Iraq War - What's different this time?

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by FrostyBoy
Drafting during the Vietnam war? How did I miss that? I was pretty sure you were encouraged to join, but not forced to join!

My dad had to leave the US, else he would have been drafted. He wasn't even a US citizen but because he was working there and was in his early 20s he was eligible for call up.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Which means that it's just a childish way of expressing an even more childish sentiment: "ooooh, we should make war illegal! That will solve everything."

Again you miss the point.

It's a way of saying there should be no draft.

Care to go for a 3rd strike?

[Kuciwalker]

That wasn't Ming's point. And either way, it's equally inane. Instead of "war should be illegal!" it's "the draft should be illegal!"

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Right now, policy makers don't really have to sacrifice when the make the most important decision of their careers.

That's why it's important to elect good and strong leaders, which is measured by more than whether or not they are willing to take a bullet with the grunts.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
That wasn't Ming's point.

So? You responded to me, trying to mock me for saying something you didn't take the time to think through properly.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
And either way, it's equally inane. Instead of "war should be illegal!" it's "the draft should be illegal!"

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
And either way, it's equally inane. Instead of "war should be illegal!" it's "the draft should be illegal!"

There is a rather large difference between the positions.

I think wars are best fought with professional forces adequately compensated so as to attract recruits. I do not think picking who fights and who doesn't based on some dice rolls is a very good way of going about things. Because of this, I think a draft is a poor idea.

The only thing inane is your attempt to equate an anti-draft position with an anti-war position.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Aeson
So? You responded to me, trying to mock me for saying something you didn't take the time to think through properly.

I didn't even edit this and still you fail to respond. Hiding in shame? If you're going to start quoting your edits in some juvenile attempt to pretend I'm dodging points... get to responding *****.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Aeson
There is a rather large difference between the positions.

And "let's force policy-makers to be drafted" is an equally inane way to establish either.

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by Aeson


I didn't even edit this and still you fail to respond. Hiding in shame? If you're going to start quoting your edits in some juvenile attempt to pretend I'm dodging points... get to responding *****.

I love the intensity of this bizarre argument

You all miss the point. If the draft is only policy makers there will be no draft.

There is no legitimate way to read into this to mean 'there should be no draft'. The obvious implication , and this is explicitly what ming said, is that political leaders should be drafted, which is idiotic and not a mature criticism of the civilian draft either.

[Patroklos]

dont' think you are seeing the advantages...

You might have a point if say this were 2100 years ago in Rome, where a politicians personel career rested on the win or loss of the wars he instigated/voted for. However, even with the Roman aristocracy largely recieving specialized military training and it being considered basically a mandatoryt skill at that, just look at the mess many of them made.

No, I have no desire to go off to war with Pelosci in charge of my unit.

[chequita guevara]

Did Pelosi vote to authorize the use of military force?

[Patroklos]

Are we talking about any specific conflict at the moment? Stop being a tool.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
There is no legitimate way to read into this to mean 'there should be no draft'. The obvious implication , and this is explicitly what ming said, is that political leaders should be drafted, which is idiotic and not a mature criticism of the civilian draft either.

Spoiler:

I am sorry that you failed to comprehend what I was saying. Please click here for a more in-depth explanation.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
And "let's force policy-makers to be drafted" is an equally inane way to establish either.

And now we've come full circle.