The NG has been used in every war since it's beginning as a militia and there is absolutely no reason today for conscription.

__________________






"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Greetings and Felicitations,

I have a bullet scar on my knee. I have multiple knife fighting scars. When you make a person your enemy you attach yourself to them. When you make someone an opponent you detach from them, remove them and move on to the next. It took me a long time to learn that lesson.

As I have said before. Just because I don't like to fight doesn't mean that I haven't.

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

The two words are synonymous:

en⋅e⋅my  /ˈɛnəmi/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [en-uh-mee] noun, plural -mies, adjective

–noun 1. a person who feels hatred for, fosters harmful designs against, or engages in antagonistic activities against another; an adversary or opponent.

Have you served in combat while in the military?

Because, and I don't want to put too fine a point on it, the context of the discussion is "the military"...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

Primarily because we almost never maintained the active Army to the required level.

__________________
January 21, 2013: The End of an ERROR.

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
"The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself."
---Benjamin Franklin

The US Government has every right to call up young men who have a "philosophical" objection to serving in the US military should the need arise. That right exists by virtue of the perservation of the republic and the citizens interest in maintaining the existence of that republic. Should the need arise and should you be in the age group determined by the board to be drafted you would be called. What your response might be is another question. You could stand and loudly declare the US Government has no right to your "involuntary servitude" but I doubt you will be heard. Most likely you would either respond by being inducted or serve out your servitude in another place less pleasant. And...I am all in favor of that procedure.

I know you see the point.

It is not optional...the draft that is. If that becomes a necessity there will be no discussion at that juncture...just a call up. The draft is merely one event away from being reactivated...never doubt it. If the need arises, as I believe it will, the drop smokers, slackers, cowards, etc can make the run to Canada. At that time [future] Canada will simply have a treaty with us to extradite them back into the arms of Uncle Sam. Those who refuse to serve, in some capacity, should the need arise would be just to lose their citizenship, be regarded as an illegal alien.

Will the draft be reinstituted in the future?

Sure it will...just when is another question. As long as quotas are met there is no need of a draft. If those quotas are not met, Junior will be called to serve. Never doubt it.

No, the US Government doesn't. If someone doesn't want to fight for our government, which is exactly what you are saying they must, then they shouldn't have to. The US Government has no right to force someone. If I was drafted to fight in a war that I disagree with, or serve in any capacity to support that war, I wouldn't go. I would also do everything in my power to ensure that others, who have no wish no serve, don't.

Again, I am not debating that the US Government will never try the draft again. That is a moot point and I cannot fathom why you cling to that argument. Perhaps it is because that is as deep as your understanding goes. What I am arguing is that the US Government doesn't have the right to force someone to serve for them.

__________________
I am a liberal, a classical liberal. Classical liberalism is liberalism, but the current collectivists have captured that designation in the United States. In Europe they are glad enough to call themselves socialists. But no one in America wants to be called socialist and admit what they are.

Courage, Truth, Honor, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self-Reliance, Perseverance

Greetings and Felicitations,

The reason I brought up the enemy versus opponent was based on zechariah1 insistence that I should be willing to kill the "enemies of the republic" and if I was not then I was unpatriotic. The flip side of that argument is that I shouldn't complain if the government wants to force me to join the military through conscription. The attitude of people like zechariah1 is that I should be willing to do whatever the "government" wants me to do because that is what being patriotic is.
The phrase "the enemies of the Republic" is redefined constantly by the government because the declared enemies change constantly. Today "the enemies of the republic" are people like Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Tomorrow "the enemies of the republic" might be you.
The terms enemy and opponent can be used as synonyms but that doesn't indicate they mean the exact same thing.
The word enemy is often a label to make it easier to drum up an emotional response. People tend to take enemies as something which exist forever. Enemies are often layered with levels of hatred. An opponent is temporary. A thing of the moment and when that moment is past they may become something completely different. The opponents of today are often the allies of tomorrow and the allies of today are often the opponents of tomorrow. The governments love/hate relationship with Osama bin Laden is a perfect example of that. I choose who my opponents are and I choose who my allies are. Not some nebulous entity such as "the republic."

