To all the folks who voiced unspeakably rude sentiments directed at the host of this board–which would be me–simply because I’m skeptical of the scramble for war at a time when domestic issues unattended to (or exacerbated) by the administration loom so large…
How many are actually in the service and would be required to fight? How many have children who would be required to go? And how many of draft age support a draft (and I’ll be going on the assumption that the rudest and most blustering who respond affirmatively to the last one are full of crap.)
Just wondering.
PAD
• 
I attempted to join the Army but washed out because of knee problems. Because of this, I can never rejoin. My sister’s husband is in the Air Force, and she’s thinking seriously about joining up. Both of my parents work in a VA hospital, my mother since Vietnam. I’ve volunteered there as well, and seen the physical and mental scars that war has inflicted on many men and women. My grandfather got a purple heart at D-Day, (he drove the ships that delivered the men to the shore, and his ship hit a bomb) and still suffers from PTSD and physical pain.
In other words, I have seen what war does to a body and mind of a survivor, and I know how much I stand to loose if say my boyfriend was drafted. (I have no bothers or sons) But knowing this, I still support a draft of men and women and, if need be, going to war with Hussein.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/01/28/wirq28.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/01/28/ixnewstop.html
My comments were strong but quite polite but I’ll answer anyway.
1. Not in the service. Tried getting into the Navy officer program back in 97 but I didn’t make it. Wish I would have.
2. No kids. I do have a nephew who is 19.
3. I would support a draft if it was necessary. But a professional volunteer army is preferable to a conscript force. If a draft was necessary I don’t believe any exemptions should be granted. Whether you are a poor kid on scholarship at Harvard, a son of a rich industrialist, or your biological father is an impeached former US president. The draft shouldn’t be just kids either. A 28 year old writer from Hoboken has just as much at stake, and to offer, as a 19 year old kid from LA. A 33 year old can carry a rifle as well as a 21 year old.
I have an uncle in the service and I have two college roomates in the army, one of whom shipped out two weeks ago. One of those two actually enlisted in Oct 2001, as felt there was no other thing to do.
I got a chance to speak with him before he left. He will be stationed on a carrier and as such, feel relatively safe. But he’s still frightened of being shot at and I don’t blame him.
However he made the case better than Bush did. Iraq most definately has these awful weapons (weapons that drove him to go to the sperm bank before he left for fear he’d return sterile) and we know that they have no moral objection to using them. Of the people and nations that he can use them against, many of them are friends either politcially, socially or economically. How can we not do something and still call these people friends?
Weapons inspectors have not worked for the last 12 years and no one has any confidence that they will. Sanctions haven’t worked, no-fly zones haven’t worked, and the Iraqi people are worse off because of all the pressure we’re putting on.
So the choices seem to be 1) To ignore him, and hope he goes away 2) Hope he comes to his sense, or is reasonable and doesn’t use his weapons against us or our friends or 3) Go in and do something.
I understand that you are opposed to war, I am opposed to it as well whenever it is avoidable. I would like to hear however, what the opposing viewpoint is. I don’t think anyone thinks that “Do Nothing” is the correct answer. And we have over a decade of proof that inspectors and the other stuff the UN is doing will not work.
So, if not war, then what?
What can Hussein really do do America that we need to waste all these lives and all this money removing him from power? And what will it really change?
Iraq will just get a newer, but equally dangerous leader out of the deal and the lives of people who signed up to defend America, not press W. oil war and personal vendetta, will be lost. (and if recent news stories and the previous “Gulf War” is any indication, we’ll lose more soldiers to accidents and “friendly fire” than Hussein anyway.
No, this country is going down the toilet and W. needs focus his full, undivided attention on fixing America’s domestic problems and quit wasting all this money on Hussein…
While I disagree that pointing out the gaping holes in your reasoning (or lack thereof) counts as being “unspeakably rude,” I do not have children to serve, nor have I had the honor of serving my country. I oppose a draft except in the most extraordinary of circumstances.
However, one of my closest friends is right now stationed on a carrier in or on its way to the Gulf.
So when you smugly suggest that anyone who thinks taking action against Iraq is the right thing do do, or disagrees that it’s all about the OOOOOOIL or “keepin tha peeps down,” well, what I’d have to say to you is…unspeakably rude.
Oh, and here’s something that shows once and for all that the idea this is “Bush’s war” or us acting “unilaterally” is a dámņëd lie:
http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110002994
While I disagree that pointing out the gaping holes in your reasoning (or lack thereof) counts as being
“unspeakably rude,” I do not have children to serve, nor have I had the honor of serving my country. I
oppose a draft except in the most extraordinary of circumstances.
However, one of my closest friends is right now stationed on a carrier in or on its way to the Gulf.
