Those politicians want the draft because they crave for wars the citizens will not support

[David1967]

"National service?!" I'd hardly characterize an affiliation with an institution dedicated to killing people and destroying things as national service. Our military adventurism usually creates the very hostility it purports to protect us from. It harms our country.

Not to mention that over the last few decades we tend to leave these countries in a worse state than when we got there.

 

[Pogo]

The registration enables a draft; it's a step in the direction of a militarized economy and populace.
There is often "no talk of" a political move -- until one morning we wake up to find it instituted.

War is tremendously lucrative for the few tapped into the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex. It's tremendously costly to the common people. Do we have a Democracy, where government is "of, by, and for" The People, or do we crave an autocracy, where The People are pawns of a military cabal? We've seen where that leads.

We used to say "What if they gave a war and nobody came?" Perhaps that would indicate that the motivation for war was not worth the cost -- to those called on to actually pay the price.

At this point this registration list amounts to a query on the US population database for a list of currently living in a given age range with a few extra criteria such as sex, felony status, hair color, whatever column they want to add.

That said, a draft is a whole nother question and I agree with you there, but this fall back talk about Military Industrial Complex etc and all the real questions that we need to deal with being inspired by this paperwork reduction act which really isn't about this registration issue, but a more basic question about the US and how and when we use our military. There will be a draft when we get ourselves deeply enough into a situation that there are not enough volunteers.

I and my children are felons because we didn't register and my mother would have sent me to canada had the situation arisen. We need to have serious discussions about what we are doing, but these people bantering about these peripheral issues (registration and would we have a draft if we needed that many bodies) is not the discussion we need to be having.

There I said it twice, which is why I don't watch these types of "interviews"

 

[F1fan]

I guess you didn't understand Gabbard's point.
Why should American soldiers sacrifice their own lives for the sake of stupid wars funded by an elitist cabal of warmongers?

Because it's not a relevant question any more. It might have been applicable to WW1, and maybe WW2, but I'd say Hitler wasn't an elitist, but a criminal, and in the same category as putin. The Vietnam war is probably applicable, and perhaps even the invasion of Iraq, but again that was more criminal ambition by elitist republicans. Some democrats were drawn into the conspiracy by the fraudulent intelligence of Iraq having WMD.

Nobody has ever answered that question yet.
And I wager you won't either.

Why is it relevant today?

You know...in my country there has never been the dogma according to which one says: my party said it, so it must be right.

No, it was a dictator that said it. That's what Trump wants to be by lying to suckers and losers who believe him.

I mean...it's the other way around. If the voters of a party demand that we stop sending warfare ro Ukraine, that party will stop sending warfare to Ukraine in order not to lose voters.

That's not the purpose, you are being deliberately duped by disinformation from right wing nonsense. We know better, you don't.

 

[Estro Felino]

Because it's not a relevant question any more. It might have been applicable to WW1, and maybe WW2, but I'd say Hitler wasn't an elitist, but a criminal, and in the same category as putin. The Vietnam war is probably applicable, and perhaps even the invasion of Iraq, but again that was more criminal ambition by elitist republicans. Some democrats were drawn into the conspiracy by the fraudulent intelligence of Iraq having WMD.

It is relevant today, since American soldiers can be sent to Ukraine or to Gaza.

Why is it relevant today?

Read above.

No, it was a dictator that said it. That's what Trump wants to be by lying to suckers and losers who believe him.

The most awful wars were fought during the administration of the guy from Kenya (or Hawaii or Indonesia?)

That's not the purpose, you are being deliberately duped by disinformation from right wing nonsense. We know better, you don't.

The truth is that there are lots of socialists here who side with Russia.
Not certainly rightists.

 

[Heyo]

Still, forcing a citizen into any service is not compatible with a free society.

I think the vast majority would happily do 2 years of service for the freedom of never being forced to work for a living again. It's not a free society, but at least a freer society.

Didn't we establish an international institution after WWII, with the express purpose of preventing war -- and then immediately emasculate it?
The UN sounds good; it's a nice symbol, but the power élite never liked it. It threatened their power games -- and potential profits. They've done everything in their power to undermine it.

It was a two class institution from the beginning, the veto powers and the rest of the world.

 

[F1fan]

It is relevant today, since American soldiers can be sent to Ukraine or to Gaza.

That's unlikely unless things get way out of control. Unless putin does something very stupid (I mean more stupid than he has already been) this is not a concern. Ukraine isn't even in NATO yet. And there some Americans fighting in Ukraine as independent volunteers. And there are UN workers in Gaza, and some have been killed by Israel. Israel claims mistakes, but they keep making "mistakes".

