NationStates Jolt Archive

The Allmighty_Meg provided me with a heads-up on a certain proposed legislation regarding two years' service of 18-42 year olds, as well as amending the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.

So is this like the issue of repealing the 22nd Amendment, to go down in quite obscurity, or is there something else to it?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?tab=summary&bill=h109-4752

What's wrong with this particular bill? It's not like it forces people to be in the military. There's obviously the choice of civilian service.

Universal National Service Act of 2006 - Declares that it is the obligation of every U.S. citizen, and every other person residing in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a two-year period of national service, unless exempted, either as a member of an active or reserve component of the armed forces or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense. Requires induction into national service by the President. Sets forth provisions governing: (1) induction deferments, postponements, and exemptions, including exemption of a conscientious objector from military service that includes combatant training; and (2) discharge following national service.
Amends the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.

Says we are obligated ... pretty much says they allow people to be forced into the Military. Which is wrong.

What's wrong with this particular bill? It's not like it forces people to be in the military. There's obviously the choice of civilian service.

I think the problem is that if forces people to do anything. I mean you pay your taxes, what right does the govt. have to demand anything more from you? If you want to serve then there are ample opportunities available.

I think the problem is that if forces people to do anything. I mean you pay your taxes, what right does the govt. have to demand anything more from you? If you want to serve then there are ample opportunities available.

Well, I guess one of the things that Government does is provide for the common DE-fense. ( At least, it says so in the Constitution. ) Meaning, they got the right to tell folks to get off their ass, shoulder that rifle, and fight AS ORDERED.

Well, I guess one of the things that Government does is provide for the common DE-fense. ( At least, it says so in the Constitution. ) Meaning, they got the right to tell folks to get off their ass, shoulder that rifle, and fight AS ORDERED.

I'm not arguing this on the ins and outs of American law as my knowledge of it sucks. My point is more on the moral side, if I don't want to go get shot at or take some dumbass civilian defense job wasting a couple of year of my life then why should I have to?

I have no objection to military service per se, I just object to a govt. telling me I have to do it.

And this is why I'm glad I live in England. Hah!
If the government tried to get people to forcibly join the military, it'd be funny here! The houses of parliament would probably be bombed again! Hahahahahah!

Damned if I would be forced to fly off to some dusty trash can of a country and fight people I don't care about.

The Allmighty_Meg provided me with a heads-up on a certain proposed legislation regarding two years' service of 18-42 year olds, as well as amending the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.

So is this like the issue of repealing the 22nd Amendment, to go down in quite obscurity, or is there something else to it?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?tab=summary&bill=h109-4752

A brief check indicates that this bill was introduced by Representative Charles Rangel, a 25 year Democratic member of the House.

Odds are he only proposed this bill to look tough on national defense issues in his home district (upper Manhattan).

As far as I can tell, the bill has been stuck in the House Armed Services committee since February...which basically means it'll never even come to a vote.

The military doesn't want to start wasting money training random people for two year tours when they've been emphasizing an all-volunteer, professional force for over 15 years.

No congressman is going to support a bill that ensures that every voter under the age of 40 will vote against them for approving a measure which essentially steals two years of their life away.

In short, there's no reason to worry...Congress will never pass such a bill.

Well, I guess one of the things that Government does is provide for the common DE-fense. ( At least, it says so in the Constitution. ) Meaning, they got the right to tell folks to get off their ass, shoulder that rifle, and fight AS ORDERED.

Do we get the right to tell them where to shove said rifle?

Well, I guess one of the things that Government does is provide for the common DE-fense. (At least, it says so in the Constitution.) Meaning, they got the right to tell folks to get off their ass, shoulder that rifle, and fight AS ORDERED.

Volunteer your own ass, Sergeant York. Not mine. I didn't agree to his illegal war, and I'm not fighting it. Fuck him.

The Allmighty_Meg provided me with a heads-up on a certain proposed legislation regarding two years' service of 18-42 year olds, as well as amending the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.

