Obligation to Serve?

Obligation to Serve? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

TheHeretic -> Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 2:58:27 PM)
Inspired by yet another thread on the possibility of a restored draft, I'd like to pose a few questions. Do you believe the government has the right to demand life and death sacrifice of the citizens? To round them up, demand an oath and waiver of civil rights and send them to die? Do citizens owe an obligation to their country sufficient to set aside their personal lives and opinions and allow themselves to be sent to die? Even if they don't agree with the war? If the letter showed up, would you report?

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 3:04:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Do you believe the government has the right to demand life and death sacrifice of the citizens? No. quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic To round them up, demand an oath and waiver of civil rights and send them to die? No. But there is a lot of interesting stuff packed into this question. What if you refuse to swear or affirm the oath? What if you refuse to sign away your rights to full citizenship? quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Do citizens owe an obligation to their country sufficient to set aside their personal lives and opinions and allow themselves to be sent to die? No. quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Even if they don't agree with the war? Esp. not in that case. quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic If the letter showed up, would you report? If the U.S. was threatened with invasion, yes. Otherwise, no.

domiguy -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 3:19:11 PM)
There are definitely things worth fighting for....If you agree to fight in a war than you also have to accept that there is the possiblity that you might be wounded or killed...It would just simply come down to is the situation worth that sacrfice...The one currently going on is not....

EvilCrimeLord -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 5:01:30 PM)
Conscripts make for the worst fighting forces because their hearts are not in it. If there is one person fighting overseas that doesn’t want to be there then they shouldn’t be there. If your Government needs you to die for the greater good you won’t be asked.

TheHeretic -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 5:42:20 PM)
There is a scene at the beginning of Enemy at the Gates, where each of the new conscipts is handed a clip of ammunition, every other soldier gets a rifle, and they are sent on a suicide charge that isn't going to do anything but buy time. Running away will get you shot by your own side. Bad as it may sound, I think government does have the right to place the survival of the whole above the survival of individuals. Yes, they can make that demand. Trading lives for time was what it took for the Russians to hold Stalingrad (or at least, that was the stategy chosen). Yes. The rights I enjoy as a US citizen come with an obligation to insure those rights to those who follow. I doubt the military would want my out of shape ass back, but I'd report if called. Unless... One of my favorite stories from the family tree is of four brothers about to be drafted for cannon fodder in one of those mid-1800's European slaughterfests. Rather than report to the town square, they raided the closets of their mother and sisters, and left the country in drag and never went back. That is my answer to those who say the obligations of citizenship are dependent on their opinion of the cause. You have the individual right to vote with your feet. Don't come back, and don't expect those who suffer losses to be nice to your mom.

NeedToUseYou -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 6:09:36 PM)
I think the draft is just slavery in a patriotic cloak.

cyberdude611 -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 6:24:47 PM)
I don't think bringing back the draft is going to work unless the country is hit again like on a level of 9/11 or higher. If another attack like that happends.....then yes, there WILL be a draft and there will be support for it.

NeedToUseYou -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 6:31:04 PM)
But in a case like that you wouldn't need a draft. That is sorta the irony of it all. Which is when we are attacked more than enough people are ready to defend the US, it seems we only NEED a draft when the intentions and goal of the war are in question.

abusablepaintoy -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 6:31:38 PM)
First off, there will never be another draft in the United States, (not unless the landscape of the world undergoes some drastic changes, like nuclear war.) Secondly, only one political party in the US is talking about a draft, and it's not the one most people would assume. (And even then they aren't serious, it is purely a political ploy) As to your questions, Does government have the right to demand life and death sacrifice of its citizens, to round them up, demand an oath and waiver of civil rights and to send them to die? 100 years ago, the answer would have been a wholehearted "Yes," and people asking this question wouldn't show their faces in public for the most part. Now? I don't think the government has the right to demand all citizens to do that. There are other alternatives in our modern society, and no reason to require all citizens to bear arms. The second question, "Do citizens owe an obligation to their country sufficient to set aside their personal lives and opinions and allow themselves to be sent to die? Even if they don't agree with the war? " I'll take in several parts. Yes, I believe that ALL citizens have a moral obligation to serve their country. In a free society, it is up to the individual as to how meet that obligation. If you've read the book "Starship Troopers," (NOT seen the movie, that is a horrible travesty compared to what Heinlein wrote and I'm embarrased for him that it was ever made.) at that time if a person wanted full citizenship and the ability to vote, they had two paths - 20 to 35 years civil service in various jobs, or a much shorter enlistment in the military. All other rights were basically the same, with the exception of the right to vote which was only available to those who made the sacrifice of civil service. That's basically my philosophy on things. Do I feel there should be a legal obligation to serve one's country? Yes, but there isn't, and I doubt that will ever change. However, look at Europe. Many countries there have compulsory military service (Israel and Cyprus come to mind, but there are many others). Israel in particular is a very strong nation because of it, if only their leaders had the political will to do what is necessary.... But I digress. So if a citizen chooses to meet their moral obligation of serving their country, and do so by joining an all-volunteer military, then they should abide by their decision and go where ordered, regardless of whether they agree with it or not. I spent 4 years in the Army because I believe the ideals of the United States as defined by our forefathers and codified in the Constitution and Bill of Rights are worthy ones, and as such I have a moral obligation to defend and protect those ideals. I enlisted under a president that I found morally lacking, knowing that there was a good chance that I might become cannon fodder for a politically motivated military engagement, and I still raised my right hand. Not wanting to go to war is human and natural, but for those who go AWOL or do other things to get out of that obligation I have little sympathy with, with the exception of those people who have been kept past their enlistment involuntarily, or those who are on their 3rd, 4th, or more tour without an adequate rotation stateside for rest, recuperation, and retraining. But I see that more as a failure of the government to meet its obligation to us as citizens by adequately providing for our military in terms of manpower and equipment.