Read above.

You made claims, no evidence, no explanation. Just paranoia. Typical.

The most awful wars were fought during the administration of the guy from Kenya (or Hawaii or Indonesia?)

See how you go off on non-factual nonsense? That suggests you know you can't make a credible argument on facts. This is why you can't be taken seriously.

And you seem to have a naive understanding of war. Notice you didn't mention how some of those wars were still going on through the convicted felon's presidency. and he ended nothing. He actually ordered the killing of some enemies.

Remember this days before Trump's Jan 6 attack on our Capitol? Trump is your guy. He must be one of those elites you hate, but have to use your powers of self-deception to ignore.

Assassination of Qasem Soleimani - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The truth is that there are lots of socialists here who side with Russia.
Not certainly rightists.

Who cares? Your claim here suggests that some Italians are not rational people. But we know that the Soviets/Russians have had a long relationship with Italy after WW2. During the Cold War Russia did a lot of buying of Italian bikes and parts. Japan made parts too, but they didn't seem to sell anything to Russia. Of course Italy had the best bikes and parts through to the 90's, and then other manufacturers got invovled and today there are loads of options. I still ride Campagnolo parts which is uncommon among bike racers.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Why should American soldiers sacrifice their own lives for the sake of stupid wars funded by an elitist cabal of warmongers?

They shouldn't if they find the war "stupid" and can avoid it at an acceptable cost.

If not in the military, one doesn't enlist except for what one considers a worthy cause, which for me would need to be an invasion or imminent danger, although others go abroad to fight with foreign armies if they find the cause worthy.

If there's a draft, then one might need to make a decision whether to comply or emigrate and become a so-called draft dodger.

If one has enlisted for the income, adventure, training, or whatever, and finds himself being shipped out to war, then he must decide whether to comply or go AWOL.

What's imminent danger? That's the individual's judgment call (I'm still assuming one is not in the military already when this imminent danger arises). Were the Nazis worth fighting against? Probably. Putin and Ukraine? Once again, it's an individual judgment - does one find that cause worth dying for?

Interesting that you say funded by warmongers. I believe the wars are funded by taxpayers. The warmongers in the States are generally going to war for profit, not to spend money. You probably recall Dick Cheney and Halliburton. Iraq was apparently invaded just for these kinds of people to make money. There was no actual mission, just a fake mission to retrieve weapons of mass destruction that never existed and which the American public was lied to about.

Trump called such people suckers and losers, which is harsh, but aren't they pawns dying and being maimed or psychologically harmed for the profit of others thinking that they are doing their patriotic duty? Senator Tammy Duckworth left her legs in Iraq. Was that worth it? Was that a worthy cause, or was she deceived? I'd say the latter, and thought I really hate thinking of somebody like that as a sucker, there's some merit to the assertion.

So no to those kinds of wars, which is pretty much all that America has had since the end of WWII not considering lesser skirmishes like Panama, Grenada, Lebanon, Libya, which were probably also all causes not worth dying for (maybe some were more justified; perhaps the Balkan skirmishes or Mogadishu were legit humanitarian issues, but I'm pretty uninformed about was because the subject is a turn-off for me).

If you've fought for Uncle Sam since thinking that you were protecting freedom or democracy, in my opinion, you probably weren't, especially in the larger, longer wars in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf/ Iraq, and Afghanistan. You were probably fighting for somebody else' financial benefit.

I hope that answers your question.

Spoiler: off-topic digression

Incidentally, I enlisted in the US Army during the final years of the Vietnam War, but I was unwilling to fight in it, and so enlisted for three years rather than two so that I could get guaranteed training in computer programming. It was not guaranteed that I wouldn't be sent to war, but successful programmers are needed near computers, which were large, mainframe computers in those days that weren't portable and not only weren't needed on the battlefield, but were too expensive to subject to the possibility of bombing. The bottom line was that as long as I was valuable to the military as a programmer, I would be far from war, and I never left the States those three years nor ever far from a computer.

Was I serving my country? Yes, but I was also serving myself. I didn't enlist to serve America, although I was glad to do so. I was there mostly for structure and discipline. I entered college too young and was lured by the girls, poker, and pot such that I was missing classes, getting bad grades, and eventually dropped out ahead of flunking out. I had wanted to be a physician for years and saw my dream evaporating away, so this was an emergency stopgap and time out to regain control of myself, and while there, why not learn computer programming and see more of the country (I had never lived outside of California, and my only times out of the state were to nearby venues for a day or a few days - Las Vegas, Lake Tahoe, and Tijuana)?