So is this like the issue of repealing the 22nd Amendment, to go down in quite obscurity, or is there something else to it?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?tab=summary&bill=h109-4752

It is fair to point out that given the massive unpopularity of every member of the house and senate, the chance that the American people would respond with total outrage to this bill guarantees that no congressman in his right mind would vote for it.

I should also hope, given the generation that these people come from, that they realize how evil and despicable the draft is and that they will prevent it from ever being used again. That said, they're politicians so they have neither spine nor moral fabric, so I don't expect much from them.

Do we get the right to tell them where to shove said rifle?


...with the proviso that afterwarz you may end up getting Danny Devered for insubordination.

Or you could have a really dumb President deciding that it was being enemy combattantishness. Oops. That was too close to reality for comfort.

Volunteer your own ass, Sergeant York. Not mine. I didn't agree to his illegal war, and I'm not fighting it. Fuck him.

You don't have to agree. You merely have to obey.

Does this apply to US citizens who have never lived in the US?

Volunteer your own ass, Sergeant York. Not mine. I didn't agree to his illegal war, and I'm not fighting it. Fuck him.
You're already bound by law to do whatever the Federal government wants to do with your ass.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sec_10_00000311----000-.html

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Does this apply to US citizens who have never lived in the US?

Nothing in it that specifies one way or another, so it probably does.

Does this apply to US citizens who have never lived in the US?

Last time they applied the draft in (undeclared) wartime, it also applied to temporary residents who had never ever been US citizens at all.
Odds are that at least one judge on SCOTUS would rule it does apply to non-resident citizens.

Well, I guess one of the things that Government does is provide for the common DE-fense. ( At least, it says so in the Constitution. ) Meaning, they got the right to tell folks to get off their ass, shoulder that rifle, and fight AS ORDERED.

Don't think a tour of duty in VietIraq quite counts as Defense of the United States. I know some people say "We are fighting them in over there so we don't have to fight them here," but the fact is that a lot of them can't even afford a plane ticket let alone get a visa. Generally speakin if you don't fight 'em over there you don't fight 'em at all.

Stupid fuckign idea…. Getting my education was hard enough without delaying it two years.

A brief check indicates that this bill was introduced by Representative Charles Rangel, a 25 year Democratic member of the House.

Odds are he only proposed this bill to look tough on national defense issues in his home district (upper Manhattan).

As far as I can tell, the bill has been stuck in the House Armed Services committee since February...which basically means it'll never even come to a vote.

The military doesn't want to start wasting money training random people for two year tours when they've been emphasizing an all-volunteer, professional force for over 15 years.

No congressman is going to support a bill that ensures that every voter under the age of 40 will vote against them for approving a measure which essentially steals two years of their life away.

In short, there's no reason to worry...Congress will never pass such a bill.
He's put up the same damned bill for the past several years. People seem to continually forget this fact.

He's put up the same damned bill for the past several years. People seem to continually forget this fact.

Yeah...I thought it looked familiar. :p

Universal National Service Act of 2006 - Declares that it is the obligation of every U.S. citizen, and every other person residing in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a two-year period of national service, unless exempted, either as a member of an active or reserve component of the armed forces or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense. Requires induction into national service by the President. Sets forth provisions governing: (1) induction deferments, postponements, and exemptions, including exemption of a conscientious objector from military service that includes combatant training; and (2) discharge following national service.
Amends the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.
Pfft, fuck that for a game of soldiers. :rolleyes:

What, your company relocates you, you do your job, and then suddenly you're handed a uniform and forced to stand up and lie in front of a flag? Meh.

Nothing in it that specifies one way or another, so it probably does.
So perhaps now isn't a good time to go to the US embassy and point out that I should get some documentation to show that I'm a US citizen for the purpose of getting a passport... Canadian passports expire after 4 years, American ones last 10.
Maybe if I don't say anything about it, they won't notice me.

"There will be no conscription, pay no attention to the people proposing 'conscription' bills behind the curtain."

I'd choose the punishment over complying with this.

You know, I think I will just go see about getting an american passport anyways... if they try to send me off I can always renounce my citizenship and stay in Canada where it's safe and warm and no one wants to sign me up for compulsory military service.

