Elect Barack Obama
Impeach Bush & Cheney!
"Google" your Voter Registration
Register to Vote
Vote Early-Absentee-Nov4
Visit the Democratic Party
User loginNavigation![]() "The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush" is available for $12; a free downloadable PDF is also available. |
Want to end the Iraq war: Re-instate the draft!This goes back to an idea I floated on a forum node that discussed why there is not a mass upheaval in the public square. As was posited by Bill Harding – and I supported – there are not enough body bags coming out of Iraq and currently we do not have a draft. My point at the time was in Vietnam, we had throngs of protests because people did not have a choice, there was a draft in place, – and the choice to participate (get your ass shot off) was not available to those of draft age. Today, all circular arguments aside as to why we are in Iraq, the soldiers are there of their own free volition. I hypothesized the idea that a reverse psychology plan to bring the American people to their collective feet would work: Impose a mandatory draft and watch mass demonstrations, work stoppages, sit-ins, and mass protests ensue immediately to demand we leave Iraq. In other words, once Bush’s war impacts all families and young men and women on a grand scale and leaves them without choice, the opposition to the war would be more than a “November vote” and a lot of arm-chair quarterbacking. Enter Chuck Rangel's (D-NY) proposal and why:
[emphasis added] I know many may disagree, but I believe that Rangel is right. Just the introduction of legislation to re-instate the draft -- which brings this depraved, immoral war – right into the living rooms and dinner tables of every American and every parent of a child between the ages of 18-26 would trumpet the final rubuke of Bush and his war of choice. Enact this proposal and see just how many shrill conservative pundits, Bush apologists, and neocon chickenhawks-Bush-supporters run for cover and start to demand an immediate withdrawal of our troops from the middle of this lawless, sectarian Civil war that WE caused. Take away the words “choice” and “voluntary”, replace them with “required” and “mandatory”, and see how many pre-emptive wars we start again. My bet is none.
|
What's HotStop Bush from Pardoning Himself and Cheney PaulsonWatch: No Bailouts for Bush's Cronies
Replace Bush Democrats
Escrow to Keep Obama Progressive Local: connect with Democrats.com members in your State, County, and Congressional District Are you really registered to vote? "Google" your voter registration to find out Ten Reasons to Impeach Bush & CheneyNo Pardons for Bush-CheneyOut of Iraq PetitionForumsPollShould Congress Give Paulson $700 Billion Blank Check? Yes 1% No 99% Total votes: 246 Protest and Organize! |
What changed your mind about
What changed your mind about the draft Frank?
Kurt Weldon and Nick Smith introduced a bill called...
The Universal Military Training and Service Act of 2001. They wrote this in Dec of 2001.
HR 3598 IH, 107th Congress
Kurt Weldon(R-chickenhawk)
Nick Smith(R-MI)
All males 18-22 would have to serve at least one year, no deferments, females could volunteer. These draftees would be paid a small fraction of what the volunteer troops made. They could be extended at the convenience of the Goverment.
This was introduced into the House Armed Services Committee...where it has languished.
Those draftees unable to be in the military would be assigned to some sort of community service.
It was a really nasty bill.
If you want to make the DRAFT unpassable, make it a draft that affects men and women alike. Congress would never dare to pass such a bill, short of a major world war's need for canon fodder.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
That does sound like a
That does sound like a Weldon Bill! Another dough boy.
Jim, I don't believe I change my mind on the draft
Have I ever espoused a view about the draft in the past? ;-)
If you remember back to Bill's bullet-point plan,
I responded to that (http://www.democrats.com/node/11050#comment-66917) and agreed that the draft was the difference. I believe you and I have agreed and discussed in the past about why American's are so apathetic and you posited the ideas of the draft and the poor job of the fourth estate. I agreed with the assessment of the draft as the difference, but diverged mostly about the MSM. (I have soften some on the MSM point)
In any event, what ever I have intimated in the past, as is evident by this node, I believe now until we starting lining up a proportionate number of wealthy/neocon kids to go die in a needless war, all the petitions in the world and all the pressure we can muster put on Congress won't change a damn thing.
My belief is highlighted in Bill's point one "Force action through widespread demonstrations, work stoppages, and other high-visibility actions. (My take: There are not enough body bags coming back from Iraq, as with Vietnam, to spur this kind of emotional response from the general public.)"
In order to effect serious change, "widespread demonstrations, work stoppages, and other high-visibility actions" are needed. Bill is correct that, "There are not enough body bags coming back from Iraq, as with Vietnam, to spur this kind of emotional response from the general public," and a draft will quickly change that lack of emotion.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
The "draft" may be a moot point anyway:
Top House Democrats to bar military draft plan
Looks like all they are interested in is fluffy, vote-snaring issues like,
I guess we should all just go back to going shopping! ;-)
Source:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061120/pl_nm/draft_dc
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Maybe I misinterpreted.