Was I making a sacrifice? No.

Was I taking a risk? Yes, but a small one.

There were other benefits. I got a security clearance and was working (occasionally) in the Pentagon writing programs, which was exciting.

And that's where I learned that I didn't want to work in a cubicle in an office under people who weren't competent managers, reinforcing my idea of wanting to be self-employed and not a programmer or engineer - work I found intriguing, but not if I had to do it in a cubicle under an uninspiring middle manager.

So, it was a good move. But it was never about serving my country, and I had no interest in "helping out" in Vietnam.

 

[Estro Felino]

They shouldn't if they find the war "stupid" and can avoid it at an acceptable cost.

If not in the military, one doesn't enlist except for what one considers a worthy cause, which for me would need to be an invasion or imminent danger, although others go abroad to fight with foreign armies if they find the cause worthy.

If there's a draft, then one might need to make a decision whether to comply or emigrate and become a so-called draft dodger.

If one has enlisted for the income, adventure, training, or whatever, and finds himself being shipped out to war, then he must decide whether to comply or go AWOL.

What's imminent danger? That's the individual's judgment call (I'm still assuming one is not in the military already when this imminent danger arises). Were the Nazis worth fighting against? Probably. Putin and Ukraine? Once again, it's an individual judgment - does one find that cause worth dying for?

Interesting that you say funded by warmongers. I believe the wars are funded by taxpayers. The warmongers in the States are generally going to war for profit, not to spend money. You probably recall Dick Cheney and Halliburton. Iraq was apparently invaded just for these kinds of people to make money. There was no actual mission, just a fake mission to retrieve weapons of mass destruction that never existed and which the American public was lied to about.

Trump called such people suckers and losers, which is harsh, but aren't they pawns dying and being maimed or psychologically harmed for the profit of others thinking that they are doing their patriotic duty? Senator Tammy Duckworth left her legs in Iraq. Was that worth it? Was that a worthy cause, or was she deceived? I'd say the latter, and thought I really hate thinking of somebody like that as a sucker, there's some merit to the assertion.

So no to those kinds of wars, which is pretty much all that America has had since the end of WWII not considering lesser skirmishes like Panama, Grenada, Lebanon, Libya, which were probably also all causes not worth dying for (maybe some were more justified; perhaps the Balkan skirmishes or Mogadishu were legit humanitarian issues, but I'm pretty uninformed about was because the subject is a turn-off for me).

If you've fought for Uncle Sam since thinking that you were protecting freedom or democracy, in my opinion, you probably weren't, especially in the larger, longer wars in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf/ Iraq, and Afghanistan. You were probably fighting for somebody else' financial benefit.

I hope that answers your question.

I am saddened by the fact that you cannot acknowledge that this Ukrainian War is identical to the Iraqi War.
Both wanted by elitist circles of people serving banking élites, who benefit from the sale of warfare.

And by the way...if you want to convince me that the American people are okay with sending billions to Ukraine, just make a referendum.
I know a referendum has never taken place in the USA. You should making them.
It's called democracy.

Spoiler: off-topic digression

Incidentally, I enlisted in the US Army during the final years of the Vietnam War, but I was unwilling to fight in it, and so enlisted for three years rather than two so that I could get guaranteed training in computer programming. It was not guaranteed that I wouldn't be sent to war, but successful programmers are needed near computers, which were large, mainframe computers in those days that weren't portable and not only weren't needed on the battlefield, but were too expensive to subject to the possibility of bombing. The bottom line was that as long as I was valuable to the military as a programmer, I would be far from war, and I never left the States those three years nor ever far from a computer.

Was I serving my country? Yes, but I was also serving myself. I didn't enlist to serve America, although I was glad to do so. I was there mostly for structure and discipline. I entered college too young and was lured by the girls, poker, and pot such that I was missing classes, getting bad grades, and eventually dropped out ahead of flunking out. I had wanted to be a physician for years and saw my dream evaporating away, so this was an emergency stopgap and time out to regain control of myself, and while there, why not learn computer programming and see more of the country (I had never lived outside of California, and my only times out of the state were to nearby venues for a day or a few days - Las Vegas, Lake Tahoe, and Tijuana)?

Was I making a sacrifice? No.

Was I taking a risk? Yes, but a small one.

There were other benefits. I got a security clearance and was working (occasionally) in the Pentagon writing programs, which was exciting.

And that's where I learned that I didn't want to work in a cubicle in an office under people who weren't competent managers, reinforcing my idea of wanting to be self-employed and not a programmer or engineer - work I found intriguing, but not if I had to do it in a cubicle under an uninspiring middle manager.