And this is why I'm glad I live in England. Hah!
If the government tried to get people to forcibly join the military, it'd be funny here! The houses of parliament would probably be bombed again! Hahahahahah!

Damned if I would be forced to fly off to some dusty trash can of a country and fight people I don't care about.

Well said old boy. Frankly if the Government tried anything like that here we would simply say 'No'. Then we would most likely carry about our business.

please re-read before making a blaken statement

Universal National Service Act of 2006 - Declares that it is the obligation of every U.S. citizen, and every other person residing in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a two-year period of national service, unless exempted, either as a member of an active or reserve component of the armed forces or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense. Requires induction into national service by the President. Sets forth provisions governing: (1) induction deferments, postponements, and exemptions, including exemption of a conscientious objector from military service that includes combatant training; and (2) discharge following national service.
Amends the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.

Says we are obligated ... pretty much says they allow people to be forced into the Military. Which is wrong.

Canada is obligated to return you.

You know, I think I will just go see about getting an american passport anyways... if they try to send me off I can always renounce my citizenship and stay in Canada where it's safe and warm and no one wants to sign me up for compulsory military service.

please re-read before making a blaken statement
Yeah, so? Suppose I don't want to defend America?

Fine give up all that student aid you get. :gundge:


I think the problem is that if forces people to do anything. I mean you pay your taxes, what right does the govt. have to demand anything more from you? If you want to serve then there are ample opportunities available.

Renounce your citizenship pick a new country (if they would have you) and go! Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Yeah, so? Suppose I don't want to defend America?

Renounce your citizenship pick a new country (if they would have you) and go! Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
Right, now here's the catch. Suppose I'm a foreign citizen living and working in america. By the terms of that thing, I'm bound to give up 2 years of my life to defend someone elses country. Er, no. And just for the record, I'm English.

As this thing will never get past committee, we're debating a moot point here.

Hey, I just thought, doesn't this mean all the 'illegal immigrants' the wingnuts are getting worked up about would have to do service too?

Fine give up all that student aid you get. :gundge:
I managed two BS one BA and Two masters without one cent of financial aid. I have done my country more service then anything they can throw at me with this.

First I believe it would only apply to permanent residents (green card holders) students people on a work visa etc would/should be excluded (they were in the old draft) No illegals by being undocumented would be excluded.

Right, now here's the catch. Suppose I'm a foreign citizen living and working in america. By the terms of that thing, I'm bound to give up 2 years of my life to defend someone elses country. Er, no. And just for the record, I'm English.

As this thing will never get past committee, we're debating a moot point here.

Hey, I just thought, doesn't this mean all the 'illegal immigrants' the wingnuts are getting worked up about would have to do service too?

Then you would be an exception to the rule, but most recieve WAY more than they ever give.

I managed two BS one BA and Two masters without one cent of financial aid. I have done my country more service then anything they can throw at me with this.

Then you would be an exception to the rule, but most recieve WAY more than they ever give.
Then why does the government give any money out?

From what I have seen out of collage like 70 percent of all financial aid is all loans that have to be payed back anyways

Have you seen the default rates ???? Many aren't It would be a win win to
get a free education for mandatory government service (not necessarily military).
I say everbody does 4 years no exeptions, 18-22 then college. Let handicapped people serve in administrative possitions as governemt employees, pacifists can teach inner city kids to read and do math.
There would be a fit for everybody.

Then why does the government give any money out?

From what I have seen out of collage like 70 percent of all financial aid is all loans that have to be payed back anyways

Yes most financial aid from the govt. is loans.

I'd never comply if they tried to get compusory military or any other kind of service from me. And I'll happily renounce my citizenship and find another country to live in. I've got my eye on Holland right now. If I can't get in there I will go for Canada - apparently I have met the requirements to move there already.

Most industrialised countries in continental Europe plus Korea, Singapore, and scores of other developed countries have something along these lines. I know someone who did this sort of thing in the R.O.K. and he ended up being no worse for it.