A few months ago I had had enough with a fixed number of Americans being burned through in our Military and I wrote (though I have kids):
To which you replied:
http://www.democrats.com/node/9906
Anyway I think we agree you can't be a Republican and NOT be enlisted. THAT needs to be pounded in, and may have a bit of the effect a Draft would.
It would be nice too if Republicans either paid back their debt or shut up while we re-instate the old taxes on the leisure class.
jim, I don't think you misinterpreted, however
jim, I don't think it was a case where you misinterpreted, but took it a little out of context. I will explain in a second, however, my views have changed some since then as well. Unlike the Bushites, I change my views when new information and ideas come to light after I examine them and reflect on them.
My "resist" comment was more directed at those that were already serving. If every soldier resisted and refused to deploy or serve in Iraq, it would end this nightmare. Some are starting to already do this.
In my view, soldiers willingly serving in Iraq are not defending our country, instead they are enabling a war criminal (Bush) and committing acts of human brutality and the undoing of two countries.
They swore to fight to protect the U.S. Constitution and they actually are helping shred it and support a war of choice and a lie from a seditious president. To me, this is tantamount to treason.
Many were stunned at how so many Nazi-Gemany soldiers were able to commit the unspeakable acts they did, and research showed they were in denial and felt they were just, "following orders."
Don't be a blind follower: think, ask questions, form your own opinion.
Yes, I am a “conscientious objector” based on the belief that all war is immoral and a crime against humanity.
John Dean's book, "Conservatives without a Conscience" really opened my eyes up to sheeple and why people follow Bush...the few that are left. He suggested that 23% of this nation are blind followers that NEED to be told what to do and who to blame. That, in and of itself, is justification (for them) enough for things like the Iraq war, rescinding civil liberties, et al.
I believe that polemic pundit, Sean Hannity, is an excellent example of this.
It is my nature to question everything and only trust after immense verification of facts and figures.
Fire away.....
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank, you just blamed the troops, as in Vietnam.
I agree that one can not blindly follow orders (as per Nazi Germany) but we should concern ourselves with not holding the troops to impossible standards. This is a multifaceted moral decision!
IF Republicans had asked Americans about sacrificing the treasury, decades of time, their sons and daughters, their standards of living, all so that the Middle East might some day be a better place for its own sake and for Americas THEN Americans might have followed some slow escalation of pressure which may have led to war somewhere there (other than Afghanistan). Were that the case those young troops would simply be balancing duty with opinions over strategy.
I recognize that the way things happened is different but yet these young troops STILL provide an amazing service to this Nation.
-They make it clear Americans will fight anywhere and at any time if they are simply called to do so.
-With respect to strategy, the invasion of Iraq was nonsense, HOWEVER the troops worked within that flawed strategy and DID accomplish quite a bit. Yes, beyond that strategy one can point fingers, but within it, obeying their orders they did well.
-Further, obeying bullshit immoral orders is NOT always a bad thing overall. There are several lines to be crossed and the troops have not crossed them. A strategic line may have been crossed. A narrowly focused moral line may have as well BUT to refuse to serve has HUGE moral implications that go beyond any single War. It is a dissolution of Union and that too must be considered to make a moral judgments.
The Blame the Troops mantra further screwed with men from a past War. I had thought we had healed a bit since then and also learned a thing or two.
Jim, I blame everyone that....
Jim,
I blame everyone who is involved with and supports this war. This nonsense of supporting our troops, no matter how vacuous a reason, is foolishness. Don’t get me wrong, I wish them no harm and want them home NOW, but they – as human beings – above ALL other things, have a responsibility to administer the ability to decide which orders are truly rational/justified ones and which ones are morally and ethically bankrupt.
History is littered with people that blindly followed “revered” leaders that only resulted in mass deaths and destruction. Simply look at Jim Jones and the famous Kool Aide brigade that committed suicide by listening to a lunatic. To me, GWB is that lunatic.
Perhaps you have not, but I have seen actual military footage, of U.S. soldiers gunning down crowds of woman and children, using apache helicopters, and after watching them literally explode into pieces, exclaim, “cool!” As if, it was some “PS2 frag game”. It was gross, disgusting, and disturbing the lack of value placed on a human life. I lost sleep for days after viewing that.
No, I am sorry Jim, but following orders, long after you know they are wrong on every conceivable level, is unacceptable to me. Failure to lay down your arms is merely an invitation for Bush to do more of the same in Iran, N. Korea and everywhere else he capriciously chooses.
