A conscript army to serve under Barack Hussein Obama? You support that?

I would never want to be conscripted to take direct orders from a communist

It's interesting to think about all of the symbolism inherent in the fasces, isn't it. Everything from authority to discipline to punishment to strength in numbers.

The English (or is it germanic) version of the word is faggot, right?

It is funny that people think that they will suddenly feel the urge to fight when the moment is right.  But history will quickly show most will shirk away and let others carry the burden if given the opportunity.

to quote the great libertarian philosopher Charlie Sheen, "Dying is for fools."

Sure, unwilling is not the same as unable.



 

I laugh because you aren't far off.

However a faggot is designed to burn.  a fascine is simply a bundle of sticks (or other such things.  4" PVC piping has been used for modern fascines.

So, you agree with me? Ok.
 

depends.  You think all the "draft=slavery" folks on here are really going nut up?

Among the professionals in the Finnish Defense Forces, it is a well-recognized fact that 2 years of conscription is mediocre service at best, and they do 6-12 months.  The active reserve soldiers are the ones who spend a lot of time throughout their lives training, seeking new professional development opportunities, to include volunteering for peacekeeping assignments, NATO and UN missions as part of Nordic country task forces, and anything they can get on a waiting list for.

Many of them are on lottery lists for immigration to the US because of our freedoms, and will never win it.  Finland can't afford to have hard-workers leaving in droves, while the welfare-recipients stack up from within and abroad.

The largest segment of Finnish ex-pats is in the US, and has been for over a century.

One thing is certain there, and that is a clear threat.  Nobody needs to be explained to about why they are training,

I think that's the major difference between them in context of a draft.  Politicians in the US have had a difficult time explaining the "why" to America since Vietnam.  Desert Storm was clearly explained, and everybody was happy with such a short-duration victory with minimal loss.

The real problem first is that US politicians and the US public do not really understand our role in the world after World War II.  A lot of people think that the US as a Nation is normal, and that other people should be able to do what we do in terms of security.  Before we can even address mandatory service, this dilemma has to be handled on a societal scale.

Since people don't learn geography or history in school anymore, that's a tall order to fill.

I do not believe a draft equals slavery; all abled body men under the age of 45 are considered part of the unorganized militia and the militia may be moved into federal service per the Militia Act of 1903.





I do, however, believe that any proper free man would logically wish to defend that which is his and that relying on those who have no concept of personal responsibility for anything is absolute folly.



 

we maintained a draft throughout the 50s.  with little complaint.  

it is funny that the same folks demanding an AVF are the same folks demanding conscription now.

there is a certain "the grass is always greener" that drives the discussion.

Having spent my entire adult life in the US military, I can say unequivocally we don't have a professional military.  all the aspects of a profession are missing, despite claims to the contrary.

we are no more professional than the bubbas at the DMV.  

there are pockets of professionalism within the military.  but the majority, dare i say vast majority, aren't.

the service with the worst retention is probably the most professional.

the benefits to the military of a conscription based force are an unquestionable decrease in personnel costs.  The costs?  

where will find such men?

you know we are talking about America, right?

And, only here would someone call a soldier-serf a professional "warrior class". Men bound in involuntary servitude, led to die in foreign wars for the glory of their ego-driven royalty. Yeah, that's the ticket... A perfect example of free men serving a cause in their own interest. Or, maybe not?

Remind me again... How many of those "joyful warriors" survived the Carolingian wars? How many of their kids starved, when they were thrown off the land because daddy was dead in Russia, and there was no longer an adult male in the household to serve the king? Yeah... Kinda ugly, when you dig into the details, ain't it? Wasn't much of a program for widows and orphans, was there?

The roots of this idea run deep, and they run right back to that ancient evil, the idea that the king or the state has the right over your life, health, and well-being. No matter the details of how it was organized, the same ugly feature of involuntary service runs across the whole system. I'm sure that there were men who wanted to be there, but what about the ones who didn't? Were they given the choice? Were the families given a choice?

I've done a fair bit of reading on that system, because I found it a fascinatingly different way to run things, sort of like a somewhat more civilized version of the Cossacks, or a modernized feudalism. I've yet to see anything that would convince me that the whole thing was benign, but then again, there isn't a whole hell of a lot in English, and the web translations from Swedish are somewhat... Lacking. Perhaps I'm suffering from biased sources.

Yes. Now we have people determining who deserves their natural rights from God.

Service guarantees citizenship rights.



My favorite part is how patriotic it is to force people into government service.

Sadly, I have to agree with you on this.  There are definitely pockets, but as a whole, what you and I would call "professional" is actually anything but, with a nice professional-looking package wrapped around it with cool catch phrases and the latest fads in garrison-oriented slackery paving the way of careers galore.

My militia will always remain voluntary.

Yes, a vast country that is so diverse one can only imagine how it has stayed united and wonders if it can maintain but some are more cynical than others.