Have you seen the default rates ???? Many aren't It would be a win win to
get a free education for mandatory government service (not necessarily military).
I say everbody does 4 years no exeptions, 18-22 then college. Let handicapped people serve in administrative possitions as governemt employees, pacifists can teach inner city kids to read and do math.
There would be a fit for everybody.
Sounds kinda like communism to me really

Yes most financial aid from the govt. is loans.

I'd never comply if they tried to get compusory military or any other kind of service from me. And I'll happily renounce my citizenship and find another country to live in. I've got my eye on Holland right now. If I can't get in there I will go for Canada - apparently I have met the requirements to move there already.
Yeah my education deffinatly bumps my score up conciderably on their test

Yeah my education deffinatly bumps my score up conciderably on their test

Same here. If you own an business or have job lined up there you are in like flynn.

I like their immigration requirements, because they make sense. Come to our country if you can contribute to it in a positive way. Unlike the US of A's immigration test which wants to see how patriotic you will be.

Same here. If you own an business or have job lined up there you are in like flynn.

I like their immigration requirements, because they make sense. Come to our country if you can contribute to it in a positive way. Unlike the US of A's immigration test which wants to see how patriotic you will be.
Yeah I am looking at geting in with honywell in the cities and transfer up after a few years

Yeah I am looking at geting in with honywell in the cities and transfer up after a few years


Nice - best of luck to you.

I was hoping to start a business or two that I can expand to other countries and hopefully have several countries I can live in :D

Strangely enough, I have little problem with this. I don't think that it should apply to any non-US citizens, but I don't have a problem with a country requiring some sort of civil service (not mandatory military service, mind you) from its citizens. I would ask only that the service be of minimal disruption to the person's life (ie. not full time), and I would change the law from being only that which aids national security to include civil functions such as working at a public library, tutoring at public schools, etc.

As for adding women to the registration for the draft - I think that should be done as well. I don't really agree with the draft itself, but as long as it is around, it should certainly be applied equally.

BYE! Can I help you pack ?







Go already .......

Yes most financial aid from the govt. is loans.

I'd never comply if they tried to get compusory military or any other kind of service from me. And I'll happily renounce my citizenship and find another country to live in. I've got my eye on Holland right now. If I can't get in there I will go for Canada - apparently I have met the requirements to move there already.

BYE! Can I help youi pack ?


Don't rush me... I still have stuff to do before I blow this popsicle stand. Plus no you can't help... you probably will steal shit.

Go already .......


I'll leave as soon as I am able. Seeing as how it's so hard for a person to get ahead in this country it might be a while. Maybe you could donate to my cause?

BYE! Can I help you pack ?







Go already .......
Naw ... for now my family and girlfriend are here

I would rather stay and make sure this is a better place by working to make sure this needless restriction of freedom does not take place

I think it would be a good idea to adopt a Starship troopers style government. Out of all the weird ideas RH had, this one was the best.

Strangely enough, I have little problem with this. I don't think that it should apply to any non-US citizens, but I don't have a problem with a country requiring some sort of civil service (not mandatory military service, mind you) from its citizens. I would ask only that the service be of minimal disruption to the person's life (ie. not full time), and I would change the law from being only that which aids national security to include civil functions such as working at a public library, tutoring at public schools, etc.

As for adding women to the registration for the draft - I think that should be done as well. I don't really agree with the draft itself, but as long as it is around, it should certainly be applied equally.
This sort of thing would have killed my family if it were full time, we live in the middle of no where and live on a farm

If you think a farm can get along when geting rid of 2/3 of its labor (my two younger bro's are only a year apart so when it applied to them we would have been without them) would have been devistating specialy with my dads back trouble

Not to mention that sense I graduated highschool I have worked 56-72 hours a week as well as have been a full time student. what time would I have to waste on this bs?

Not to mention that sense I graduated highschool I have worked 56-72 hours a week as well as have been a full time student. what time would I have to waste on this bs?

Do you really think that all forms of public service are BS? Personally, I kind of wish I had been pushed into some of them, because it would have meant I would have had to make the time, instead of saying how much I would like to do it, but couldn't.