I believe our soldiers have crossed that “proverbial line” more than once: White phosphorous, torture, rape, etc. Further, I can think of no good reason that justifies, “obeying bullshit immoral orders is NOT always a bad thing overall.” How can that be and who decides which immoral orders is merely B.S. and which truly have implications? What if you or your family is on the “working end” of some of those, “bullshit immoral orders”?
It may send the message that the U.S. is willing to fight anywhere/anytime, but is that the message we truly want to send the world? That we are bullies?
Is brute strength harness by excessive, willingness and undo violence the people we wish to be?
Jim, 655,000 people are dead now, countless injured, two countries torn apart – ours and Iraq – 400 billion dollars wasted and the loss of virtually all respect by the rest of the world. If that is the cost of what the “willingness to fight anywhere/anytime” is, then I don’t want any part of that.
I stand by my quote from over a year ago,
“There is no freedom in fear. There is no honor in deceit. There in no virtue in war. Justice is only served when peace is favored over hostility and diplomacy is the true show of strength of a great nation. Violence is the final refuge of the impatient and the incompetent minds of cowardly and narrow-minded men.” -Frank J. Ranelli
Those that continue to support, engage, justify, approve, or participate in this baseless war are part of the perpetuation of deceit and there is NEVER any honor in that. Lay down your weapons, end the war. That, and that alone, will bring us honor.
To me, here is the bottom line: George W. Bush, as President of the United States engaged in a concerted and unified effort to deceive Congress, The American people and the world that Iraq was a threat and the not only possessed weapons of mass destruction, but their intent was to cause us immediate and pernicious harm. George W. Bush did so willingly, and with great malice towards the United States, bring unnecessary war to bear on our nation and the Nation of Iraq; violating his oath of office and in doing so also violated the Constitution. Even after incontrovertible evidence showed his massive mendacity, he furthered and continued a "war of choice" and used mass propaganda and lies to ask others to engage in his crimes against the United States and humanity.
For the reasons stated above, it is my opinion that any one who participates on “any level” that supports this war is guilty of sedition and treachery.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank, where is the introspection?
Are you without guilt?
-Oil profits tempted men and you had a hand in that.
-Men who serve have to balance infinitely more you give them credit for.
YES, the troops do have to obey orders because X number of years from now "Hitler" will again rise up and a moral War will have to be fought. The culture that must be passed along so that Americans are ready to fight a just War will not exist if soldiers do as you suggest. I repeat: some bullshit immoral orders must be followed because of broader implications.
Assholes have to live with jerk offs. Meaning, one can not expect individuals who must fill incredibly different niches in our Nation to also behave alike. You want to bitch at these troops? How about they bitch at the failings they see in you? Americans have to give each other some space: This is true here, with respect to Choice, Religion, The Gay Agenda, etc. (I like saying it that way because the Gay Agenda is exactly ZERO. They want precisely NOTHING. Just not less than nothing.)
And yes, the troops have still accomplished wonders within the clusterf@@k that was this "strategy". The 9/11 shit heads have gotten to see that Americans will fight whenever asked and a dictator was overthrown with lightning speed. (Overall a pitiful strategy but some particulars stand out).
Jim...the term you seek is...
strategery, not strategy. Just thought I'd mention that.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Is that a word?
Is that a word?
Jim, it must be...the pretzeldent used to use it all the ...
time. 8^)
We have another word being used:
SNARKALICIOUS.
Checked my copy of the OED and don't find it.
Perhaps you could enlighten me and all the others.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
lol. Forgot about that! CP
lol.
Forgot about that! CP used the snark reference not I.
Well Jim, I figured that you being a Ph.d and all...
that you could translate. lol.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
I would pull something if I
I would pull something if I tried ;)
SNARKALICIOUS
I confess, it's an original construct.... must be all these yrs. listenin' to the village idiot. :)
LOL CP...I thought maybe it was from watching too...
many Sat. morning cartoon shows.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Jim: I will answer your
Jim:
I will answer your question with a question:
"Are you not without shame?"
-Shameful that as a citizen of this nation, we allowed our President, the man we entrusted with the highest honor of our land, to lie to us and drag us into this tar pit of hell. Do you not have guilt for this, as you ask me if I do not have guilt? Bush, nor any of his people, speaks for me...not in my name.
While I see your logic, I don't think you carried it through and arrived at a possibly illogical conclusion. Ostensibly, what you suggest is that Iraq is justified, because we must "keep order at all costs" just in case a moral and justified one comes along. I see this as a dangerous primacy. It squelches free and critical thinking. This, IMO, is a prelude to Orwellian ideas and newspeak jargon.
My failing have never caused the deaths of innocent people, or looted an entire national treasury. That's a hyperbole argument. I won’t entertain you on this one, sorry. ;-(
I am surprised at your final comment about overthrowing a dictator. I failed to read the part in the U.S. Constitution where we proclaimed that we must police the world. Should we remove every third world dictator, then? Even so, if that is the case, who will over-throw the dictator at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue?
