Conscription

[Al B. Sure!]

alright, Ming... i'll re-state what i was saying...

it is a fact that the US military is extremely disproportionately lower middle class and also very disproportionately hispanic and black... it don't seem right to me for american wars to be fought by the poor and semi-poor when the more wealthy can just sit back with no fear of serving their country...

so conscription is only fair.

[Al B. Sure!]

it also should be noted how Switzerland has mandatory, peace-time conscription and the Swiss have not been in a war since the 16th century. having conscription may be the road to peace

[CorpusScorpius]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
alright, Ming... i'll re-state what i was saying...

it is a fact that the US military is extremely disproportionately lower middle class and also very disproportionately hispanic and black... it don't seem right to me for american wars to be fought by the poor and semi-poor when the more wealthy can just sit back with no fear of serving their country...

so conscription is only fair.

What are the Exact numbers? The US military is only 38% minorities..........that leaves the other 62% being white..........

[Ming]

As usual... Albert is just ranting and has no clue what he is talking about...

[TCO]

Re: Conscription

Originally posted by David Floyd
As a result of not wanting to fully threadjack another thread, for those who are interested in discussing it, here is a thread on conscription.

My position is that conscription is slavery. It is immoral, and can never be justified in any circumstance.

Did you register for the draft? Or do you just back your opinions up by posting on a Civ site?

[Berzerker]

Do I have the moral authority to force you to risk your life for my security? That is what conscription is all about, not "implied" contracts fabricated by other people when it suits them.

Boris -

Hypothetically, I can justify it. Say a powerful Fascist country, akin to Nazi Germany, was poised to invade your country. The only way to repel the invasion would be to institute a draft. If this country invades successfully, it is a given they will commit horrible atrocities, including genocide and slavery.

The American Revolution was fought and won by volunteers against the mightiest nation on Earth. Now, a draft may be the utilitarian response to such a scenario, but that doesn't make it moral to force others to die for you.

David - We have a judicial system that makes mistakes by jailing, even executing, people who are innocent. While that is immoral, we, and you, have no better alternative, so what do we do? While I believe conscription is immoral, and that a nation that needs conscription isn't worth saving since the people aren't willing to fight of their own accord, there are, as Thomas Paine said, certain "necessary evils".

[TCO]

Walter Mitty smoked his cigarette and faced the firing squad.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Berzerker
The American Revolution was fought and won by volunteers against the mightiest nation on Earth. Now, a draft may be the utilitarian response to such a scenario, but that doesn't make it moral to force others to die for you.

Not even remotely analogous to the scenario I posited. First, the British weren't really "outside" invaders, hence the term "revolution." Second, a large portion of the colonists remained loyal to the crown, so instituting a draft to fight their troops would have provoked full-scale revolt against the colonial leaders. Third, the victory of the British would not have been a dire situation for most of the colonists, as it would simply maintain the status quo. Nor were the British engaging in wholesale genocide against the population.

The fact is, in a real world, a draft might indeed be necessary as a lesser of two evils. There are plenty of cowards and lazy schmucks who would probably be content to sit out a war, even if they knew their country losing would be terrible, because that's how human beings can be. Shortsightedness of individuals shouldn't lead to longterm disaster for a society.

The beauty of the representative democracy is that the government IS the people and speaks with the voice and authority OF the people. So conscription is, in fact, a democratically-chosen path. As was said, it's part of the "neighborhood dues," along with taxes. You want to partake in all the great things America has to offer? Fine, but you've got to also do your part when called upon.

[Giancarlo]

Conscription when not necessary when the nation in question has a large peace time force ready to win a war, should not be done. But when it is required, if the war turns out to be more bloody, such as WWII yes it is moral and right. I would even serve if the situation required it.

[David Floyd]

Sava,

Then devise a plan to effectively test maturity for millions of people and sell it to the government. Until then, age is the best way of limiting inexperienced youth from operating heavy machinery, purchasing liquor, and entering legal contracts.

As to purchasing alcohol and drugs, the government shouldn't be involved at all. It should be a parental decision, and if parents decide to let their kids walk around with enough money and enough lack of supervision to buy beer, then the parents obviously don't care. If they did care, they would make an effort to stop it. But it isn't the government's problem.

As to driving ages, this shouldn't be a governmental problem either, as roads should be privately funded.

Legal contracts are a simple matter. If there is a dispute, a court simply decides competency on a case by case basis, same as they would do for, say, a mental patient. If someone is competent to enter into a contract, ie, they know what they are doing and have a capability to grasp the ramifications, then they can enter into it, and if not, then not.

btw, Floyd, aren't you against welfare because you don't want your money going to people who didn't earn it? I'm sure veterans might feel the same about you. You are enjoying the freedoms you didn't earn, and others died for.

What conscripts do you think died defending my freedom? I'll tell you how many - ZERO. Any war in which we have used conscription had precisely nothing to do with protecting the US from invasion, except for the US Civil War, but the CSA wasn't interested in conquering the US or violating the rights of US citizens, only in ending a war the US started.

Further, if the Founders thought I had to do something to earn my freedom, why don't they say so in the Constitution? And don't tell me that it's implied - that's clearly preposterous.

Imran,

It is neither. It's simply your social duty... which is not immoral, nor slavery.

Who says military service is my "social duty"? And if this is true, then why don't we deport COs?