Of course, the government gives student deferments and such for all sorts of things. I see no reason that this couldn't be deferred by a full-time student.

A brief check indicates that this bill was introduced by Representative Charles Rangel, a 25 year Democratic member of the House.

Odds are he only proposed this bill to look tough on national defense issues in his home district (upper Manhattan).

As far as I can tell, the bill has been stuck in the House Armed Services committee since February...which basically means it'll never even come to a vote.

The military doesn't want to start wasting money training random people for two year tours when they've been emphasizing an all-volunteer, professional force for over 15 years.

No congressman is going to support a bill that ensures that every voter under the age of 40 will vote against them for approving a measure which essentially steals two years of their life away.

In short, there's no reason to worry...Congress will never pass such a bill.

Not only that, but Chuck Rangel has introduced such a bill repeatedly. Never has it gone beyond committee, and no one takes it seriously. Chuck does it for whatever reason he does it.

We would know if it was the "Starship Troopers" issue because that is entirely different from the draft. They didn't want people to serve in the military, they tried their damndest to deter anyone who wasn't committed. Granted, you couldn't affect government without serving, but so what?

We would know if it was the "Starship Troopers" issue because that is entirely different from the draft. They didn't want people to serve in the military, they tried their damndest to deter anyone who wasn't committed. Granted, you couldn't affect government without serving, but so what?


Go for it. You'd weed a lot of trash out.

Go for it. You'd weed a lot of trash out.
Yeah! Them damn hippies with there "not wanting to kill people" shit don't deserve rights! Hell, let's just kill all of them filthy bastards!

It is fair to point out that given the massive unpopularity of every member of the house and senate, the chance that the American people would respond with total outrage to this bill guarantees that no congressman in his right mind would vote for it.Aye, there's the rub. :(

Well, I guess one of the things that Government does is provide for the common DE-fense. ( At least, it says so in the Constitution. ) Meaning, they got the right to tell folks to get off their ass, shoulder that rifle, and fight AS ORDERED.
Sergeant Prendergast: [Standing on the hill near the convenience store] Hey, Mr. Lee! D-FENS!
Mr. Lee *shrugs*
-
Nick: We're the same, you and me. We're the same, don't you see?
Bill Foster: We are not the same. I'm an American and you're a sick as*hole.
Nick: Just what kind of vigilante are you?
..
Nick: F*ck you. Who the f*ck are you? Are you f*cking with me? I...
Bill Foster: I am just disagreeing with you. In America, we have the freedom of speech. The right to disagree.
Nick: F*ck you and your freedom.

-
Gang member 1: Whatcha doin' Mister?
Bill Foster: Nothing.
Gang member 1: Nahh, man. You're trespassing on private property.
Bill Foster: Trespassing?
Gang member 2: You're loitering too, man.
Gang member 1: That's right, you're loitering too.
Bill Foster: I didn't see any signs.
Gang member 1: [pointing at a graffiti skull] Whatcha call that?
Bill Foster: Graffiti.
Gang member 1: Nahh man, it's not f*cking graffiti. That's a sign.
Gang member 2: He can't read it man.
Gang member 1: Well then I guess I'm gonna have to read it for you. It says this is f*cking private property. No f*cking trespassing. That means f*cking you.
Bill Foster: It says all that?
Gang member 1: Yeah.
Bill Foster: Well, maybe if you wrote it in f*cking English, I would f*cking understand it.
...[Foster has just attacked the gang members on the hill]
Bill Foster: What about the brief case? You forgot the brief case! I'm going home! So clear a path, you motherf*ckers! Clear a path! I'M GOING HOME!

--

I think it would be a good idea to adopt a Starship troopers style government. Out of all the weird ideas RH had, this one was the best.
Wow, four pages in, and you appear to be the first to mention the other angle in the title.