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Of course I share guilt. I also do not call the troops traitors
The CITIZENRY SHARES GUILT. Not the Machine that is our Military. Not to the extent as the Citizenry that commanded them.
Just as we divide Prosecutor and Defense Attorneys, or Doctors (aiding a murderer) from the Cops who brought him to the E.R. so too we divide the Citizenry from Military.
You ask about conclusions in the extreme. Well we are ALL in agreement about the extremes of following orders.
As to your failures causing deaths: Of course they have. More so still by sins of omission.
(I did throw in the Dictator note. It was a gain against an infinitely greater loss, but it IS what the citizenry asked of our troops and they accomplished it.)
-----
Calling our troops traitors while you remain unblemished is beyond the pale.
The fact that you have now broadened all this to include non participation in ALL Wars for all times, at least places this in a more academic perspective. Still, that is not a place to also engage in what is hurtful to people going through hell. I'm at a loss.
Jim, Is it impossible for us to be as guilty as the Germans?
If the Citizenry shares the guilt, then it is WE that should bore the treachery of our nation as well. By this contention, it is WE who are guilty of seditious acts. To that, I may agree, for I do not separate the military as a “machine” but an extension of who we are. Men of uniform are human beings, too. To dehumanize them into anything less, reduces them to renewable resources or war, just like tanks and guns.
The fact is, they are human, capable of thought, and know right from wrong. Their voice should be heard and not suppressed. I have never called them traitors, those are your words. By my standards, WE are ALL guilty of Bush’s crimes and failure to end this war and impeach him for dragging us into this horrendous atrocity is merely blood on all of our hands.
I simply do not draw the lines of distinction that you do and think that what is believed to be impossible is possible. Let’s surmise for a moment, that what I suggest actually did happen. Can you lay out all the likely outcomes? Is peace one of them?
You and I are both more than blemish, we are all tainted, damaged goods as a collective nation for we failed the world and allowed this to happen on our watch. Democracy actually failed; it permitted a despot to spoil our good name. In doing so, communally as a nation – from those that continue to take orders from a criminal – to the woman standing next to you in the store, are all guilty of being a traitor to basics of reciprocity of fundamental human kindness and appreciation for life itself.
Since we are “all in agreement of about the extremes of following orders,” did it ever occur to you that the people of Iraq believe we have already crossed that line?
Is it impossible for us to be as guilty as the Germans were because we are so full of hubris and blind nationalism that we believe we are above the fray?
Choices Jim, choices…..we all have them, we just haven’t made very good ones the last six years. History will judge is very poorly for the deeds we allowed while we (the citizenry) shared time on this earth.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank,
Frank,
Your words:
"In my view, soldiers willingly serving in Iraq are not defending our country, instead they are enabling a war criminal (Bush) and committing acts of human brutality and the undoing of two countries.
They swore to fight to protect the U.S. Constitution and they actually are helping shred it and support a war of choice and a lie from a seditious president. To me, this is tantamount to treason."
-------
If you do not believe in ANY War, then we fundamentally disagree.
-------
It is a fact of life that civilizations and social groups within it, divide themselves up with little overlap. The OVERALL effect is a good one and Soldiers, Cops, Librarians, etc must balance their role with any specific moral question that comes up. Sometimes the greater good occurs by breaking with one's specific moral concerns (as in the morning after pill and a pharmacist's morality). He can be asked to ignore those moral concerns because of his more general role in society. Your loved ones and mine would be dead many times over if we broke with our roles out of moral outrage. We obeyed Republican Laws though we disagreed with them. Once again however, as we move on to the soldier, if you do not believe in a standing army then any appeal I would make to a larger concern will have no meaning for you.
Regardless, starting a thread to promote the draft, while alluding to the troops as traitors, and that a draft should be resisted, all the while bickering with Vets has me bewildered.
Academically at least, positing that no War is justified, and therefore no army, at least simplifies all this.
----------------------------------------------------------
HOWEVER this is as hard as I have seen the troops knocked as I have seen anywhere in decades.
The key there Jim is,
The key there Jim is,
"soldiers willingly serving in Iraq" This war people, this war!!!!
I am not bickering with vets, I was asked by Grinch to engage in a debate, without the knowledge that he, or anyone else, is a vet, nor should that matter.
I put forht my analysis, you can agree or disagree. That is your choice. You can choose to fight, or you can chose not to fight. That is also a choice. When you know that the choice to fight is wrong and illegal and you willingly choose to do it anyway, then you are enabling the people that started the war. That is how I see it.
My intent with the thread was a genuine one and has been widely talked about in the MSM. It is a solution to help bring about the war, by calling the bluff of chickenhawks. This thread now has been taken WAY off course and out of context.