If you have a duty to do something, it cannot be slavery,

You could say that slaves prior to the 13th Amendment had a legal duty to obey their masters. Does this mean it wasn't slavery?

and since it is for society's benefit, it cannot be immoral

So if society can derive and justify some benefit from my death, murdering me isn't immoral?


Ming,

Without conscription in WWII, you might be speaking german now, and have none of the rights you so sadly think came to you for free.

Ming, that statement is preposterous. Not only did Germany have no intention or wish to go to war with, much less invade, the US, but they didn't have the capability, nor could they possibly have had the capability in any forseeable amount of time.

It is not slavery... it's a contract between you and your country. One that comes with citizenship. If the country requires it... then you must agree because that's part of the deal. That is by no means slavery.

Really? So, again, why don't we deport COs?

You have the choice to say no... renounce your citizenship... or suffer the penality by going to jail.

So, then, the government has the moral right to tell me to do anything it wants - say, wear a pink tutu - and if I don't like it, I can either go to jail or get out. Is this your position?

Whose to say whether it's necessary or not. Having a standing army available might be considered necessary by some people.

The definition of necessary and the definition of desirable (to certain people) are by no means the same.

Frankly... I think all young men and women should have a mandatory 1 or 2 year service to their country... whether it's in the military or communty service... It would teach them that freedom doesn't come for free,

That isn't what the Founders of the country thought.

and that EVERYBODY needs to do their share.

If the US faces a dire threat to national survival, I would probably volunteer, provided that the US was behaving morally. If the US isn't behaving morally, or there is no threat to national survival, why would I want to prop up a regime or support a war I am opposed to?

Many people have died so that we can enjoy the freedoms that we do have...

Sure, in the Revolutionary War, I suppose, but I'm curious as to what other war was actually fought to preserve the US from invasion? I suppose you can make an argument about the War of 1812, but that would be the only other exception, and seeing as how both wars were fought with volunteers, it is my argument that is supported, not yours.

Albert Speer,

it don't seem right to me for american wars to be fought by the poor and semi-poor when the more wealthy can just sit back with no fear of serving their country...

What war was this? I assume you mean Vietnam, but this has been proven to be patently false.

so conscription is only fair.

Even if you are right, and minorities and the poor make up the bulk of the armed forces, they are there because they volunteered, not because someone made them. So your "fairness" argument isn't accurate.

it also should be noted how Switzerland has mandatory, peace-time conscription and the Swiss have not been in a war since the 16th century. having conscription may be the road to peace

Erm, actually the Swiss haven't been in a war in quite a while because of the treaty ending the Napoleonic Wars, which prevented the Swiss from exporting mercenaries. Also, the Swiss haven't been in wars because they take pains not to piss anyone off.

Berzerker,

David - We have a judicial system that makes mistakes by jailing, even executing, people who are innocent. While that is immoral, we, and you, have no better alternative, so what do we do? While I believe conscription is immoral, and that a nation that needs conscription isn't worth saving since the people aren't willing to fight of their own accord, there are, as Thomas Paine said, certain "necessary evils".

What are you saying here? It sounds like you are justifying registering for the draft, in which case I agree. Yes, I registered, because if I didn't, it would have caused problems for me. Obviously, I registered with no intention of ever responding to a draft call. The US is ****ing me, so I'll gladly **** the US right back.

[Dis]

conscription is slavery?

what if a nation is going to invade your nation, and make you a slave to their nation?

What if your nation was under direct attack. Do you not think that the individual owes society something? Remember, society provides the invidual with a safe, secure environment (compared to anarchy) in which to pursue happiness.

[Ming]

Originally posted by David Floyd
So, then, the government has the moral right to tell me to do anything it wants - say, wear a pink tutu - and if I don't like it, I can either go to jail or get out. Is this your position?

Yep...
But again, that's a straw man argument because the government isn't going to pass that law.

You have the right to elect politicans that support your positions... you have the right to fight laws in legal ways... but, you still have to follow them, or face the results of your actions. Or you can move to some country that agrees with your positions. Your Choice.

It's that simple... it's called freedom of choice

[David Floyd]

Dissident,

what if a nation is going to invade your nation, and make you a slave to their nation?

Then I'd volunteer to fight.

What if your nation was under direct attack. Do you not think that the individual owes society something?

Saying that I owe "something" to society is a slippery slope, culminating in the belief that society should have final say over every aspect of my being.

Remember, society provides the invidual with a safe, secure environment (compared to anarchy) in which to pursue happiness.

Naturally, and if "society", by which you mean "government", is doing a good job, then there should be no problem with people volunteering to defend it, no?

Ming,

Yep...
But again, that's a straw man argument because the government isn't going to pass that law.

It's not really a straw man - it's simply an extreme example which I'm using to see how much of an absolutist you are. And judging by your answer, I'd say quite a bit, if you really believe that "society" can force me to wear a pink tutu.

You have the right to elect politicans that support your positions... you have the right to fight laws in legal ways... but, you still have to follow them, or face the results of your actions.

Yes, I know that I'm fixing to use the Godwin Principle, but it's still valid...so if 51% of people voted for Hitler, then what Hitler did would have been OK (stick to his actions against German citizens, not foreign nationals, if you prefer)?

[Ming]

That's the nature of our Country David... whether you like it or not... that's the deal. If you don't like it, you can leave. But again, your example is absurd at best, and can't even be considered an extreme example, so it is a straw man argument.

And you must be losing your arguments if you have to mention Hitler in your own defense

[Giancarlo]

Well, with the weaponry that is being invented and which is in the works, I don't really see why conscription would be necessary.