On a side note. The military isn't the only way to find yourself in combat. My earlier career placed me in several firefights but that is a discussion that is not in the purview of this thread.

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

How would serving in the military only under threat of law, and not of your own willpower, show "that you are willing to serve/protect/help your own society"? And what about those like ThorHammer, who seems like a hell of a "real worthy citizen," who would be willing to help others avoid the draft if it was for a war he disagreed with? Or is a real citizen one that blindly follows the current administration, but not one that does what he or she believes to be best for their society?

It's ironic, I guess, that you bring up slavery in an argument in support of conscription.

__________________
No man is an island...
Each man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in Mankind.
And therefore, never send to know
For whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
—John Donne

You understand this reasoning right here can be used to justify any, any, state-mandated activity it deems to be "service"? Is that your "philosophy"? Regardless of the state doing the coercing?

__________________
No man is an island...
Each man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in Mankind.
And therefore, never send to know
For whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
—John Donne

Strange I never felt forced to serve, it's part of life and it's been that way for a long time over here and as nowadays even alternatives forms of service and so on are available, there's no reason to paint it as being truely forced.

I just prefer the concept and I'm sorry and it's not my intention to insult people being in favour of a non draft military.

By the way imho a true cititzen follows the laws and tradtions of his fatherland, no matter what the current administraion might be or do.
Again just my thought.

__________________
"Homo Homini Lupus"
Thomas Hobbes

I have long felt that an all volunteer force is always the best.

For one, the military gets to "pick and choose" who to accept. They are able to take the best of the applicants, and screen them carefully. This helps weed out most of those that would be unsuited to the rigors and demands of the military life.

It also ensures that they get the best qualified. The smartest, the most dedicated, and people who honestly want to serve. Not those that want to "kill a commie for mommie", nor those that have a string of bounced checks and pregnant women they want to escape from.

On average, it takes from 2-6 months to join the military. A person simply does not walk into the recruiting office and raise their hand. There are background checks, criminal record checks (even those supposidly sealed "juvenial records" are scrutinized), education requirements (non-high school grads or GED need not apply), drug screenings, IQ tests, and a strict physical. If a draft was ever brought back, the military would be force to take a huge amount of "scum" in, which would make a shambles of the system.

And everybody that serves knows that every man and woman they serve with volunteered to serve. Nobody has been drafted. We all knew what we were getting into before we raised our right hand. And we know that with few exceptions, that we can rely on those beside us to do their job.

Our military still turns away a lot of people. Before we see another draft, they would simply lower the entry requirements, like they did a few years ago. Simply allowing more waivers is all that is needed to swell the ranks to a higher number.

Allow those with a minor drug charge, allow those with minor physical disabilities, allow those who in most cases would be considered to old, allow people with 3 or more children to enlist, allow education waivers, lower the minimum test scores for certain jobs, increase the maximum age, the list goes on and on.

2 years ago, the Army did exactly that, and was getting a record number of enlistees. I was given a waiver for my medical condition, I serve now with a friend given a waiver for his children. With the increase in age from 28 to 35 then 42, huge numbers of older people have joined. I am now 44, and I serve with several others that are in their first enlistment, ranging from 31-39. A lot are people either returning after being given a "second chance", or enlisting for the first time, for various reasons deciding to make a change in lifestyle.

Give me people like this at my back, instead of a bunch of whiney civilians in uniform. I have no interest in serving with people that do not want to serve. Let them stay back in the states, with a Battalion taske with picking up trash on the side of the road.

Don't get me wrong, I do agree with you that a willingness to serve one's country is an indicator of a good citizen. I just disagree that conscription illustrates a person's willingness to do anything except avoid breaking the law. I'm not insulted by your opinion, apologies if I seemed that way.

Agreed, though this can get confusing in a situation where certain laws may contradict what one believes to be the tradition of the nation. In the US, many of us have a strong aversion to telling people they have to do this or that via the force of law, even though we do also have a history of instituting the draft.

__________________
No man is an island...
Each man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in Mankind.
And therefore, never send to know
For whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
—John Donne