I guess I should have known better than to venture into a likely devisive topic, but I thought we could handle it without all the hyperbole and accusations of troop bashing.
The original thesis was that IF, as a human being, soldiers exercised the judgment of Bush's war --that we all have agreed to here --and stopped fighting, it would be an effective end to the war.
I had no ulterior motives, and have allowed the thread to develop organically.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Well posters can read the
Well posters can read the thread for themselves. Much generalization is there.
This is not right here. I would just say that you ask too much of others. grinch noted some of the problems inherent in "resisting".
To give a final example of the broader implications I spoke of when breaking from our "roles" and to perhaps give you a sense of walking a mile in the other guys shoes, I hope you have not paid any income tax these last 5 years so as to resist funding this war. If not, to be fair, the light penalty for this, in comparison to laying down one's rifle should give one a real sense of what one is asking of others.
Finally, I don't think these are deep questions that only you "dare" to ask. I think they are trivially simple questions that require enormous thought to work through. I see none of that. Listening to the Anarchists, Libertarians, Independents, etc. you would think there are few connections between us instead of the web that actually exists. Webs are yucky and ill defined yet that is life, and to behave as if life is simpler is insensitive at minimum.
Soldiers Frank, are not allowed to exercise judgement...
they are told what to do...and the only response is to do what one is told. It is just that basic.
There is no wiggle room for you Frank...your original piece says what it says...you cannot change what you have stated...from a position of ignorance.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
I don't subscribe to that methodology.
I don't subscribe to that methodology. As a human being, unless you shoot me dead, I have the power to resist. Period.
Not all vets agree:
http://www.couragetoresist.org/x/index.php
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Jim, you failed to answer my
Jim, you failed to answer my question:
"I simply do not draw the lines of distinction that you do and think that what is believed to be impossible is possible. Let’s surmise for a moment, that what I suggest actually did happen. Can you lay out all the likely outcomes? Is peace one of them?"
That is the crux of my argument.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Are you kidding?
Your world is held together by people doing their jobs without regard to 100% personal morality.
-We ask this of Religious types.
-We ask this of racists.
-We ask this of ER Doctors who would help you even if someone was mistakenly yelling that you raped somebody.
-We asked this of WW2 Vets because the machine had to work.
-We ask this of taxpayers who are devastated by abortion or war or capital punishment or corporate welfare.
-We ask this of Cops so that a broader audience can have it proven to THEMSELVES that a particular guy "did it" when the Cop already knows and risks loosing the culprit by bringing him in legally.
-etc.
A couple of points,
if I may...and then I have to take care of family stuff. I'll be back later, tho.
First:
Point: That includes you. You support the war with your tax dollars. If you will blame a soldier for doing what he has to do to stay alive and follow orders, you must blame yourself for your part in it.
and
Point: How many kids have you carried inside your body?
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
Lootie, you assume I pay
Lootie, you assume I pay taxes and that those tax dollars are used to fight this war. Taxes you pay today are gone and go towards paying the interest on the 8 trillion dollar debt we owe the Chinese.
I have two children, what's your point?
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
You don't pay taxes?
?
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
Do you pay taxes?
?
If so, show me the law that states you must pay an income tax. Not the IRS code, but the U.S. statute (U.S.C.) where an individual must pay them?
(Don't bother looking you won't find one.)
Forget the XVI ammendment, it was never properly ratified. The amendment was rejected (and subsequently not ratified) by Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Utah.
This is a topic for a different discussion.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
OK.
OK.
Frank. You pay taxes.
I know that doesn't fit in very well with your philosophy on life, but you do pay taxes.
How many horses do you have, Frank?
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
I don't have a car and I don't fly.
And no, I don't like or have any horses, either.
I really don't want to debate the legality of taxes....as a democrat, I believe they are needed, but how much I pay and to whom and why is not something I am willing to discuss.
I do everything humanly possible to not patronize anything that is remotely linked to the Bush admin. or his supporters. I don't even watch ABC any longer after that, "Path to 9/11" crap.
Am I perfect,no, but at least I try, far harder than most to make a difference.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank. You pay taxes.
If you don't drive a car, you ride public transporation or ride taxis. They use gas. Your fare pays for that gas. (Unless you ride a bicycle EVERYWHERE you go in this world, which I very highly doubt.)
If you smoke, you pay federal taxes.
I don't want to discuss whether or not you pay federal taxes. We both know you do. I wanted to make a point: Sometimes we become a part of that which we hate - and it's not by choice.
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
Okay, I give up....Grinch, Lootiemaye, Bill, Jim.
