I'm 18 at the present time and a citizen of the US, for some background information. Personally, after all the facts of this war have been brought out, or atleast a substantial amount, I don't agree with it. Apparently there was "faulty information" or some such BS given to the Bush Adminisration by the intelligence offices about WMD's. But, I also think that the UN had done a fair bit of lollygagging on Saddam. Simply put, the man needed to go. I don't agree with the US's involvement in affairs of other countries. What i do think should happen is that the UN needs to police the world, not the US. So, in my opinion the US should no longer be sending troops in under our own banner. The idea of invading another country should be put to vote by the UN, and if a certain majority finds it necessary, I believe that then, and only then, should action be taken. I've always thought of joining the military. Mostly because, I don't know what I'm going to do with myself. And, I view the military as a way to support my country. Both my parents, my grandfathers, tons of cousins, and an assortment of other family have all been in the military at one point or another. So, if I'm needed I don't think I'd hesitate to answer the call. I do not support this "war on terrorism". It's a bunch of crap. You can't, logically, defeat the type of enemy that we are facing in the near future by demolishing a country, you only add to their numbers by doing that. This type of war needs to be fought at its core. We need to stabilize the area of the Middle East. By sending military into that area we only destabilize it more than it already is. We need to withdraw all of our troops from the Middle East as soon as is possible. But, the only way that we'll ever be able to leave that area is if we restabilize the countries whose infrastructures we've demolished. In other words, we need to put a new emphasis on our military. We need them to be trained not only for war time and for dispatching an enemy, but also for the peacekeeping process. For the time in between a regime change. That is the only way that we'll ever get people out of these countries. As for the idea of no longer having a standing army, I'd personally rather be safe than sorry. At this point in time, so as to protect ourselves, we need an army in case of a real attack. The reality is that the world is beginning to cool off, or atleast, that's what I see. The major powers of the world are so economically tied to each other that a war on any one of them will end up in a detrimental shift in the world's market. So, I see less of a likelihood of country vs country, and more of these terrorist acts. Well...I think that's all i have to say....
If we pull out of the middle east, however, that means Israel will be on its own. If Israel doesn't have US/UN support, it will fall. Unfortunately, since the US/UN helped to establish the state, they refuse to back out. The way things are, the things I don't agree with when it comes to our military view. Odd, the only thing I don't agree with is the only thing you don't explicitly mention
Personally, Israel doesn't belong there. There are so many countries in this world that are in strife because of arbitrary lines drawn on a map hundreds of years ago. Case in point: Africa. Israel just plain doesn't belong there. Even if the major powers in the world at the time were judeo-christian run, that area isn't sacred to only Jews, or Christians. The way that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are so intertwined is amazing in my own view. So, just ceding that tract of land to someone who had not occupied that area for hundreds of years is simply wrong. There's a reason that the British were driven out of so many of their "colonies". The natives finally got fed up and threw them out. The same would have been true of Israel if it had not been backed by the UN/US. It was just plain ludicrous.
Who do you think gave the Bush administration the BS information? US spies perhaps? It certainly wasn't the UN weapons inspections teams - they had made it perfectly clear that they had nothing conclusive. It was faulty intelligence because the US made it up. Agreed about the US keeping its oars out of the affairs of other countries. The UN was pretty clear about not having enough evidence to send troops to Iraq; the US ignored that and declared war anyway. Yes, the UN needs to enforce things, but it has to do so in a way that's compatible with its treaties. The way that the US has behaved in the last 4 years has been shocking - Abu Ghraib and Gunatanamo are not symptoms of a country which prizes it's freedoms and the liberties of individuals. It'll be about as successful as the War On Drugs (tm) that the US fought in the '90s -- I hear you can't buy drugs in the US any more... Buzzy
Yes, I know where the information came from...thank you for the clarification... bottom line - it was about time for saddam to go, but it shouldn't have been the US charging in guns blazing.
I am undecided, leaning toward no. However, I do think that civil service is a good idea and I would support it if it were mandatory. That doesn't mean military, of course, but some activity in which the lazy and spoiled youth of America (not all of them, just some) could use a little lesson in civility. The only problem is that our culture seems to reward ignorance and abhor intellectualism. This presidential election is case in point, but that's off-topic. Anyway, I'm against a military draft because war is a polarizing force and will only create a situation ala 1960s/70s. I am in favor of civil service, however, which could include military service or Habitat for Humanity, or the Peace Corps, or AmeriCorps, or any of those good things. It's one thing to force an 18 year old American to bring food and supplies to a starving nation in Africa and help them build a self-sustaining community - it's something totally different to force an 18 year old to kill foreigners.
