NationStates Jolt Archive

I am trying to determine who is actually paying the ultimate price for the NeoCons wars.

I realize that not all Bush supporters agree with the way he is handling the War on Terrorism.

I also realize that not every one who is against Bush is against the war.

So just out of curiosity, I want to see how many Bush supporters actually would support him with their own lives or the lives of their loved ones, and how many are risking their lives following a leader they disagree with.

the problem is that the bush supporters who support the war dont really have all the facts on it

some pipa survey found that the majority of bush supporters thought that there was clear evidence linking saddam to 9-11, that they FOUND wmds (i dont know anything about this recent chemical find) and that the majority of countries support their actions.

They also believe that all credible and intellicetual sources agree with them

yay misconception

If there was a draft, I wouldn't run away and abandon my country.

But why would I join when the armed forces are perfectly fine with the numbers they have right now?

FYI, the troops are overwhelmingly Republican.

I don't have family in the military, nor would I enlist. If one of my close family members tried to enlist right now, I would try to talk them out of it, but in the end, I would support their decision. If there were a draft, I would go to Europe or Japan. Maybe under a new Commander in Chief I would fight, but no way in hell will I serve under a Bush.

the problem is that the bush supporters who support the war dont really have all the facts on it

some pipa survey found that the majority of bush supporters thought that there was clear evidence linking saddam to 9-11, that they FOUND wmds (i dont know anything about this recent chemical find) and that the majority of countries support their actions.

They also believe that all credible and intellicetual sources agree with them

yay misconception

I understand this. What I am wondering is if, besides supporting him in principle, if they are also sending their children to the front.

Example: only one Congressman actually has a kid in the military who is serving in Iraq.

I understand this. What I am wondering is if, besides supporting him in principle, if they are also sending their children to the front.

Example: only one Congressman actually has a kid in the military who is serving in Iraq.
Children aren't property, you can't command them to join the military. Its their decision, not their parents.

I understand this. What I am wondering is if, besides supporting him in principle, if they are also sending their children to the front.

Example: only one Congressman actually has a kid in the military who is serving in Iraq.

I saw that on F 9/11 he is the only one who can rightfully vote for the war.

Children aren't property, you can't command them to join the military. Its their decision, not their parents.

Yeah, so dont start a war that can send tons of peoples children into a war, were they really have no choice, they need money. While Congress can give their kids money, and if there is ever a draft their children will certainly not be included in it.

I understand this. What I am wondering is if, besides supporting him in principle, if they are also sending their children to the front.

Example: only one Congressman actually has a kid in the military who is serving in Iraq.

i wouldnt aim this question at Bush, or even use it to denounce the credibility of his cause. Moore did it, i thought it was cheap, even for him.

How many senators had their children in ww2? vietnam? (im sure it was higher due to the draft, but historicly poor people are the most likly to sing up for the "glory of war", for much the same reasons they will buy into the "glory of God")

I dont know how to solve this problem however. while I was critical of him, Moore does show the problems of army recruiters trying to convince people to join, not to mention their manipulation. There is also the problem of the back door draft.

maybe a compleatly mechanised armed forces? if the American people would ever allow that much of a tax hike. (lol, the T word)

Yeah, so dont start a war that can send tons of peoples children into a war, were they really have no choice, they need money. While Congress can give their kids money, and if there is ever a draft their children will certainly not be included in it.
Thats part of the deal when you join there military, there's a good chance that you'll fight. It isn't designed to be an extension of the welfare program. :rolleyes:

I support the war, if for no other reason than to get rid of Saddam and have a non-psychotic dictatorship/Near-Anarchic country in the Middle East.

I saw that on F 9/11 he is the only one who can rightfully vote for the war.

there is a reason why, in intellectual debates that if you use the name Chomsky, or Locke, Rousseau or Voltaire people will credit what you say. However, Moore or O'Riley or Limbaugh or i guess coulter are not recieved as well. There is a reason for this.

Credibility

Children aren't property, you can't command them to join the military. Its their decision, not their parents.
Yes, I understand this also.

But let's face it, kids around the age of enlisting in the army generally still carry the political attitudes and opinions of their parents.