We would know if it was the "Starship Troopers" issue because that is entirely different from the draft. They didn't want people to serve in the military, they tried their damndest to deter anyone who wasn't committed. Granted, you couldn't affect government without serving, but so what?
Two, now.
Thank you.
Wouldn't it depend somewhat on how much positive attention/support this particular motion would garner?
As yet, it just sounds like the same BS regarding repealing the 22nd Amendment.
A few of the local right-wingers here express the idea that the fella's a regular in this particular respect ... and given the response on this thread, i'm not particularly inclined to believe there'd be a lot of support. But the point of the illegal immigration is also an interesting angle - perhaps there's a connection, perhaps not.

Would homeless people be allowed to vote in Robert Hielin's world? Just wondering because a lot of homeless people are former military personal. It might make for intersting politics. Politicians would finally be interested in the homeless vote. And anytime a small group has a lot of power they vote themselves huge pensions. Just look at Congress, Parliment, Diet, etc. They might end up cutting the millitary budget to pay for millitary social security.

Would homeless people be allowed to vote in Robert Hielin's world? Just wondering because a lot of homeless people are former military personal. It might make for intersting politics. Politicians would finally be interested in the homeless vote. And anytime a small group has a lot of power they vote themselves huge pensions. Just look at Congress, Parliment, Diet, etc. They might end up cutting the millitary budget to pay for millitary social security.
Good point!
In my state of AK, the veterans have taken it upon themselves to start a new political party, essentially being the disenfranchised vets party, since the republicans here have thoroughly screwed the pooch in so many repugnant ways
http://rushlimbaughtomy.blogspot.com/screwed%20the%20poochA.jpg
that the party they had been pretty consistent with is getting cursed at and dropped like a turd out of a mule.
Power to 'em.

This is a bill that will never get out of committee and will never remotely see the light of day. Nothing to see here..move along.

This is a bill that will never get out of committee and will never remotely see the light of day. Nothing to see here..move along.
Corneliu? That you?
Your nation is relatively new ... and, Intestinal fluids? What's your inspiration?

I think it would be a good idea to adopt a Starship troopers style government. Out of all the weird ideas RH had, this one was the best.

Being an RAH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A_Heinlein) fan myself, I am more inclined to conclude that the real message of Starship Troopers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers) is located below the surface (the relationship between "liberty" and "responsibility") and that the government of the Terran Federation is simply a literary vehicle, not a political blueprint. Afterall, the message of The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress) seems to take a competely different view of the relationship between the citizen and the state, being a novel about the nature of human political revolution - something along the lines of ":upyours: @ Authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress)."

Oh, and concerning this idea of compulsory national service in the United States within the context of current United States foreign and domestic policy, I have only one comment:

:upyours: @ Authority

edit:


Do not confuse 'duty' with what other people expect of you; they are utterly different. Duty is a debt you owe to yourself to fulfill obligations you have assumed voluntarily. Paying that debt can entail anything from years of patient work to instant willingness to die. Difficult it may be, but the reward is self-respect.
But there is no reward at all for doing what other people expect of you, and to do so is not merely difficult, but impossible. It is easier to deal with a footpad than it is with the leech who wants 'just a few minutes of your time, please - this won't take long.' Time is your total capital, and the minutes of your life are painfully few. If you allow yourself to fall into the vice of agreeing to such requests, they quickly snowball to the point where these parasites will use up 100 percent of your time - and squawk for more!
So learn to say No - and to be rude about it when necessary.
Otherwise you will not have time to carry out your duty, or to do your own work, and certainly no time for love and happiness. The termites will nibble away your life and leave none of it for you.
(This rule does not mean that you must not do a favor for a friend, or even a stranger. But let the choice be yours. Don't do it because it is 'expected' of you.)

Aye, there's the rub. :(

It was early in the morning when I wrote that and I forgot that there was no such thing as a congressman in his right mind. Forgive the slip. :p

Canada is obligated to return you.
What do you mean by that? I've never lived in the U.S., I've only lived in Canada, so they'll return me to Canada?
I've got dual citizenship, it woudln't hurt me any to renounce one if they deceided to force me into military service I disagree with. If I was no longer an American citizen and didn't live in the U.S., they'd have no excuse to force me to work for them.

