TexasCHLforum.com

I think you might be surprised by just how many liberals there are in the Military.

XtremeDuty.45 wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:It would truly be ironic if our first African president were the one to re-institute Slavery.

Fixed it for ya!

First Muslim President, maybe? But then the slavery connection wouldn't exist.

pbwalker wrote:It'll never pass...any yes vote would be career suicide.

That's what some thought about the Healthcare Destruction Act which passed earlier this year.

baldeagle wrote:Charles Rangel does this over and over again. He believes (with the evidence completely contrary to his beliefs) that blacks serve disproportionately in the military because they have fewer options coming out of high school. So he keeps introducing bills to re-institute the draft to even the playing field. He's a corrupt idiot, but then he has plenty of company...

So his solution then would be to reduce their opportunities by "leveling the playing field" and forcing more non-blacks into the military, thereby eating away at positions they could hold? It is a wonder that a moron like that can even breathe on his own.

Is this the same Rangel who is under investigation for ethics violations, and has admitting to taking bribes, but hasn't admitted to enough of the allegations to get a plea bargain?

Actually there is some merit to the idea.

Requiring 2 years of community/military service from every person between the age of 18 and 24 would do a great deal towards removing people from the welfare rolls and give our younger citizens ( this could also apply to immigrants) a better sense of community and civic spirit. I don’t believe that these people should be put in just any job the President see fit, but Military, Fire, Law Enforcement, or health care would fit the bill.

I do not know about most of you all but I do not want people in a job like fire dept or law enforcement that do not want to be there. Those jobs are to protect the citizens and forcing people...especially young people into those jobs would do more harm than good.

As for the military, they have their own way of "working" you if you do not want to be there and act up (not that I would endorse this bill if it only made them go into the military, I think the thought of this bill is ridiculous and absurd).

I have always advocated some sort of National Service for able-bodied people (and even those that are not, but willing), to include Military Service.
But I have always envisioned it as something that could not be manipulated by individual administrations, but something that was ongoing and something you really couldn't abuse.
I was kind of alarmed by the reaction to this bill on this forum, but I guess the fine-print of the bill allows it to be used/abused on a selective basis by whatever President is currently in office. I prefer to see something that is continuous and ongoing, works as smoothly as the Armed Forces and isn't subject to the vagaries of extreme left-or-right wing demagoguery.
The President already has sufficient powers to draw upon the population it times of national emergency, and don't forget that the draft is technically still in effect. It simply is not being used at this time.
My only problem with this whole idea is how it might be implemented. This Bill appears to be one of the poorer versions to be offered.

XtremeDuty.45 wrote:I do not know about most of you all but I do not want people in a job like fire dept or law enforcement that do not want to be there. ).

I agree, that's where the military clause would come into effect..

Not all jobs would need to be life threatening, there are many places where people could serve and not put themselves or others in danger. Someone’s got to clean the equipment and mow the grass..

Morale and discipline in the millitary rose tremendously when they ended the draft and went to all volunteer.

bdickens wrote:Morale and discipline in the millitary rose tremendously when they ended the draft and went to all volunteer.

And the concept of serving your country declined tremendously as well.

America is supposed to be about freedom a forced draft is slavery. We free people do not belong to our government. Our government is supposed to belong to us. Slavery is immoral whether it is government owning us or another man owning us. Most folks who served during bopth the draft time military an a all vollunteer military will agree tyhat the draft time military tends to have more malcontents.

Some people live an entire lifetime and wonder if they have ever made a difference in the world, but the Marines don't have that problem.
--Ronald Reagan--

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
--John Stewart Mill--

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
--George Orwell--

Freedom isn't free.
--Anonymous--

I have always felt that some type of service should be required of the citizens of this country. The military is not for everyone, and there are a myriad of other organizations where the service to our country could be accomplished. Having said that, I have many objections to this bill, but not the concept.

For those that believe any mandatory service is slavery, had it not been for mandatory service, we might be exchanging ideas on this forum in German or Japanese.

TxKimberMan wrote:

Some people live an entire lifetime and wonder if they have ever made a difference in the world, but the Marines don't have that problem.
--Ronald Reagan--

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
--John Stewart Mill--

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
--George Orwell--

Freedom isn't free.
--Anonymous--

I have always felt that some type of service should be required of the citizens of this country. The military is not for everyone, and there are a myriad of other organizations where the service to our country could be accomplished. Having said that, I have many objections to this bill, but not the concept.

For those that believe any mandatory service is slavery, had it not been for mandatory service, we might be exchanging ideas on this forum in German or Japanese.

Ooh-rah!

TxKimberMan wrote:
I have always felt that some type of service should be required of the citizens of this country. The military is not for everyone, and there are a myriad of other organizations where the service to our country could be accomplished. Having said that, I have many objections to this bill, but not the concept.

For those that believe any mandatory service is slavery, had it not been for mandatory service, we might be exchanging ideas on this forum in German or Japanese.

This is my view as well. I am for compulsory military service.

I would structure it based on a similar concept to how it is done in my Wife's home country, Finland.

The way it's done there, I believe it is from 6 to 12 months, depending on what you choose (non technical jobs vs more technical/trained ones). For those who do not meet military qualification, there's civil service positions available as well. She informs me that while some otherwise military-qualified people try to avoid the Military part, and 'dodge' their way into a Civil service job, that it is looked down upon, and considered poor form for one to do so. Obviously it is not considered as such if the person is legitimately unable to meet the military qualification.

They see it as their national duty to serve their country as such.

EDIT: Found more information on how they do it there. Have a read, it's pretty interesting. They allow people to serve it any time between their 19th and 29th birthdays if they are otherwise obligated to school or something else.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_service#Finland" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Personally, I find this paragraph especially of interest

Over 80% of Finnish males serve in the military. Often there is great pressure from family members to do armed instead of civilian service. Finnish World War Two veterans are highly respected in Finland, and not undertaking military service may be considered an offence towards veterans in the family. There has also been a prevailing social assumption that masculinity can only be proved by army service, and, consequently, not doing so can lead to the stigmatisation of non-conscripts as not "real men". This has recently started waning as being considered an old-fashioned perspective, but it still holds in some more traditional occupations such as teaching. Additionally, the youth are often frightened that employers do not hire men who have performed civilian service.

Personally, I think some months in the military under compulsory service would help instill some respect and discipline that today's kids seem to lack.

However, I also agree that giving the President the choice that this bill does, is not the correct way of doing it. It should be a bill specifically stating Military/Civil service, and not up to the President to decide.