Grinch, Lootiemaye, Bill, Jim, you are all powerful and I am dead-ass wrong! Further, I am an ignorant moron that after quitting his $75,000 year job to research, write and educate the public about the dangers of Bush -- earning less than $20,000 now -- that sits in an ivory tower and "bashes troops", knows nothing. 6,000 hours of research taught me nothing.
You missed the point, but that's okay, I'll keep my mouth shut from now on.
I guess I don't know a damn thing, should be executed for speaking my mind or banished to an island for bring alternative ideas to a debate because I stepped on a nerve.
Hell, here I am thinking we wanted to end this war and stop the killing and impeach a president who violated everything this website stands and this country stands for! What was I thinking....stupid me!
Wonderful. Do you all feel better you eviscerated me and could not find one common thread among the nearly 3,000 words I typed or the litany of viewpoints I gave?
Hell, even a gun held to my head was not enough to get any of you to walk a minute in my shoes, or that I might actually get it. Nope. I am just another worthless contributor that should be put in his rightful place; yours.
Thanks for the support.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Reply to come...
In the meantime you may answer the responses put to you in answer to your questions.
First to the emotional part
First to the emotional part of all this:
I missed Vietnam by a few years. Had to sign up for selective service but managed to be born in a pocket of peace. I did however pray everyday as a kid for the war to end. I did visualize that my spending habits and energy habits might help cause oil wars so I bicycled thousands of miles per year, gained a degree so I could perhaps make some impact, am building a solar home in the middle of the woods, etc. Not saying I am correct in all I do, just trying to establish that I care.
My prayers at dinner for a few years had to do with giving thanks for not having to work at all because the third world and its animals were doing all the hard labor. (This while working my ass off by other standards). My point is that I'm a Bleeding Heart Liberal who is deeply concerned about War. I also understand that we really need a new word. Big difference between political Wars and stopping someone from killing your kids via imminent invasion.
------------
All that I saw happening in this thread was an attempt to temper your view. I still believe posts where made that logically counter that view but you did not seem willing to pause to even reflect and from what you just wrote above, perhaps I see why. To put this in perspective:
You have spent 6000 hours researching. I have spent over 60,000 hours in addition to other work.
You mention money? I have turned down 4 times that in order to be "pure".
You mention empathy. As soon as you mentioned what happened to you (out of nowhere) I expressed empathy and concern to people in private, as you were still going quite strongly. When I first thought to write you back I wondered if you also considered who might be dying under other posters noses? Who might have endured traumas. Karin came right out and spoke to a couple of them.
You asked about where the support is? Could other posters ask the same? Could I?
You began with the strongest statement possible, but more importantly you defended it at ALL costs, as folks attempted to provide perspective.
---------
As to where the above comparisons brings us, I will speak to only those posters you included in the above post:
My research does not allow me to speak with the clarity and brevity of Lootie, with the culture and directness of grinch, with the power and Americana of Bill, nor with the elegance of Frank. It does not allow me to speak to the 6000 hours of research that you performed except specifically. However NONE of that research was being expressed in this thread. Further, it does allow me to post as I do. Sometimes an "opinion" is NOT an opinion. Sometimes a demand to be left alone when posting in the extreme is too much to ask.
If you do not feel that you went after folks (as you went after me before) then I'm not sure what more I can say on the matter of emotions. When you posted elsewhere that Minimum Wage is not like the Meat and Potato issue of Impeachment when you went after another poster I worry that my "Concerned Democrats" are going to view Democrats here as cold.
If Vietnam-like troop bashing is back (even in measured amounts) then I will address it dispassionately in a post to come though I left answers/questions for you already in this thread. I understand that you may not, or do not, view my emotional analysis as correct.
btw, you didn't answer my question
How many babies have you carried inside your body? I just find it quite humorous to hear a man bitch and moan about war and killing when it's MEN who wage war and it's OUR babies who get killed.
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
Obviously none. But why....
are you jumping on me?? I am a conscientious objector to war, and stated,
I hate war, despise it and value life above all other things....I understand and agree with you.
WTF, "is this beat the hell out of Frank night?"
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
I'm not jumping on you
I've made a couple of points, that's all. One is that you pay federal taxes and therefore, support the war. While it may not be voluntary, it is support just the same.
Another point is that I find it hilarious when men gather to argue about the killing going on in war. As I said before, it's men who wage war and it's men who complain about it.
I believe a third point would be that sometimes we are forced to do things we don't want to do - like pay taxes that support a war we don't believe in, and as is the case with the military - defend themselves while they're following orders. Sometimes choice is a fantasy.
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
As I said, I hate war
As I said, I hate war and hate killing, its senseless. Men may wage war, but this man does not; nor does he want to and he tries to find every way possible to end it and not support it.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank, you have gotten totally carried away with yourself...
judging from your comments, you have never served. Is that a correct assumption on my part? I am talking specifically about your resist comments.