 

You know the background of that guy in the picture that you're mocking?

I don't think you do. Per the people I know who were actually in that unit and knew of the reality of that situation, he was an involuntarily recalled IRR reservist with health issues stemming from endocrine problems he developed while on active duty. As in, I believe, pituitary cancer. They waivered his weight, and he volunteered to go to Iraq because he was a low-density technical MOS that needed to be filled. The guy could have, and probably should have, been medically retired. Instead, he's been held up to ridicule by people like you who know nothing about the actual situation.

Proud of  yourself? Frankly, I'm embarrassed for you and anyone who has to serve with you.

You think you're something special, but you're really a judgmental jackass.

People here love the nanny state. Just as long as it is flushing money on their fairy tale ideas.

You either believe in natural rights or you do not. If people were truly endowed by their creator with unalienable rights, then government does not trump these rights.

The logic used to justify a draft, or mandatory service, for emergencies, or the collective good, is the same justification that has been used (over and over) to disparage other rights. Forcing people into the service of the government, who derived their power from the very people they are forcing into service, is absurd.

"We should have the draft for emergencies" - it's okay for the government to alienate natural rights for an emergency, just as it's okay to do house to house seizures of all weapons after an emergency like hurricane Katrina. It's for the greater good citizens.

"Mandatory service would be good for the country" - forcing people into government service will make people better citizens. Put simply, it's not the place of the federal government to make people "better citizens." I try not to compare every big government idea to Nazism, because it has become so cliche, so maybe North Korea would be a more fair comparison. Article 86 of the North Korean Constitution states, "Defending the fatherland is the supreme duty and honor of citizens. Citizens shall defend the fatherland and serve in the armed forces as prescribed by law".

How many free men do you see in this photo?

Almost everyone believes that the will and "greater good" of the majority is sacrosanct, so long as they're in agreement with the majority. As soon as they lose that position of advantage, it's all "but muh rights, muh freedoms".

The worst, most vexing part, is that they frequently couch it in terms that imply that they occupy a position of moral superiority. They will advocate for the will of the people on one issue and flip right around and espouse a belief in individual rights on another issue, solely based on the fact that they are with the majority on issue "A", and the minority on issue "B".

Simple, base hypocrisy is all that it is. They want to make other people do their will and be immune from the same in return.

You still suffer from the delusion that it was involuntary.

Perhaps you should do some more reading?

As you have highlighted, he is the embodiment of the AVF.

So all those parades in NYC in 1945 were just slaves?




.......and that poor Nurse getting kissed by a slave in Times Square.

One thing I've noticed again and again is that people always debate why they think something should or should not happen. They never talk about how it would actually happen, based on how similar things have played out in the past. If the government were given the free labor of everyone in the country for a year or two of every individual's life, they would use it to do the same shit they are doing now. What would we see is more bogus civil rights investigations, EPA harassment of businesses and land owners, and lots and lots more audits.

I did a ctrl+f and still can't find slave any where in my post.

Just to be clear, is your argument, since it has been done before, it's okay to do now?

That's a good point too, people don't take it so far as to actually think what this massive pool of forced laborers will be used for.

It will almost certainly not be used to do anything that most people here would agree with. At best they'll be wasted doing make work bullshit, at worst they'll be used to further the goals of whatever petty tyrant bureaucrats they end up falling under.

Are these individuals going to be subject to the UCMJ, or a facsimile thereof? What do we do with someone who refuses to work, jail them? What then if they refuse to go quietly to jail, and resist, is it morally justifiable to kill them?

Is this the kind of country we want to live in, is this what the Founders envisioned when they wrote the Bill of Rights?

The biggest problem America has is it's own bloated government, and this would make it exponentially worse, not better.

You learn a lot, something that is not taught anymore in any schools. Unit cohesion, physical fitness, competition, appearance, respect for our flag and patriotism. Completing tasks by yourself or in groups, respect for authority, respect for laws, compassion for other human beings. Draftees served with distinction, many never came home. The draft would make many people enlist to choose an MOS for longer enlistments, instead of 2 years being cannon fodder

How much are we paying kitchen help and truck drivers?

Wouldn't be necessary if our Defense Dept. was funded to deter war to begin with.

Don't worry, Obama won't commit troops to battle.  It won't be him that's forced to contend with the world he's creating.

If I had a son that was forced into military service against his will, I would gladly help him move to Canada.

Doing the numbers, if every person was conscripted when they turn 18 and held for two years, that would mean everyone born from about 1995-1997 would currently be conscripted.

That is almost 12 million people, WTF are we going to do with 12 million unskilled conscripts? this would be on top of the people who are already in the military, those who stayed past their mandatory conscription time.

Let's say we have another million people who are volunteers that stayed in the military in some capacity beyond their conscription, that makes 13 million. Now add the bloated civilian federal and state bureaucracies that would surely not go away.