If your parents are staunchly anti-war or anti-Bush, chances are you won't enlist, and vise-versa. Granted this is not always true, but rarely does a person come into their own political philosophy that disagrees with their parents until they are older than the average age of enlistment.

I support the war, if for no other reason than to get rid of Saddam and have a non-psychotic dictatorship/Near-Anarchic country in the Middle East.

do you believe then that america should invade

-Rewanda
-Somolia
-Congo
-Ivory Coast
-Suddan

all of which are basically anarchistic type states, many with tribal warlords instead of a single dictator

or what about:

-Saudi Arabia
-Lybia
-Iran
-N. Korea
-A host of other african nations
-the rest of the middle east

all are dictators

Yes, I understand this also.

But let's face it, kids around the age of enlisting in the army generally still carry the political attitudes and opinions of their parents.

If your parents are staunchly anti-war or anti-Bush, chances are you won't enlist, and vise-versa. Granted this is not always true, but rarely does a person come into their own political philosophy that disagrees with their parents until they are older than the average age of enlistment.

id disagree with this on your chronology of child development

i personally despised what my parents stood for when i was 16-18, then when i moved out from them i began to see and understand a lot of what they said

i still disagree with them on major issues, but the understanding didnt come until later

that being said, i would agree that in a very over-bearing power relationship with ones parents, they would easily (even for their entire life) consider political and philisophical standpoints based on weather their parents would be proud of them.

I support the war, if for no other reason than to get rid of Saddam and have a non-psychotic dictatorship/Near-Anarchic country in the Middle East.
I REMIND EVERYONE THAT THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THE WAR.

THE QUESTION IS WOULD YOU PUT YOUR/YOUR FAMILY'S ASS ON THE LINE FOR IT

I am thankful that the Ba'ath Party was removed from power and that we stopped the flow of funds and bio-chemical weapons from going into the hands of known terrorist leaders such as Zaqarwi and Hezbollah, who were being harbored and endorsed by Sadaam Hussein. There is no question that the food for oil program was being manipulated by Sadaam for the purposes of buying enriched uranium and bio-chemical weapons. It's no question that Sadaam broke 16 UN treaties and did not permit the UN Weapons Inspectors to do their job. It's no question that Sadaam was exporting weapons material into Syria, right up until the day that our invasion began. I am thankful that we have a President who acted responsibly on this information, who didn't wait for the war to come to us at the hand of well-funded and well-equiped terrorists. What Osama Bin Laden managed to organize with Al Quaida was only the beginning of what terrorist organizations could have been capable of doing.

Thanks to President Bush, Iraq, along with Afghanistan, will be a democracy and an ally in the war against terror. Iraq and Afghanistan will be powerful partners in assisting the U.S. with thwarting threats from the other middle-eastern nations, such as Iran and Syria. As a side benefit, the people of Iraq will enjoy freedom and civil liberties unequaled in their history. Their standard of living, healthcare, education, free enterprise, religious freedoms, will improve dramatically.

War is always a brutal and ugly thing, there is no doubt. But I promise that there will come a day when we put Iraq in the similar category of Germany (WWII), Japan (WWII), the former Soviet Union (Cold War), and Spain (WWI)...all of whom were threats to the free world not so long ago, and all of whom now are industrious nations who contribute good to the world, and whose citizens enjoy civil liberties and high standards of living...all thanks to the U.S. for their action in defeating facism.

President Bush has correctly identified the "access of evil," which we are dealing with on multiple fronts.

I don't believe for a second that our efforts are in vein.

I REMIND EVERYONE THAT THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THE WAR.

THE QUESTION IS WOULD YOU PUT YOUR/YOUR FAMILY'S ASS ON THE LINE FOR IT
I would.
Next year, I will.

I am thankful ...BLAHBLAHBLAH ...are in vein.
AGAIN...

This is NOT a poll on whether the war is right or justified.. STOP TRYING TO JUSTIFY IT. That is NOT my question.

My question, which Eligage did NOT answer is DOES HE/SHE SUPPORT THE WAR WITH THEIR OWN LIFE OR THE LIFE OF THEIR LOVED ONE OR JUST WITH WORDS??