I think we have a winner! I agree. I think it is perfectly reasonable to have a "draft" into something like the health services, development aid work, community work, or charity work for the homeless, elderly etc. That, I feel, would help towards the development of maturity of today's youth (makes me feel old, saying that...) and I could support that, and wouldn't have minded being drafted into.
first off, background info: 19, american. now that that's out of the way... I voted yes, men only. If our country felt that it was that neccessary to draft soldiers to fight a war and called me tomorrow, then i would gladly go, because i would rather go and die myself then watch my friends go without me and die. But i do have one point that hasn't been made yet, surprisingly. Who in the heck said that the draft would be reinstated for the war in iraq? From the numbers i can find at the moment the total number of U.S. soldiers in Southwest Asia (Iraq and surrounding areas) is believed to be about 170,000. It was just last week iirc that we topped the 1,000 death mark. If my math is correct that means that we have lost half a percent of the troops we have sent over. This does not seem to be enough of a loss to make a draft neccessary. That being said, i refuse to jump on the "this war was all for oil/bush's pockets/war mongering" bandwagon. My reasoning on this subject? I completely, entirely, whole-hearted, distrust the media. I feel that everything shown on the nightly news is simply twisted to get the most viewers, and the scarest headlines are put in the boldest type on page 1 to sell the most papers. The media twists the facts to invoke the greatest sense of indignation in people. case in point: i watched a documentary on how businesses are getting rich by outsourcing jobs, and they really emphasized the fact that the companies were paying children to work for the minimum wage of 5.43 cents a day! this enraged people everywhere. However, what they didn't say, was that one 15 year old girl was able to feed her family of 6 working at this rate with that 5.43 cents being the only income in the house, due to the fact that there economy is vastly different from ours. They also really played up the child labor thing, though no one forced that child to work. I myself remember trying to get a job when i was 15 years old and being unable to because of laws similar to this. If that child wanted to work to help there family, why shouldn't they be allowed to? anyways, sorry for the OT, just wanted to express my distaste for the media. I believe that the government had there reasons for entering into this war, that many of them were bad, and that some of them were good. I am by no means a patriotic man believe that was oscar wilde, however i believe that if this country felt it neccessary to embark into this war, then there were reasons unknown to the general public and the media. anywho... </rant> off to bed....
Why men only? Even if it was for a stupid reason? Astutely observed. But I think everyone is worried about future development. We don't know just how long things are going to carry on for in Iraq. It may be years. And then there's Bush eyeballing Iran... ...But you trust politicians? Well, that sorta depends. In theory, that 15 year old should be in school. Now the companies involved could, in theory, cut their profit margins just a little bit and pay a better wage, and so hire her parents (who, in turn, could then afford to send her to school and thus better her future employment prospects and earning potential). We, as conscientious consumers, could facilitate this process by choosing to pay just a little bit more for our products, too. And if you think no-one forced the girl to work, you really are a trusting soul. Of course she was forced. Poverty forced her. Destitution forced her. Seeing her family starve forced her. You (and me), of course, are in very different circumstances. When we want a little weekend job at 15 (not the 16-hour a day, seven day a week slog our 15-year old girl has to endure), to, say, fund our new PC (not feed our starving relatives), we can look forward to something relatively humane and reasonable. We don't like it, we walk. We get groped by the boss, we walk (and sue, possibly). The 15-year old girl in the 3rd world country doesn't have those options. She works in a hot, smelly factory, no water, no toilets, no exits if a fire breaks out, and endures the long shifts, the groping, the exploitation, so we can enjoy our designer-label products with pride. Yeah, and I bet there was a reason to keep them from being known to the public. I don;t know about you, but if I'm sent to a foreign country to kill and be killed, I'd like to know why. It's that democracy thing.
the reason that i voted men only basically boils down to the fact that i'm old fashioned, which not many 19 year olds can say . I'm what some might call the "chivalrous type". I open every door for my girlfriend, for her friends, for women i work with, for pretty much every women i see in a day. I absolutely cannot stand men who go out to simply ogle women. And i believe it is the duty of every man to protect the women in his life and do whatever is neccessary to defend her honor. Now let's not blow this out of context here people, not saying i'm gonna stab a guy for checking out my girlfriends ass (a more common occurence then i care for ), but i still think it's neccessary to try and hold women up on a little higher platform. In the event that my girlfriend wanted to join the military, i would not stop her if that was what she truly wanted to do. However i don't want anyone to force her into anything that will put her into that kind of danger. and no nex, i don't trust politicians. This is my primary problem with our current system of government, because as soon as someone gets into office they have to make decisions that pay off in the short term and start thinking about there next election, not do the things that truly benefit the future of the country. (for anyone looking for an example of this kind of ruler, read Macchiavelli's (sp?) The Prince ) Yes i would want to know why i was being sent off to war if there was a draft, but if i'm going to accept the good things that my government gives me in times of prosperity i need to accept that there will be times when i will be called upon to do my part to help ensure my children (which won't be hitting this earth anytime soon god willing) get those same good things. And if i truly disagree with the war, i'm only a 3-4 hour drive from canada EDIT: btw, you do have some excellent points on the outsourcing, i do have some rebuttals to those however don't want to throw this thread to far OT
Noble sentiments, but remember that the flipside of chivalry is chauvinism. To put women on a pedestal is to separate them from men, and judge them by different standards (often harsher ones, as being put on a pedestal means they have more to live up to). Therefore I'd settle for a platform of equality. But I digress. And I want the same courtesy to apply to men. If there is no draft, you don't have to emigrate. Your joining a war becomes a matter of your own principles, choice and decision. You can still go if you feel you ought to, but at least you're not forced. And the goverment, realising you have a choice in the matter, will be more careful to go to war only if it has a darn good reason to present to its people. Another thread, perhaps.