Just what percentage of the population do you people want working for the government?

My time has passed. Are you going to make my house and car payment while I join up? If not then stfu

the selfishness of america will be the death of us.

fortunately there is a law for that.

your lifestyle will still be there.

Yeah thats what I figured.

your time has passed, eh?

I am sure 2001 you lined up at the recruiters office.

Oh, and to your completely selfish concern,
http://www.defense.gov/specials/Relief_Act_Revision/

Im not joining. If you have a problem with that then be a man and come right out and say it. I get tired of your type on here.

veterans?

It really isn't as hard as you think.

It's already been said, but I'll up my post count.

No,


Unless aliens or zombies or something like that happens .

so if "something like that" happens who makes the determination?

Regarding a draft today, I think the only real way you could make it work in this country would be by expanding the National Guard and fleshing it out with the draftees. The key here being you wouldn't draft an individual for 1 year, 18 months or even two years. As technological as the modern military has become, an enlistment of such short duration would be more of a liability than an asset. You would have to make the term of enlistment 4 years. But being it isn't a full-time, active duty type deal, 4 years wouldn't be overly stressing. The individual is drafted out of high school, sent through basic and AIT, then off to their local NG outfit. From there they will do their one weekend per month and two weeks per year until their enlistment is up. In the meantime, they can do whatever they want. They can join the workforce. They can go to college or technical school. They can do all the things that everyone else can do and the stuff active duty troops just don't have time to do. Meanwhile, in a state or national emergency, they can be called up and utilized to handle the situation. If that situation is a war, they will still need time for a train-up period before being sent into combat. But that is still a better option than the traditional system of starting a draft once war has begun. By doing it this way, you already have a large pool of trained personnel in cohesive units when the crisis develops. Getting them into action would be a much quicker process than would be the case with brand new recruits.

There are other reasons why taking the route of reserves would be the best way to go. For one, it would cost a fortune to pay an additional 100,000 or 200,000 active duty troops per year. It would cost far less to pay that many additional reservists. And by being assigned to local Guard outfits rather than active duty, they would be in a better position to serve their own communities during times of need. They may never deploy overseas or fire a shot in anger. But they can still be used to fight wildfires, fill sandbags during floods, perform riot control, perform search and rescue, etc.

If we ever have to bring back the draft in order to get sufficient numbers of people into uniform, I am convinced the method outlined above would be the best way to go about doing it. While 4 years seems a lengthy enlistment period for a conscript, considering they are only "part-time" soldiers means it would be much less intrusive on their lives overall than a two year hitch on active duty. But by keeping them around at least 4 years, it gives you time to properly train them and get back some return on the effort invested in them.

All of that being said, I am not a big fan of bringing back the draft. As long as we can meet our manpower needs with an all volunteer force, then that is how we should proceed. But if there comes a day when manpower requirements exceeds the capacity of our all volunteer force, then I am not opposed to using the draft to provide that extra muscle.  People can spout off foolishness about slavery and such. But here is a painful truth. Freedom isn't free. It has a price. And that price is sweat and blood. Sometimes we are required to shed some of each, even if we would rather be doing something else, just to maintain that freedom we value so greatly.

Oh, and I see lots of people in this thread that are selling draftees short. Many of the best soldiers to ever serve this nation were draftees. There were no shortage of draftees that stormed the beaches at Normandy. There were plenty of draftees atop Pork Chop Hill. Lots of the men who air assaulted into LZ X-Ray in 1965 were draftees, as were the men who launched 11 assaults on Hamburger Hill in 1969. Does anyone here want to argue that an all volunteer force could have performed any better during these ferocious battles? Those guys fought like tigers. They did as well as anyone placed into those situations could do. Don't sell our drafted vets short! There are many of them right here on this forum. Military service may not have been at the top of their list at the time. But when called upon, they went, they served and they did us proud in every regard. I have no doubt that millions of young American men stand ready to do likewise today should the need ever arise.

I think the number would be close to 1 million

Thats why they had the lottery system.  
Frankly with 75% ineligable for service now, the "run to canada" freedom crowd, and the various dodgers, who knows what the % would be.

I have to ask the "ain't no fucking way I'm going to be drafted" crowd:

How many of you didn't sign up for Selective Service?

I can think of a good use for a conscript, plant them like fence posts on the southern border and shoot anyone crossing.

Physical, mental and medical issues pare down the majority. There were guys that tried to enlist and could not get in from medical scrutiny. The draft got them in the door.

Some days I feel like such a sucker.

My dad is a member of the 1% and here I am about to hit six years in.

I should be retired to Portland by now.

Must be nice for the guys that don't feel any sense of duty.

I just made a request for my draft card I had 2, one before and after I enlisted

Not sure what you mean.
I'm saying that we're already paying these deadbeats anyway, so we should make them work for it.
If that means giving them E1 pay & making them a fobbit, then we still win.

Not willingly.