Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is reinstatement of the draft at hand?
Various | Aug 4, 2002 | The Duke

Posted on 08/04/2002 3:08:09 PM PDT by The Duke

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-113 next last
To: hole_n_one
Your's must have also been a don't do as I do, do as I say approach.

I also taught them not to be judgmental when they don't know much about a person. Whoever hatched you should have done the same thing.

61 posted on 08/04/2002 5:11:26 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Like taking candy from strangers?
62 posted on 08/04/2002 5:13:23 PM PDT by Dec31,1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I also taught them not to be judgmental when they don't know much about a person

Are you sure you want to go there?

63 posted on 08/04/2002 5:15:59 PM PDT by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
According to whose judgment though? Yours? The government I dont trust?

There ought to be certain things that everybody (or at least the vast majority of people) can agree go beyond parental rights. Your view would suggest we should not have any laws because they will be passed and enforced by a government, and you don't trust government. There is always a balance between opposing absolutes, parental rights and the welfare of children, society and the individual, statism and anarchy. Drawing those lines is what politics (and really civilization) is all about.

64 posted on 08/04/2002 5:20:26 PM PDT by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
I would like to know what other Freepers think of the prospect of resurrecting the draft?

Considering you've given absolutely NO evidence to support your conclusion, I think it's just a product of unhealthy cynicism and a crummy outlook.

Personally, I think the politicans and their corrupt crony media should go fight their own war against Saddam Hussein, because the only words I've heard on the subject have for the past ten years been coming only from the mouths of fools and liars.

While it seems I've spent the last 6 months disagreeing with President Bush more than agreeing with him, to call him a fool and a liar is vile.

And why don't you ask the men in uniform about Iraq? After all, they VOLUNTEERED.

The VAST majority I've spoken with are itching to get to work. And from what I understand, reenlistments are very high. Does anyone have any numbers on that?

65 posted on 08/04/2002 5:20:38 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #66 Removed by Moderator

To: The Duke
This isn't really an answer but, check with your local post office and see whether they've recently updated their draft registration materials. I was in one yesterday and saw one of the little pamphlets reminding young men to be sure to register.
67 posted on 08/04/2002 5:26:00 PM PDT by pa_dweller
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hugin
There ought to be certain things that everybody (or at least the vast majority of people) can agree go beyond parental rights. Your view would suggest we should not have any laws because they will be passed and enforced by a government, and you don't trust government. There is always a balance between opposing absolutes, parental rights and the welfare of children, society and the individual, statism and anarchy. Drawing those lines is what politics (and really civilization) is all about.

My view is that when you use force and violate other's rights, thats where the government steps in, otherwise the government has no business stepping in. Government's job should be to protect rights, not be a nanny state. As soon as you open a crack on the nanny state box for something you think should be enforced, something else will come up that you dislike and will be enforced on you and your children(ex: Homosexuality is ok, premarital sex is ok, abortion is ok, Christianity is bigotry, spanking your chidren is immoral, etc etc)

68 posted on 08/04/2002 5:27:26 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
There is a bill in Congress floating just under the radar screen and it's designed to re-institute a draft that will be MANDATORY only for young men and curiously enough the mandatory section, if I'm correct, DOES NOT apply to women.
69 posted on 08/04/2002 5:31:47 PM PDT by american spirit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
I've heard numerous radio ads reminding all "young men" that registration for "selective service" is "the law".

This is the first time you've noticed? Those ads have been on the radio for decades.

70 posted on 08/04/2002 5:33:07 PM PDT by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
I think we actually agree more than we disagree. When talking about indiviual rights the question of children is perhaps the most difficult. As someone once said, children don't fit well into the libertarian model.
71 posted on 08/04/2002 5:36:37 PM PDT by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: TomB
onsidering you've given absolutely NO evidence to support your conclusion, I think it's just a product of unhealthy cynicism and a crummy outlook.

I wasn't aware that I had presented any "conclusions" - my intent was to solicit discussion - and attempt which seems to have been successful.

While it seems I've spent the last 6 months disagreeing with President Bush more than agreeing with him, to call him a fool and a liar is vile.

I didn't say President Bush was a fool. In fact, I wouldn't have called "president" Clinton a fool either.

Now, as far as "liar" goes - all I can say is that both are politicians.

The VAST majority I've spoken with are itching to get to work. And from what I understand, reenlistments are very high. Does anyone have any numbers on that?

I would suggest that you don't think of a war with Iraq as necessarily being conveniently located "over there". One might do well to anticipate, for example, entire US cities quaranteened due to biowarfare within our own borders. In fact, the sailors at sea might be the lucky ones.