Do you really think that all forms of public service are BS? Personally, I kind of wish I had been pushed into some of them, because it would have meant I would have had to make the time, instead of saying how much I would like to do it, but couldn't.

Of course, the government gives student deferments and such for all sorts of things. I see no reason that this couldn't be deferred by a full-time student.
I pulled 3 years of voulentary fire department duty

But I did it as a VOULENTEER

Forcing a lifestyle change is NOT something I needed, I am a responsible citizen and when I had the time in my life I worked on saving lives

But just because I found the time at one point in my life does not mean I wanted it dictated to me, nor should the government have the right to do such.

Make it extreemly easy to serve, sure, make it profitable why not but do not force lifestyle changes to thoes that are being responsible and planning their life

Being an RAH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A_Heinlein) fan myself, I am more inclined to conclude that the real message of Starship Troopers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers) is located below the surface (the relationship between "liberty" and "responsibility") and that the government of the Terran Federation is simply a literary vehicle, not a political blueprint. Afterall, the message of The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress) seems to take a competely different view of the relationship between the citizen and the state, being a novel about the nature of human political revolution - something along the lines of ":upyours: @ Authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress)."

Oh, and concerning this idea of compulsory national service in the United States within the context of current United States foreign and domestic policy, I have only one comment:

:upyours: @ Authority

edit:
A most excellent post, and even better with that Heinlein quote. *bows*

It was early in the morning when I wrote that and I forgot that there was no such thing as a congressman in his right mind. Forgive the slip. :p
S'all a'ight. Besides, showing a little slip every now and again keeps the thread hot! ;)

I seem to recall a member of the Joint Chiefs responding to a call to reintroduce the draft a few years ago.

His basic response was "Dear god, NO!"

Don't think a tour of duty in VietIraq quite counts as Defense of the United States. I know some people say "We are fighting them in over there so we don't have to fight them here," but the fact is that a lot of them can't even afford a plane ticket let alone get a visa. Generally speakin if you don't fight 'em over there you don't fight 'em at all.

Some people: Dubya?

The only thing that matters is his definition.

It is the whole thing: in the end, everyone simply has to do whatever the Big Boss tells him. Even when the Big Boss is a retard. ( No system of Government ever escapes that problem. )

Sergeant Prendergast: [Standing on the hill near the convenience store] Hey, Mr. Lee! D-FENS!
Mr. Lee *shrugs*
-
Nick: We're the same, you and me. We're the same, don't you see?
Bill Foster: We are not the same. I'm an American and you're a sick as*hole.
Nick: Just what kind of vigilante are you?
..
Nick: F*ck you. Who the f*ck are you? Are you f*cking with me? I...
Bill Foster: I am just disagreeing with you. In America, we have the freedom of speech. The right to disagree.
Nick: F*ck you and your freedom.

SNIP
--

As yet unrevealed Executive Order dated 1/1/2006.
'Disagreement with the opinion of the President shall constitute enemy-combattantishness.'
*serious*
There is a right to disagree.
But there is no right to disobey.

Deletions: blame the browser... ( silly repeats)

A most excellent post, and even better with that Heinlein quote. *bows*


I think that it should be made clear within this context that RAH advocated the total monopolisation of power by the ex-Military.
(You have to have succesfully completed Service, and be outprocessed before you are allowed to vote. )

Some people: Dubya?

The only thing that matters is his definition.

It is the whole thing: in the end, everyone simply has to do whatever the Big Boss tells him. Even when the Big Boss is a retard. ( No system of Government ever escapes that problem. )
Well theoretically a true democracy would … (though as freedom fan as I am I don’t think a completely free democracy would be ideal)

Well theoretically a true democracy would … (though as freedom fan as I am I don’t think a completely free democracy would be ideal)


This thing may not be good - but it is all the good we'll ever have...
( freely qouted from Frank Herbert: Children of Dune ).

This thing may not be good - but it is all the good we'll ever have...
( freely qouted from Frank Herbert: Children of Dune ).
Yeah I am a fan of people being free to choose … I just don’t feel it should extend so far that people can choose to infringe upon rights. Rights and equality should be outside the bounds of the popularity contest.

