America needs to stop trying to police the world

Originally posted by generalissimo
[b]every social animal down to ants has such an instinct as part of their nature. Man is no different in this regard

this is beyond risible now. are you seriously considering using the behavior of ants as the foundation of your argument for the draft? LOL

I do accept that it is very noble of someone to dedicate his/her life to the welfare of ...[text shortened]... nforced duty its no longer morally acceptable. Individual freedom takes precedence over society.[/b]

Please stop sounding like Wajoma.

Societies were formed so that individual freedoms could be safely protected something that is impossible absent such societies. Once you are part of a society you naturally incur obligations to it to compensate for the benefits you receive. Assisting in its defense against external enemies is a very basic obligation recognized since time immemorial.

If the majority of society say that the best way to insure an adequate defense of that society is to establish a draft that is fairly enforced against all citizens, an individual in that society incurring all the benefits of such has no reasonable complaint.

Originally posted by generalissimo
oh yeah, because the inevitable result of the absence of conscription is conquest by another society, followed by mass looting. 🙄

how old are you sam? you seem to be losing the ability to reason properly.

Maybe you should start a threat castigating the Swiss, their system must drive you nuts.

Yet it works for them and no Swiss male is crying about how awful service to their state is.

Why do you?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Please stop sounding like Wajoma.

Societies were formed so that individual freedoms could be safely protected something that is impossible absent such societies. Once you are part of a society you naturally incur obligations to it to compensate for the benefits you receive. Assisting in its defense against external enemies is a very basic ...[text shortened]... s, an individual in that society incurring all the benefits of such has no reasonable complaint.

Societies were formed so that individual freedoms could be safely protected something that is impossible absent such societies. Once you are part of a society you naturally incur obligations to it to compensate for the benefits you receive. Assisting in its defense against external enemies is a very basic obligation recognized since time immemorial.

Im well aware of all this, but I think you have to consider the circumstances of modern life instead of discussing this issue with the assumption that people live in the era of militias and the ever present threat of invasion by foreign powers.
Once again, I still haven't seen you clearly stating what benefits would come out of the draft and how they compensate for its disadvantages.

If the majority of society say that the best way to insure an adequate defense of that society is to establish a draft that is fairly enforced against all citizens, an individual in that society incurring all the benefits of such has no reasonable complaint.
The majority of society isn't infallible, they can be wrong, so yes, the individual can have a reasonable complaint.

btw, Im sure its perfectly convenient of you to lecture me on the benefits of the draft when you haven't experienced it or even come across it in any way, but let me assure you that there's nothing worse than the threat of being forced into unwanted work for no reason whatsoever.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Please stop sounding like Wajoma.

Societies were formed so that individual freedoms could be safely protected something that is impossible absent such societies. Once you are part of a society you naturally incur obligations to it to compensate for the benefits you receive. Assisting in its defense against external enemies is a very basic ...[text shortened]... s, an individual in that society incurring all the benefits of such has no reasonable complaint.

What do you think about conscientious objectors?

Originally posted by generalissimo
Societies were formed so that individual freedoms could be safely protected something that is impossible absent such societies. Once you are part of a society you naturally incur obligations to it to compensate for the benefits you receive. Assisting in its defense against external enemies is a very basic obligation recognized since time immemorial s nothing worse than the threat of being forced into unwanted work for no reason whatsoever.[/b]

Sam stated a perfectly valid reason for a military draft; it would save society a lot of money. And it would certainly be fairer to spread the obligation to defend society over all its members. It might even lead to less reliance on force in international affairs; as of right now the wealthy have little reason to oppose such measures as it hardly affects them and their families.

I haven't actually seen you present any disadvantages except individuals might not want to be in the military. I don't consider that much of an objection; there are lots of things individuals would prefer not to do (like pay taxes for instance) but that they are required to because society deems it necessary.

I'm never interested in personalizing matters, so your last paragraph is irrelevant and uninteresting except that defending your country is hardly "unwanted work for no reason whatsoever".

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
What do you think about conscientious objectors?

A true CO would be worthless as a soldier, so requiring them to do some other type of public service seems reasonable to me.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Sam stated a perfectly valid reason for a military draft; it would save society a lot of money. And it would certainly be fairer to spread the obligation to defend society over all its members. It might even lead to less reliance on force in international affairs; as of right now the wealthy have little reason to oppose such measures as it hardly affects ...[text shortened]... ting except that defending your country is hardly "unwanted work for no reason whatsoever".

Oh...jeez....hell just froze over. You agreed with me and you were very nice. Now I feel like a dick.
Thank you, Mr. Marauder, I now have to completely reevaluate my opinion of you .

I FEEL TEH LUV

Originally posted by generalissimo
Perhaps the EU will pull itself together and fulfill its role as a major world power.

That would mean left leaning Europeans voting to increase defense spending. They are already going broke as it is. Do they want to follow the US model or change business as usual?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
What do you think about conscientious objectors?

