OK....whatever. Bottom line is that I don't see how ANYONE can be gung-ho to send troops to fight a war that will cause unnecessary casualties on both sides. The whole purpose of bringing up SE Asia during the Viet Nam era was to point out that whatever happens truly affects those that are put in harms way at the time. I always maintained that ridding the world of Saddam is imperative. But going to war with a nation is not (at this moment) the effective way to do it. We have been to this dance before. It looked in '91 like it was an easy victory. But what did it really accomplish? Saddam is still in power (as was our objective at that time). Kuwaiti oil fields burned for a year and polluted the planet. The Iraqi people are worse off now than they were prior to the Gulf War, and Saddam continues to sell oil and live in many palaces and rule with no regard to human rights or his own people. And "Gulf War Syndrome" is very real. But not for Dotslash, he got to just watch on tv if he was old enough. So when I hear Dotslash and his kind clamoring for war, I have to object. He obviously has no idea what war is about. He and so many, including some of our most hawkish leaders like Cheney have never served and it seems like they believe it is a game of good vs. evil using the bodies of others. It isn't that simple. Blood and death are very real to those that experience it. And their families. If Dotslash were born in Iraq, I wonder what he would be thinking now. Unfortunately for us, he was not. Too bad. It just offends me to hear people so easily talk about going to war. He has said the military is ready. The mothers of our soldiers are ready. He is so off the mark as to be absurd. No one in their right mind chooses war over peace. I agree there is a threshold that once crossed warrants war. But Iraq has not crossed that threshold with us. Al Qaeda has. And I support that war wholeheartedly. Viet Nam did not cross that threshold. And I resisted that war. And I ended up taking what proved to be a coward's alternative to prison. I am anything but proud. I said that before. I picture Dotslash as a teenager or possibly a very young and ignorant man. I cannot believe that anyone can be so rigid in their thirst for war. Even our President would like to find a peaceful solution. As would every right thinking person on the planet. The politics of an impending war with Iraq are just scary to me. Colin Powell, who directed the Gulf War is talking more and more hawkish. He has to be a team player. But I know he would prefer a resolution brought about with diplomacy. I have heard him speak at a fund raising dinner not too long ago. (He joked about yelling at Gen. Schwazkoph during the Gulf War. He said he only felt safe doing it from 10,000 miles away). But he did say that he took every precaution to assure a victory with as little collateral damage and as much preparation as possible. Right now we are certainly not prepared like we were then, with a wide coalition of allies. And plenty of time to prepare. This time, the consequences figure to be more severe. Iraq will not likely sit by and wait while we amass troops on his borders like last time. Israel will not likely show restraint when attacked like last time. This is a very serious business we are considering. If Dotslash is so gung ho, I will buy him a rifle, and an airplane ticket, and he should go and try and shoot his way into Saddams domain and take him out personally. It would be my pleasure. But to go to war with a nation of living breathing humans that are oppressed in every way to get at their leader just seems morally wrong. There has to be a better way. We did not invade Russia in 1948 when they were working on developing atomic bombs. And they were a super power already. It seems that strategy and tactics for stopping Saddam should be developed from the lessons of history and the technology and intelligence of today. There MUST be a better way than deploying a massive invasion. Or striking at targets we don't know are real or imagined threats. I wish I had a simple answer. I am glad I am not in the position to make the final decision. But I am more glad that Dotslash isn't. At least I understand that I am not well informed enough or qualified to make such a decision. He is convinced he is. And that is scary to me. He is a fanatic, and uses only emotional responses. He is NOT what America is supposed to be about. He thinks he is a patriot. He truly is an example of what is wrong with our country. We are supposed to represent certain ideals. He represents the opposite of these ideals. He should be ashamed of his narrow mindedness and bloodthirstiness. Today's world requires well thought out solutions and restraint. Not a bully attitude and a bigoted one. And the truth of the matter is that our military today, would not even accept him if he tried to join. Their standards have been raised significantly since conscription has been stopped. Unless they needed someone to just scrub toilets. PS: good post Madison....thanks!
There's a very good reason the military drafts 17-year olds to fight wars, and it's got nothing to do with their physical fitness...
Well the idea you are expressing is accurate. It is easy to get teenagers to follow orders. However they never drafted 17 year olds to my knowledge. You had to be 18 to enter the selective service system. Now they don't draft anyone. Also, now they are quite selective about who gets to join. And what they get to do once they are accepted. The requirements are not what they were during the days of the draft. All enlistees must be high school graduates at minimum. And they must be physically and emotionally fit. They give a test (ASVAB) and put the right people in the right job. I am sure if Dotslash were accepted, they would be happy to let him paint and clean and cook. But I seriously doubt they would ever let someone with his mentality ever touch a weapon. And in no case would they ever allow him to be in a position to make a decision. But your premise is correct. Grown men were never very willing to just follow orders and shoot other humans. This was a big problem in the military during the Vietnam War. Lot's of older draftees. They didn't want to be there, and the army finally realized they were better off letting most of them stay out. Unfortunately, they also used military service as punishment during that time. It was very common to give criminals the choice of jail or the service during a long stretch of that war. So we had an army in Vietnam that was interspersed with resisters, criminals, and men that were too mature to respond well to the insanity. It was a bad time. During World War II, there were also older soldiers. But they were fighting what they knew was a just and unavoidable war.
Lol, I have obviously gotten under RS7's skin, maybe a little too much truth for him to take at one time. Also he has gone schizo, since he has gone from neutral to totally anti-war, anti-bush over the course of this thread. As for the people in the military, they are not draftees, they are pro's, they are a lot smarter than the average hippie wannabe protestor, and they are IN FAVOR OF THE ATTACK. Get it ? RS7, you are just plain wrong, and the dem leaders are going to backpedal eventually and leave you twisting in the wind.
....October 2, 2002 In another time, in a similar situation, Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., and Rep. David Bonior, D-Mich., would be indicted for high treason and face the death penalty for the stunt they pulled in Baghdad this week. It would be justice if they received a capital sentence. "I think the president would mislead the American people," said McDermott from Baghdad. He suggested the U.S. is trying to "provoke a war." He said our country has "put a gun to the head of Saddam." .... http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29131 I wonder what the backlash would be on this if it hits main media. I just hope cool heads prevail Josh
McDermott's defensive posturing just hit the Seattle paper: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/89509_mcdermott03.shtml
2002-09-12 September 15, 2002 - San Jose, Costa Rica. The government of Costa Rica is beginning preparations for a possible invasion of the United States, Costa Rican officials have said. In a speech to a group of business leaders in San Jose on Thursday, Costa Rican Foreign Minister Roberto Tovar said that the government of George W. Bush constitutes a "continuing threat that will only worsen," making military action a requirement. "It is better to act now than to wait until bombs are raining down on San Jose," he said. "Costa Rica has a stronger democracy than any other country in Latin America," said Tovar. "As such, we realize the threat we pose to the Bush regime. For all we know, they could attack at any moment." ... http://waldmanreport.com/reports/index.php?ReportID=39 What's next? NewZealand?