Yeah I am a fan of people being free to choose … I just don’t feel it should extend so far that people can choose to infringe upon rights. Rights and equality should be outside the bounds of the popularity contest.


Which leaves us the nettly question: now, where does the ultimate source of authority reside?
I'm still thinking it should reside in the majority decision ( the popularity contest ) - inasumuch as an Appeal to God is rather difficult to work with.

Which leaves us the nettly question: now, where does the ultimate source of authority reside?
I'm still thinking it should reside in the majority decision ( the popularity contest ) - inasumuch as an Appeal to God is rather difficult to work with.
I agree which while I feel a restricted democracy such as the USA is so far the best solution if we could cut out all the needles restrictions on freedom and cut the fat from the gov

I agree which while I feel a restricted democracy such as the USA is so far the best solution if we could cut out all the needles restrictions on freedom and cut the fat from the gov

What limits should there be on an absolute and utimate source of authority?
Should there be any?
Of what nature?

What limits should there be on an absolute and utimate source of authority?
Should there be any?
Of what nature?
Lol good questions all of them ... though I dont want to hijack the thread further

Lol good questions all of them ... though I dont want to hijack the thread further

Essential ones.
I have been feeling for some 25 years now, that most people try to avoid that area.
Democracy itself - if to prosper - must be militant and uncompromising, not unlike a Jacobin.

And this is why I'm glad I live in England. Hah!
If the government tried to get people to forcibly join the military, it'd be funny here! The houses of parliament would probably be bombed again! Hahahahahah!

Damned if I would be forced to fly off to some dusty trash can of a country and fight people I don't care about.
Likewise. I'm glad I neither reside in the United States nor hold citizenship, but I do respect the country for it's values.

The US would never impose a mandatory 2 year military service for many reasons, one of which being the enormous cost. It would take an obscene amount of money to feed, clothe, house, train, and pay even a negligible salary to 8 million people (roughly 4 million people are 18 years old) in addition to those with experience or skills needed for higher ranks.

The military needs relatively intelligent and competent people with extensive training. With a 2 year service people are mostly limited to the most basic of functions and are thus of little use. You could basically have secretaries and infantry grunts, but that’s about it. I suppose there would no longer be any outsourcing of basic janitorial or catering services.

Were you to tweak this program a little you might have a good idea.

I would allow deferments for those in tertiary education – that education would be valuable to their later public service.

Those that go straight from high school would probably gain some good job skills making them far more employable. Extensive training would be implausible, but some experience as a janitor, cook, or secretary would be better than nothing. Additionally people could sign up for longer terms in exchange for better training.

Those in their ‘public service obligation’ could assist in anything from firefighting, park rangers, border patrol, coast guard, or any number of other functions in addition to actual military service. Not to mention completely non-military services like Americorps. The only real problem would come from the lower 10% or so who are fairly incapable and too incompetent to do much, but some basic grunt work doesn’t need much intelligence. Even the bottom 1% could be a janitor’s assistant or something.

I pulled 3 years of voulentary fire department duty

But I did it as a VOULENTEER

Forcing a lifestyle change is NOT something I needed, I am a responsible citizen and when I had the time in my life I worked on saving lives

But just because I found the time at one point in my life does not mean I wanted it dictated to me, nor should the government have the right to do such.

Make it extreemly easy to serve, sure, make it profitable why not but do not force lifestyle changes to thoes that are being responsible and planning their life

Are you equally opposed to welfare? Because I have seen this argument before:

I give to charity, but I VOLUNTEER it!

Forcing me to help other citizens is not something I need. I'll give when I want to. The government should not have the right to make me do so.

Give tax breaks for charity, sure, but do not force me to give up my hard-earned money to anyone else!

I don't think that it is too much to ask someone to help support the society in which they live - be it by money or by some sort of service to that society. We have welfare because we realize that it is the duty of the rest of us (and generally is in our best interest) to help those less fortunate than ourselves. I don't see how mandatory public service is all that much different.