So when you smugly suggest that anyone who thinks taking action against Iraq is the right thing do do, or
disagrees that it’s all about the OOOOOOIL or “keepin tha peeps down” is a cynical warmongerer or a dupe of the GOP or just not as enlightened as you, who don’t have the stomach to watch a speech by a President you disagree with, well, what I’d have to say to you
is…unspeakably rude.
Oh, and here’s something that shows once and for all that the idea this is “Bush’s war” or us acting
“unilaterally” is a dámņëd lie:
http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110002994
Peter… good to hear that you are sceptical of this looming war. Nice to see that the true patriotic America of freedom and democracy isn’t getting lost at all, as it sometimes seems to these days.
I am 23. I am anti-war in all but the most extreme circumstances.
This war is the world’s biggest shell game, and I am shocked that more people don’t see that. 15 months ago, this started out as a hunt for Osama Bin Ladin.
Guess what? We couldn’t find him. He ended up being too clever for us.
Let’s play a little game here. How many times did Bush say Osama Bin Ladin’s name right after 9-11? Now, how many times has his name come up in the last six months, after Bush realized they couldn’t find this scumbag?
But we can’t leave a defeat like this on our record, right? We go after Saddam Hussien, a mission that worked so well when our president’s daddy was in office. At least we know where he is…uhm…we think.
Bush is playing a shell game, and we’re all fools watching him bluster about. This is the yutz who stumbles over his words worse than I did when I asked out my first girl. This is the jáçkášš who wants payback for his daddy’s failure 10 years ago.
And we’re trusting him with the safety and well being of the entire world. In fact, it seems a lot of people support this mindless cretin.
God bless America.
I’m a 22 year old who is currently rather disturbed by the concept of a draft. I have a hard time believing in any war where we can’t convince our own allies that we are doing the right thing, never mind our own citizens.
At the very least, I’d hope we would wait for U.N. support before going off to blow the living hëll out of another country. When was it last time that we started a War without U.N. support because we thought we were right, and conscripted our youth into the army to fight it? Oh yeah…
If not a war then what?
If not a war, then we can put the resources both financial and human that would have gone to war to finding and removing the root causes of the human suffering behind the hatred which has gotten us to this terrifying place.
In the spirit of “if Hero A fought Bad Guy B, who would win?” If Superpower A really cared about the people living under Tyrant B, and acted out of caring rather than fear and hatred… who would win?
I agree that there is no place for rude comments, but what do your questions truly have to do with the US taking action to defend itself?
Should we put off ANY military action until everything on the domestic front is perfect? How do we define “perfect”? When, exactly IS a good time to go to war? Daschle and co. bellowed that we need to go to the UN. We did. Now they want to change their own standards for political gain. Nothing new here.
Why, Mr. D, is Isreal’s policy of defense against aggression(one which I support) good enough, but if the US takes steps to defend itself, its foolish? Perhaps because there is NO action W could take that you would be pleased with? Your statements in your political entries sound like Carville’s partisan vitriol on Crossfire(a show I dislike for the same reason on the right and left).
Is Japan the only country where sarin gas could be released in a subway by a group of loons?
Is flying planes into buildings crazy talk?
Is attempting to blow up the WTC from the lower floors an act someone would carry out?
Would anyone attempt to blow up a plane with explosive shoes?
How many attacks must our servicemen endure like those on the USS Cole endure before you are ready to act?
Saddam’s first act as ruler was to execute those whom he saw as a threat to his regime. Within hours he had people marched into the street and executed. Surely such a man would never sell a liter or two of nerve gas to a terrorist group. He’s too busy ripping out people’s tongues. Or instructing his son to do so.
And have you ever stopped to think that perhaps there is a strategic reason why we have focused our attention on Iraq? The whole “you done my Daddy wrong” argument doesn’t hold. W would have to be of the same mindset as Arafat or Saddam and I don’t think even you would agree with that.
If it takes action now to ensure that ny unborn child can go to school w/o worrying about suicide bombers, I’m all for it. And thank God for all the people, from the Revolution on, who fought and died so we can live the life we do.
Forgive me if you found my comments offensive. Such was not my intent.
I am a conservative despite being upper lower class. I believe much of the conservative agenda (though quite a bit more of the Libertarian agenda) because I think it’s right (as in correct…), not because it will make me rich or powerful.
I disagree greatly with the leftist agenda because I just don’t believe it holds water at all. I prefer individual responsibility to government interference, leaving the government to protect not mandate. I also believe you sincerely believe otherwise.
Your question smacks to me of “what will this war mean to me?” not “is this the right thing to do?” Nonetheless, I’ll answer.
I’m not in the service. My brother-in-law is. My nephews are 19 and 18. I have close friends that have been called up. This doesn’t change the fact that this threat should be dealt with.
This war that is being contemplated is not a first-strike, which prevents us from going after other regimes. It is a continuation of a previous war that should have been dealt with over the last 12 years but wasn’t by someone far more interested in domestic affairs (!).