Under the articles of war and the Uniform Code Of Military Justice, soldiers must obey all legal orders of the officers appointed over them. They really have no choice. Iraq is a war zone, even if no formal war has been declared. The penalties range from long terms in prison to death itself. Doesn't matter if one soldier or 1000 soldiers resist.
If they were to claim the orders received as illegal, then they had better be able to prove it to a military courts martial. The Armed Forces have 1000s of legal officers and other serving officers capable of handling such trials. Most times, soldiers who resist, are better off using the local legal talent on their posts/bases than they are using civilian lawyers.
If you have personally never been in the service, then you have no idea what you are suggesting these troops do.
If you can explain your stance in 1000 words or less, I am willing to debate with you.
Several generations have passed since we last had a draft. Makes a big difference.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Grinch, with all due respect:War is hell and a racket, period.
Grinch, with all due respect, I see nothing to ponder. War is hell and a racket, nothing more. I would just as soon die or spend my life in prison than to kill an innocent person or worse yet, engage in hostilities towards a nation and its people that intended no harm towards my nation or me. I asked myself this question long ago, “Who am I to decide who lives, who dies, and whether I should take another man’s life?”
These soldiers do have a choice. Every human being has the power of choice. Maybe I am waxing philosophically, but if we all stopped believing in the impossible, so much in the world that is possible today simply would not be in existence. I apply this same thought process to everything, including war. It is my opinion that you have been “framed in” by an “in the box paradigm” of duty and honor. I think outside the box and on a grander scale. I don’t look at the world as it is; I look at the world, as it should be. I refer to Robert Kennedy’s “…I dream things that never were and say why not?” This is how I universally see the world: WHY NOT?
Iraq is a war zone because we chose to make it a war zone. We, as nation, allowed this to happen. We are all equally responsible for it. 140,000 soldiers laying down their arms, walking away and saying, “no more” would not only end the war but who is the world going to believe, Liar-in-chief, George W. Bush, or the 140,000 men and woman who say, “this war is wrong and I will no longer continue this abomination of my fellow man?”
The world would hold in the highest regard those 140,000 serving that were brave and honorable enough to speak out and stand up. To me, that is the true definition of courage and valor. All too often, we take this warrior-like mentality and assume it to be the supreme logic when it is not.
If we are to ask, no demand change, then it must be done on a striking and imposing scale. I suggested one alternative to end this abuse of power along with mass protests and mass work stoppages.
In my mind, I don’t believe there is any question that the orders were illegal. I am positive that you have read every document and view point I have – such as those on afterdowningstreet.org -- that proves emphatically that the orders to war were illegal and unconstitutional and violates a number of treaties. (I would be genuine curious to hear how David Swanson would feel about this.)
As I stated, I am a conscientious objector to war and no law or punishment would make me fight. (Think M. Ali when he protested his draft in Vietnam. This is how I feel.) Obviously, based on the above, I have never served, nor would I or could I. It subverts every fiber of my belief as human.
Perhaps this will help you to understand my viewpoint. I am an atheist. I believe in only reality, the human spirit, and the power to change the world lies in each one of us. When you are dead, you are dead and no amount of honor or worship can justify taking a life or short-changing my own.
War is never justified and wars of choice are unequivocally cold-blooded and depraved; whatever the purpose – be it for oil, land, domination or any other object of materialism.
The penalty for not standing up is far greater than the penalty for following immoral, illegal, and inhuman orders to kill and torture and to invade sovereign nations based on a mountain of lies and aggrandized “proof.” The penalty for not standing up is the loss of our nation, our principles, and our soul as a once proud – but now shameful – nation.
Pick me apart if you wish…
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank, I shall tell you something...
If my ancestors had not stood with Washington at Valley Forge, you would be a subject of Great Britain.
I didn't think you had served. You forget that the orders to the Generals could be illegal...but the orders from 2nd Lts passed on to the troops, the 'legs, the tankers, and so on are quite legal.
Because you have no service experience, you have no ability to understand what these guys give up in order to serve. At 18, one seldom gets involved in abstracts.
I suggest you read the Articles of War, the Uniform Code Of Military Justice, and perhaps the General Orders that all recruits are required to memorize before you tell the troops, and all of us, what they and we should do.
Note that I don't have to leave the site to make my point. My words just flow.
Used to be that our troops served one combat tour and were then returned to the states. Others took their places on the line. These guys, some serving their 4th Iraq tour don't have that luxury. Those extended at the convenience of the goverment also have no say.
How many broken families Frank. How many fatherless/motherless children? How many sacrifices do these guys have to make so that you can sit in your ivory tower and tell them they are a disgrace.