farglebargle -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 6:32:13 PM)
There will never be a draft, as long as there is the smallest chance of inducting a homosexual. That said, there are some very important aspects of Constitutional Republics vs other forms of Government, and I think the best is that The People ARE the Sovereign Entity, and the US Government being just a TEMPORARY political administration structure ( like the Articles of Confederation... ) to be changed or abolished at our discretion.

snappykappy -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 6:41:15 PM)
for the comments of abusablepaintoy very well presented response to this subject which i whole heartedly agree people these days think they can get things for free and not have to pay some price for it an easy way is to do civil service or heck even better let them pick up trash along the roads if they do not want to serve in the military also if the taggers want to tag then send them over to the areas of conflict and let them tag all they want and this goes along with the rapists and killers and all the rest of the no gooders this would make room for the overcrowded prisons and also if the illegals want to come into this country then give them a gun and send them to the conflict areas and if they get out alive after 4 years then they get to into this country also any elected official have their son or daughter in the military and then would they want to send them into harms way and along with that have mom and dad go with them over there

abusablepaintoy -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 6:58:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle There will never be a draft, as long as there is the smallest chance of inducting a homosexual. That said, there are some very important aspects of Constitutional Republics vs other forms of Government, and I think the best is that The People ARE the Sovereign Entity, and the US Government being just a TEMPORARY political administration structure ( like the Articles of Confederation... ) to be changed or abolished at our discretion. If you are serious in thinking that keeping homosexuals out of the military is enough of a reason to keep it permanently abolished.... When I was in, I'd say 25-30% of the soldiers were bisexual or gay. For 95% of soldiers that I came in contact with, it wasn't an issue, and for the other 5% they were extremely homophobic in the first place (and about the same proportion of extreme homophobes you'd find in the civilian world.) I served in combat arms, so I can't vouch for anything outside that, but (for instance) my roommate was basically "out" as a homosexual and they never did anything to him, it didn't keep him from getting promoted to E-5, and he finished his enlistment with 2 GCM's. Most people don't care WHAT your sexuality is, as long as you soldier when it's time to soldier. (I even knew a Lieutenant and a corporal who were in MI who were crossdressers/transvestites, both had top secret security clearances (The Lieutenant had a higher clearance, I never did find out exactly what it was, nor did I care) and their command staff was fully aware of their activities.) You make a good point about the government being a contract that the citizens make with each other to serve the common good, and that it is our responsiblity to see that it meets that common good, or change or abolish it if it fails to do so. The problem comes about when you kick the old SOB's out, how do you keep even worse SOB's from taking over and making it worse? And given how large our country has become, if we ever did try to change our government it would be impossible to come to a consensus as to how to change it. (Maybe if we let governments at the state and local levels actually govern instead of lumping it all on the federal level, like our forefathers intended... Naah, that's too revolutionary!)

farglebargle -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 8:35:35 PM)
Short response. NOTHING which is not explicitly delegated is the proper role of the Federal Government. No Child Left Behind? Nope. Federal Highway Administration? Nope. DEA? ATF? NSC? Closed. Closed. and Closed. It would devolve authority to the States ( where it belongs ) and hamstring the out-of-control feds.

kittinSol -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 8:41:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Inspired by yet another thread on the possibility of a restored draft, I'd like to pose a few questions. Do you believe the government has the right to demand life and death sacrifice of the citizens? To round them up, demand an oath and waiver of civil rights and send them to die? Do citizens owe an obligation to their country sufficient to set aside their personal lives and opinions and allow themselves to be sent to die? Even if they don't agree with the war? If the letter showed up, would you report? No.

SusanofO -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 9:08:08 PM)
If I got such a letter, ordering me to fight in this Iraq war - I would personally round up a Posse to have Bush kidnapped, and permanently banished to Canada. Or maybe even to Iraq, or Pakistan - where he would be forced to live out the rest of his days in a lonely cave. Without Laura, too. If it was some other war, it would depend on why we were at war (and by that I mean, whether or not I believed it was a legitimate reason for war). I am still ticked off nobody ever found the much-touted "weapons of mass destruction." My sister, on the other hand, is convinced they exist and are still out there, and that Bush walks on water, and "everyone" should just get off his back. To each his own. But I would not consent to be drafted into this war - I would become a Conscientious Objector first. - Susan

LATEXBABY64 -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 9:08:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic There is a scene at the beginning of Enemy at the Gates, where each of the new concepts is handed a clip of ammunition, every other soldier gets a rifle, and they are sent on a suicide charge that isn't going to do anything but buy time. Running away will get you shot by your own side. Bad as it may sound, I think government does have the right to place the survival of the whole above the survival of individuals. Yes, they can make that demand. Trading lives for time was what it took for the Russians to hold Stalingrad (or at least, that was the stategy chosen). Yes. The rights I enjoy as a US citizen come with an obligation to insure those rights to those who follow. I doubt the military would want my out of shape ass back, but I'd report if called. Unless... One of my favorite stories from the family tree is of four brothers about to be drafted for cannon fodder in one of those mid-1800's European slaughterfests. Rather than report to the town square, they raided the closets of their mother and sisters, and left the country in drag and never went back. That is my answer to those who say the obligations of citizenship are dependent on their opinion of the cause. You have the individual right to vote with your feet. Don't come back, and don't expect those who suffer losses to be nice to your mom. people who do not respect freedom are doomed to loose it.. in ww2 people lined up to sign up a long with the draft. i remember filling out my draft card if it ever came up i was proud to do so. i respect what this country is and what it can do for you. I do not piss and moan about what what someone else says or does in office i know they can be outed in the next election.. only way to change something is to be involved.. like bush says your either four us or against us.. you make you choice not rocket science really

farglebargle -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 9:11:30 PM)
You know they're just snatching people off the street, and torturing them? Sometimes being held without arraignment for 1300 days... Get back to me with the Patriotism when there's a Government WORTHY of respect. I figure we have here exactly the situation the Declaration of Independence warned up about, myself.

popeye1250 -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 10:46:50 PM)
I've already served many years in the military but if they wanted to "draft" me to be deputised as an I.C.E. Officer I'd do it.

UtopianRanger -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/11/2007 11:06:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Inspired by yet another thread on the possibility of a restored draft, I'd like to pose a few questions. Do you believe the government has the right to demand life and death sacrifice of the citizens? To round them up, demand an oath and waiver of civil rights and send them to die? Do citizens owe an obligation to their country sufficient to set aside their personal lives and opinions and allow themselves to be sent to die? Even if they don't agree with the war? If the letter showed up, would you report? When I was a young, wild fool.... I gave six years of my life to the United States Marine corps -- So I don't think they'll knock at my door if they re-institute the draft. However, if they somehow change things and make us all eligible again and pick me.....I'd spit in their face and tell them to put the plastic cuffs on. Absent of standing on the coastal cliffs of Oregon and witnessing--with my own eyes—an armada of Chi-coms or Abdullah’s motoring-in close to our shore, they couldn't get me to risk my life or fight for the US government even if they offered me ten times the typical pay rate of a KBR employee. The citizenry of this country has a zero sum debt to this crony-corporate government. - R

NorthernGent -> RE: Obligation to Serve? (8/12/2007 12:41:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Do you believe the government has the right to demand life and death sacrifice of the citizens? To round them up, demand an oath and waiver of civil rights and send them to die? As governments believe they have the right to lie where it is in the public interest (their version of the public interest), then you're on shakey ground here. They can quite easily sleep at night after telling you lies and rounding you up for the express purpose of your nipples being used as target practice by a tribe of Taliban. quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic If the letter showed up, would you report? No, but I would send the letter back with a superimposed picture of my cock up the queen, a pint of beer in my hand, with a big smile on my face and a caption saying: fight your own fuckin' wars, wankers. What is the country anyway? What exactly does it mean to you and why? That's the question that needs answering intially, what exactly binds you to 300 million people: many of which living thousands of miles away?, what obligation do you have to people you probably have little in common with and will never meet? In my book, "the nation" is simply an economic convenience and the chance to raise a huge army through having control over a greater number of people. I'm fiercely proud of the part of the country I'm from, and I'd be up in arms if there was a real threat to the North of England, but I don't give a fuck about London and all the government/queen bollocks that goes on down there, and have no wish to fight for them.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875