... now there's a group that can do with some water-boarding....the nerve of some people to try and hog the high ground...tsk...

Originally posted by no1marauder
Sam stated a perfectly valid reason for a military draft; it would save society a lot of money. And it would certainly be fairer to spread the obligation to defend society over all its members. It might even lead to less reliance on force in international affairs; as of right now the wealthy have little reason to oppose such measures as it hardly affects ...[text shortened]... ting except that defending your country is hardly "unwanted work for no reason whatsoever".

Sam has no idea what he is talking about, and the idea that the draft would save society money is nothing but a myth which is perpetuated by facile analysis of the cost of conscription, I really recommend you read the link I posted before (http://econjwatch.org/articles/the-role-of-economists-in-ending-the-draft).

as of right now the wealthy have little reason to oppose such measures as it hardly affects them and their families
that is unless they have children...

I haven't actually seen you present any disadvantages except individuals might not want to be in the military. I don't consider that much of an objection; there are lots of things individuals would prefer not to do (like pay taxes for instance) but that they are required to because society deems it necessary.
In that case you must be either being very selective about what you read or you simply are not paying enough attention, I clearly stated the reasons why conscription would be a bad idea. Nevertheless the burden of proof is on you as you have stated the implementation of conscription is preferable to the current situation. I don't believe you can possibly compare the payment of taxes to being forced into unwanted work.

I'm never interested in personalizing matters, so your last paragraph is irrelevant and uninteresting except that defending your country is hardly "unwanted work for no reason whatsoever".
How very convenient! but very well, who would the conscripts supposedly protect the country against exactly? somehow I can't quite picture an Iranian invasion any time soon. Btw, since the draft is such a marvelous idea Im sure history will support this notion right? we all know how it went down fantastically well with the US public during the vietnam war, right?

Originally posted by generalissimo
[/b]Sam has no idea what he is talking about, and the idea that the draft would save society money is nothing but a myth which is perpetuated by facile analysis of the cost of conscription, I really recommend you read the link I posted before (http://econjwatch.org/articles/the-role-of-economists-in-ending-the-draft).

as of right now the wealthy hav now how it went down fantastically well with the US public during the vietnam war, right?

I read the article which was largely reminiscing about how brilliant Milton Friedman was and was very spare in any actual arguments regarding the public cost of a draft. But I'm aware of the economic argument and it merely states that conscription is a tax on those drafted. So what? Last I checked, the US had an enormous budget deficit and taxes need to be raised. There is nothing unfair about a "tax" that will be borne by all at one time or another in their life as universal conscription would be. Opportunity costs to individuals have very little to do with the public purse; there is no doubt that a smaller drafted army using the reserve system I mentioned would cost tens of billions of dollars less as a public expenditure.

You really can't seem to follow an argument; the point was that the wealthy are freer to support all types of wars and military interventions now precisely because their children will not be asked to fight them.

What you believe is your own business, but I see little difference between expropriating the product of work through taxation to fulfill societal needs and requiring paid public service to fulfill critical societal needs (and national defense is one of the first order). In either case, you are sacrificing something for the public good.

The US has used a draft during every one of its wars from the Civil War to the Vietnam War and results were generally good. A reserve type system which I have alluded to was utterly common among European countries early in the 20th Century and worked quite efficiently. A smaller standing army would discourage military adventurism and force politicians to be more open in their intentions; calling up the reserves would have to be politically justified.

There are ample reasons to adopt the system proposed and the snivelling "I don't wanna" argument you have presented is unimpressive in the extreme.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I read the article which was largely reminiscing about how brilliant Milton Friedman was and was very spare in any actual arguments regarding the public cost of a draft. But I'm aware of the economic argument and it merely states that conscription is a tax on those drafted. So what? Last I checked, the US had an enormous budget deficit and taxes need to ...[text shortened]... he snivelling "I don't wanna" argument you have presented is unimpressive in the extreme.

So what? Last I checked, the US had an enormous budget deficit and taxes need to be raised
The taxes need to be raised, yes, but not to support unnecessary costs involved with conscription. There are less counter-productive ways of addressing the budget deficit.

What you believe is your own business, but I see little difference between expropriating the product of work through taxation to fulfill societal needs and requiring paid public service to fulfill critical societal needs (and national defense is one of the first order). In either case, you are sacrificing something for the public good.

Yes, in either case there is sacrifice involved, but the extent thereof isn't comparable in any way. Tell me, would rather pay taxes or serve in the army?

Originally posted by Sam The Sham
I absolutely agree the USA needs to pull all of it's military forces out of anyplace but America.

Let the world fend for itself.

We're going broke keeping a military presence everywhere and it's none of our business anyway.

This must be the first wise thing I've ever read you type.
I'll rec you for it.

Originally posted by shavixmir
This must be the first wise thing I've ever read you type.
I'll rec you for it.

Dude... God damn commie might be hiding down there.