Dunno Frank...spells cowardice to me.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Grinch, I am subjected to something much worse
Grinch, I am subjected to something much worse the a being a subject of Britain; a theocratic dictator posing as a United States president who has violate the sanctity of the Constitution and willfully caused the death and destruction of almost countless people.
There is nothing cowardice about what I suggest; it takes far more bravery to stand up to evil and defy it, than to destroy, maim and kill people.
An illegal order from the "highest order" does not justify other orders; it only supplants my idea that the notion of war is rotten to the core. It goes right back to the "just following orders" argument that the Germans made about the crimes they committed against the Jews. Nope, I don't buy it. Wrong is wrong.
I ask the same questions, Grinch:
How many will die for a lie? How do you stand there so self-confident of yourself that we, as a nation, should ask someone to be the last person to die for a war of choice and a bag full of fabrications? How much do we spend and at what point does "being right" actually say we are "oh so wrong?" Where does the last dollar end and who decides? How many people of New Orleans do we continue to cast aside while we wage a war that never had to fought and continue it after we know it should never have been fought in the first place?
Finally, exactly what are we defending? Honor? Integrity? Those that truly died in vain so this country could exist? How much blood will it take and how many statements of, "just following orders, sir," will it take till we soil the American flag till we no longer recognize it?
Grinch, the ability to resist is far more courageous than the compliance to follow orders of liars and criminals.
I do not sit in an ivory tower, and I have fought battles of life and my own impending death more than once. I take great exception to the suggestion of my cowardice.
Have a man place a gun at your head, have that man tell you he is going to kill you, and find the courage, the will and the words to talk him out of it, so you can go home and see your wife and kids again, and then we can talk about cowardice and courage; for I have been in that very position.
Violence is easy, peace is hard.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank, don't attempt to tell me about the legality or...
non-legality of orders. I know, you are assuming. I am not against COs, Jehovah's Witnesses, Quakers, or others who prefer not to serve. That is a right in this country.
Like Bill, I was a volunteer. Matter of fact, at age 18, I received my draft notice halfway through my Air Force Basic Training. It gave us all a good laugh.
Like Bill, I felt I was needed. Much like many of our young feel today. 18 year olds, those not immediately going on to college(and even some that do go)are not into deep thinking. They are adults making their first adult decisions. They want to start their lives.
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your last comment. It is, pure and unadulterated trash. Rightfully or wrongfully, people have died, are in fact dying as we discuss this issue, so that you can make your pronouncements in safety.
I started fighting Bush in mid 2000. I knew then what he was. He has turned out to be even worse than what I had anticipated.
I doubt that my Sons Of Liberty ancestors would appreciate your comments either.
I told you what to read. When you have done so, I'll expect an apology from you to all vets. You don't know shit from shinola about military law.
One last point that may suddenly turn on the light in your mind:
Why do you think American servicemen and women are called GIs? Because they are goverment issue. Cogs in a huge machine and nothing more.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Grinch, you did not answer a single question of mine.
Grinch, you did not answer a single question of mine. It not unadulterated trash, its truth, fact and you refuse to engage a single one of them. Can you answer just one??
No one, I repeat, no one has died in THIS war so I can make my pronouncements. People have died in this war to further the radical agenda of a madman and his war profiteering cronies. Those are the only reason people have needless died, period!
I know damn well why they are called GI’s; and it is with that idea that I take great exception. They are people, not tools to be used and thrown away. That notion is pure unadulterated dehumanization and debasing of human life.
I value life above everything else.
I nearly died by the hand of a crazed gunman; and you offer no empathy, yet you want me to indulge you by reading military law and offering an apology. I stand by my statement that, “the ability to resist is far more courageous than the compliance to follow orders of liars and criminals.”
You asked for my comments and to debate this, I am sorry you disagree. I think no less of you or anyone else that disagrees with me. I expect the same in return. Usually, the bulk of us agree, this time we do not.
"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"
Frank, I told you to read those items so that you...
would have some real knowledge of military law and how it differs from civilian law in this country.
You prefer to remain forever ignorant of the subject. Instead you stand on your 'morals' and my contention about that is if you have to continuously state that you stand on your morals, then you probably don't have any. That is just the way it works out in life, particulary in today's life.
That you had some sort of traumatic experience is unfortunate. But one cannot let traumatic experiences rule one's life.
You are dealing here with something that is set in concrete. You simply refuse to see that.
As LottieMaye points out, you are a hypocrit. You yourself support this so-called immoral war with your taxes. Otherwise you would join all those who refuse to pay their taxes in prison. That is also reality. Lottie is quite good at pointing out things like that.
It is like the trite saying: What if they had a war and nobody came?
That, although a truism, ranks right up there with: How many angels dance on the head of a pin.
Sorry Frank...you owe vets an apology and you also need to familiarize yourself with military law if you continue to write about it.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur