Posted on 11/19/2006 10:30:36 AM PST by Brilliant
How could anyone argue with that?
Au contraire. Anybody who condemns other people for how they spend their free time - and who says they should be drafted because he doesn't approve of their recreational pursuits - fairly BEGS to be asked, as I did, how he spends his own time. He might be as much of a slacker, from my perspective, as he accuses those "contemptible" young people of being. I won't know until he tells me how he spends his time.
What I DO know is that he has the mindset of a busybody, overly concerned with how others spend their time and money.
bump
College deferments are spelled out here:
http://www.sss.gov/WHHAP.HTM
See how clever Rangel is? He floats the idea, and then stuff like this pops up in conservative forums and then more people take the bait and sympathize with it.
Before you know it, it's the Republicans who are gonna take those young people minding their own business and ship them off to Iraq.
Because they didn't do their algebra, of course...
Let me get another batch of cheese to go with the next whine...
If it's any of your business, which it's not, I was drafted for the Korean War. What about you, freedomdefender?
Due to the lack of internal cohesion in the United States the Vietnam war was lost; the same lack imperils the WOT now. You need a brain transplant.
The folks at Berkley are not going to be liking this very much.
Deuteronomy 20
4 For the LORD your God is the one who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory."
5 The officers shall say to the army: "Has anyone built a new house and not dedicated it? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else may dedicate it.
6 Has anyone planted a vineyard and not begun to enjoy it? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else enjoy it.
7 Has anyone become pledged to a woman and not married her? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else marry her."
8 Then the officers shall add, "Is any man afraid or fainthearted? Let him go home so that his brothers will not become disheartened too."
9 When the officers have finished speaking to the army, they shall appoint commanders over it.
Someone needs to corner Rangel on why his state and CA are the highest in non-compliance in the country with 18 year olds registering.
Are you saying Klinger wouldn't have defended his unit?
We already got way too many grammar school dropouts in those welfare... errr... jobs.
If they are educated enough to be competent at those or any jobs, why do they need a promise of "educational benefits"?
I missed the Vietnam Draft. And I wouldn't force a draft on anyone else - unless there's a national emergency. If you served in Korea, thank you. But don't tell today's young people that the government knows best how they should spend their lives - and that the government should be able to order them into the military. The draft is not appropriate for a free society, except in the highest national emergency. Frankly, neither Korea or Vietnam qualified as such, so the draft was wrong in both cases. It would also be wrong now.
Pete I would be willing to bet that a good portion of those drafted would have to be placed in special platoons just to be able to be phyically fit enough just to complete basic training.
If the civilian and military leadership fears a draft because of potential protests, then one of two things is possible:
- The leadership has no nads.
- The war ain't worth fighting.
I guess they'd have four choices then:
- Serve
- CO status
- Jail
- Canada (although, I'm not sure that would be open this time.)
You're arguing for a draft in the name of "internal cohesion" - but then you say we lost Vietnam because we didn't have "internal cohesion". Buddy, we had a draft for Vietnam, in case you never knew. Guess it didn't give us "internal cohesion." What really lacks "internal cohesion," is your logic. They have drafts in dictator-run countries. "Internal cohesion" is what dictators want above all else.
That's only the case if they're living with Mom and Dad and not working, or their parents are footing the entire bill for college, and the kid doesn't care if he graduates or not. Either way, it is enabling behavior by the parents that allow this perpetual childhood.
If they want to live at home, they either need to be in college or working full time. I'm not even going to say they need to pay rent; that's between them and their parents. But I WILL say that maybe folks need to get out of the attitude that parents need to foot the entire bill for a college education. Let the kids take out loans, with the parents co-signing. Maybe this will require them to go to a state school for a couple of years and transfer to a bigger name school later. Maybe the parents take out the loans for the first two years of the expensive school and let the kid pick up the last two years. Whatever the plan is, the young person needs to be responsible for his or her own college education. There would be a lot less partying and a lot more seriousness about actually learning something.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.