We ain't living in Kansas no more Dorothy, and try as you might, clicking those ruby red slippers together ain't gonna help once certain genies are out of the bottle.

72 posted on 08/04/2002 5:38:03 PM PDT by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
Could it possibly be that a ressurection of the draft is being contemplated? And if so will this draft be "selective" in the sense that it won't "select" the children of our national leaders(?) (as apparently was the case with Vietnam?)

The draft will not be returned but maybe your statement about those in power requires a bit of a re-think. Congress is chocked full of military vets. Many highly decorated. Bush the 1st was a WW2 fighter pilot that was shot down on a combat mission. Bob Dole almost died of his injuries and still has the use of only one arm. You may have let your cynicism get in the way of fairness.

73 posted on 08/04/2002 5:39:58 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pining_4_TX
Old politicians always send young men off to die in wars, just not the ones in their own families

Not always true. John F. Kennedy is one counterexample. His father wasnt' an elected politician, but he owned plenty of them. JFK's brother was killed in WW-II. Similary the son of President Teddy Roosevelt was the first general on the beach in the first wave no less, on D-Day in Normandy. He and his two brothers fought in WW-I. The youngest one, Quentin, was killed in the war. His son, named after his brother, was also in action elsewhere in Normandy on D-Day, this source claims they were the only father-son pair in action that day in Normandy. Of course all of them, in addition to being sons or grandsons of President Teddy, where also part of the extended family of both the then sitting President (Franklin) Roosevelt (although the two branches of the family were politically opposed) and of the First Lady, who was also a Roosevelt and to whom they were even more closely related. Teddy Jr. died of a heart attack a few days after D-Day. He was not a career officer, but rather, horrors, a politician (for the most part). The article above also mentions the son of President Hayes getting the medal of honor during the Phillipine insurrection, long after his father was out of office and dead. Franklin's own son, James, went on active duty as a captain in the United States Marine Corps in November 1940; promoted to colonel April 13, 1944, and served in the Pacific Theater; released from active duty in August 1945. Another son, Franklin D. Jr, was called from the Naval Reserve on March 13, 1941, (having gotten his law degree in 1940) to active duty as an ensign in the United States Navy and served in North Africa, Europe, and the Pacific; discharged from active duty in January 1946; awarded the Purple Heart Medal and the Silver Star. Elliot and John were also in uniform during the war and before US entry.

(Incidently the FDR offspring were a marrying bunch Anna was married three times, Elliot and James 5 times each and John twice.

Even in England, long standing tradition, probably to be broken by the current generation, is that future Kings of England serve in the armed forces. Even those Princes not next in line usually served.

Some politicians have always been willing to send other peoples kids off to fight, but there is a counter tradition of uniformed service to country, by the sons of elite as well as the sons of the more humble members of society. When that tradition dies, the country is in trouble. Come to think about it, the Sinkmeister was very much an execption in being a President with no personal military service of any sort. I think you have to go back to FDR, and even he served as Assistant Secretary of the Navy during WW-I.

74 posted on 08/04/2002 5:47:27 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JavaTheHutt
On the one hand, I completely agree with you! Everyone should put in their time in service to this nation. This country needs a reawakening of sorts...of course, in my opinion. However, comma...I see these two goonies and wonder how in the hell-o we could ever use them!
75 posted on 08/04/2002 6:14:14 PM PDT by getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
I would like to know what other Freepers think of the prospect of resurrecting the draft?

I don't like it.

If young boys or men want to go to the Military, then, Great!

76 posted on 08/04/2002 6:18:29 PM PDT by carenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
It's been the law for a long time now. I registered when I was 18, and that was 20 years ago. Two years afterwards, I joined the Air Force. They've had the PSA's for Selective Service for a while now, and the frequency they play them at varies.
77 posted on 08/04/2002 6:22:43 PM PDT by Tennessee_Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL
Ooops! Sorry! And again: On the one hand, I completely agree with you! Everyone should put in their time in service to this nation. This country needs a reawakening of sorts...of course, in my opinion. However, comma...I see these two goonies and wonder how in the hell-o we could ever use them!
78 posted on 08/04/2002 6:26:02 PM PDT by getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
the government indoctrinates love for socialism through the public schools

You are full of shit. Or yourself. Either way it stinks.

79 posted on 08/04/2002 6:28:22 PM PDT by mrfixit514
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Hugin
I'm sure we do, and I agree that a child does not fit well in the libertarian mold for a number of reasons. However, generally throughout history (especially in the USA), most the child's rights are retained through their parent (with the exception of life and some property, which is retained to the child) or guardians until they are considered 'of age', which is again why I fall back on the parent > government, except when force/promotion of force is involved.
80 posted on 08/04/2002 6:29:37 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-113 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson