Two big Precursors to a draft are a "Stop-Loss" order to ALL FOUR branches of service (there isn't one) and A massive recall of those discharged in the past 4 years (also hasn't happend)

    third
    LOOK UP THE DEFINITION of Servitude, I hate the idea of a draft more than you can possibly imagine. BUT as long as you are paid for your work it's not Servitude.
    (I got schooled on this about 3 months ago, pulled out the dictionary and everything... I'm just trying to send some knowledge your way FRED)
  23. Special_Fred Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2003
    star 4
    That doesn't eliminate the all-important word: involuntary.

    EDIT: Just for the hell of it, I took your advice and looked up the word "servitude":

    ser·vi·tude (n.)

    1) A state of subjection to an owner or master.
    2) Lack of personal freedom, as to act as one chooses.
    3) Forced labor imposed as a punishment for crime: penal servitude in labor camps.

    Only in the land of the free... ;)
  24. KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2001
    star 8
  25. Master_SweetPea Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 2002
    star 4
    yes I understand that Fred, But the thing is there has been legal debates about this before. Aparently as long as they pay you, they get away with it. Because although it is involuntary, it isn't Seritude it's Service (without a smile!)
    I don't like it.
    I hate it!
    I wouldn't want someone who doesn't want to be there, signing off aircraft as "safe for flight", etc.
    We need to start a movement of the people to make a draft amendment and ban it!

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.