So, it was a good move. But it was never about serving my country, and I had no interest in "helping out" in Vietnam.

The Vietnam War (I would have loved to use the expression the guy from Forrest Gump used but I cannot because I am a lady), was a devilish war that destroyed a peaceful nation.
Just to please those devilish élites. And as a Christian I can promise you that MacNamara is not in Paradise. Nor is Kissinger.
They are in the other place.

 

[Valjean]

At this point this registration list amounts to a query on the US population database for a list of currently living in a given age range with a few extra criteria such as sex, felony status, hair color, whatever column they want to add.

That said, a draft is a whole nother question and I agree with you there, but this fall back talk about Military Industrial Complex etc and all the real questions that we need to deal with being inspired by this paperwork reduction act which really isn't about this registration issue, but a more basic question about the US and how and when we use our military. There will be a draft when we get ourselves deeply enough into a situation that there are not enough volunteers.

They fear a lack of volunteers to save our dying empire. Dying empires often attempt to hold onto power with increased military adventurism.

I and my children are felons because we didn't register and my mother would have sent me to canada had the situation arisen. We need to have serious discussions about what we are doing, but these people bantering about these peripheral issues (registration and would we have a draft if we needed that many bodies) is not the discussion we need to be having.

The main issue is often an amalgamation of, or result of, multiple 'peripheral issues'.

 

[Estro Felino]

They fear a lack of volunteers to save our dying empire. Dying empires often attempt to hold onto power with increased military adventurism.

Their financial empire is dying. They can't accept it that the world has become multipolar.

 

[Revoltingest]

Those politicians want the draft because they crave for wars the citizens will not support​

I don't buy that explanation. Wars aren't impeded
by lack of soldiers in a volunteer army. USA starts
& continues plenty of wars, generally with voters
cheering them on. Objections are typically partisan,
eg, Dems opposed Dubya's wars until they became
Obama's. Pubs oppose helping Ukraine because
Biden favors it.

Actual reasons I recall hearing for the draft.....
- Builds character in men.
- Mixing of different classes & races. (A favored
social engineering reason among liberals.)
- It's cheaper to force men to serve than to pay
enuf to entice them to volunteer.
- It's necessary to defend the country because
there's a ready supply of men to become soldiers.

My view of all that?
See my signature....

 

[Revoltingest]

I am saddened by the fact that you cannot acknowledge that this Ukrainian War is identical to the Iraqi War.

No rational person can acknowledge a specious claimed equivalency.
My advice....
Don't be saddened so easily or erroneously.

 

[Estro Felino]

No rational person can acknowledge a specious claimed equivalency.
My advice....
Don't be saddened so easily or erroneously.

Enlighten me, then.
Do you think that the USA should send its own soldiers to help the Sorosian regime of Kiev?
It's either yes or no.

 

[Altfish]

Why should American soldiers sacrifice their own lives for the sake of stupid wars funded by an elitist cabal of warmongers?

Can you name this elitist cabal? Or anyone who is part of it.

 

[Altfish]

Enlighten me, then.
Do you think that the USA should send its own soldiers to help the Sorosian regime of Kiev?
It's either yes or no.

Good grief, I knew Soros would get named. Sad really.

 

[Revoltingest]

Enlighten me, then.
Do you think that the USA should send its own soldiers to help the Sorosian regime of Kiev?
It's either yes or no.

A loaded question is really a mischievous
claim disguised as a question.
I don't answer those because you assume
a premise that I reject.

 

[Revoltingest]

Good grief, I knew Soros would get named. Sad really.

Obviously it's not Soros running Ukraine.
Soros is Jewish, so not compatible with
Ukraine's Nazi regime.
The reality....
They re-animated Hitler's brain, put it in
a jar, & connected electrodes. This is how
Hitler commands Ukraine to continue his
conquest of Russia.

 

[Valjean]

If you've fought for Uncle Sam since thinking that you were protecting freedom or democracy, in my opinion, you probably weren't, especially in the larger, longer wars in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf/ Iraq, and Afghanistan. You were probably fighting for somebody else' financial benefit.

America's wars and nation-building have, on the whole, been an impediment to freedom and democracy. They've left us with an insecure, gun-loving populace, in a police-surveillance state, with an economy heavily dependent on military expenditures.

 

[Estro Felino]

A loaded question is really a mischievous
claim disguised as a question.
I don't answer those because you assume
a premise that I reject.

But I know what you think, I have read you several times.

 

[Estro Felino]

Good grief, I knew Soros would get named. Sad really.

When he dies, I will stop naming him,