I also think you’re mistaken about the president’s character. He is a good friend of a man I know (sounds like hoo-haw, but it’s not) and he tells me that GWB is a good man, doing a hard job, to the best of his convictions. He is not the selfish powermonger you think he is. Nor is he stupid or immoral. He has different IDEAS than you have. He has been elected to carry those ideas out to the best of his ability.
While I do not agree with everything he does and says, I support him in this.
My neighbor a few years back beat his wife horribly. To take your stance would be to let that continue. To take Bush’s stance would be to step in and do something about it. That’s the right way.
Hey, Mr. David…
As someone who voted for Bush twice – once for gov. and once for prez. I couldn’t agree with your comments about the war more. I think that Sad-ham is dangerous and all, but the justifications given for an all-out war are weak, especially given the current state of our economy.
I think its Ironic that we live in a country that is the only nation on Earth to use a Nuclear Bomb against another country, we have just treatened another nation 60 years later with a “we WILL NUKE you statement” and we continue to build devices of mass destruction. Our citizens are uneducated, fat, lazy, and so easy to manipulate.
Yet here we are more worried about the dangers Iraq poses. I wonder if some countries will band together one day and insist that maybe America is a danger to the rest of the world, or maybe just McDonalds and Paulie Shore
Xavier, we got UN support back in the fall, which France, despite it’s current series of lies, voted in support of. And we do have the support of our Allies. The Czech Republic, Spain, Portugal, Italy, the U.K., Hungary, Poland and Denmark. You know, the New Europe. The people who weren’t Nazi’s and didn’t collaborate with them.
Taking out Saddam Hussein will not stop anyone from using Sarin, airplanes, bombs, or anything else to attack American targets. This war is NOT about those kinds of terror. Crushing Iraq is like stamping out a bunch of ants on the sidewalk: You still have NOT DESTROYED the source of the ants, so you will still have ants.
I am 27 and of draftable caliber, and I do not want to fight in what many around the world (and I) see as a personal crusade on Bush’s part. He has yet to provide the “smoking gun,” and if we’re going to get Americans killed (along with Iraqi soldiers), we’d better know beyond a reasonable doubt that we’re going in with a real purpose.
It is NOT “unAmerican” to question one’s government. It is the MOST American thing one can do, and the one thing we should all do as citizens.
Eric
Why, Mr. D, is Isreal’s policy of defense against aggression(one which I support) good enough, but if the US takes steps to defend itself, its foolish?
Israel is constantly under real attack, while Bush claims Saddam is getting ready to attack us.
Try looking at it this way. I punch you in the face. That is an open act of aggression, obviously.
Now, what if someone tells you he overheard someone else saying I was going to punch you in the face. Does this deserve the same response?
Saddam has never proven himself to be a threat to the American people. Even we attacked him the first time, Iraq didn’t exactly have success against our troops.
Served for 15 years, would still be serving if I could. Was a part of Desert Shield/Storm, Northern Watch, and homeland defense. If asked to I would go back in a heart beat. I believe in my country and I believe we need to act where Iraq is concerned. If we let him get away with all the crap he’s pulled who’s next? I do support a draft and believe that women need to be add to it and yes I am a woman.
I suspect many of your countrymen cares little of what the rest of the world thinks, but what the hëll…here’s my 2 cents. If America wants the support of the rest of the world, then the Bush Jr. administration should come clean and SHOW us the evidence that proves Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. In other words, we need that Adlee Stevens moment you folks keep talking about.
The conspiracy theorists have speculated that perhaps Bush Jr. is relunctant to reveal the evidence as it may indicate that Iraq got the parts for its weapons from America. Remember when Saddam was ally when Iraq waged war with Iran? I usually don’t buy conspricacy theories, but so far this makes the most sense. I mean come on, how did Saddam replaced Bin Laden as the biggest threat to global peace within a year and half?
Look Saddam is no saint, but unlike 91, were not talking about liberating Kuwait. You’re talking full scale invasion, and before you commit to that, you better have the proof for justification. Unless America truly believes its the new Rome of the 21st century.
I’m 37 and female, so I’m not draftable. I don’t have any family members in the service. I am vehemently opposed to this war (and organizing against it politically). Osama bin Laden is a terrorist; Iraq is a source of oil.
All that said, I would strongly support a draft. The armed forces are currently disproportionately low income and minority. A draft would pull in middle and upper class white kids. Maybe the prospect of seeing their own kids on the line would shock some sense into the war mongers.
Peter, I am in the Military, on active duty as we speak. While I didn’t say anything rude to you yesterday, I do disagree with you 110%. At no time can we ignore a threat to our country, or our way of life.
An economy in recession wouldn’t mean a whit if a nuclear device was exploded by a terrorist in down town Washington DC, or one of the other major cities in this country.
While a recession is nothing to laugh at, the greater responsibility of our national security has to be the President’s top priority. Must be!
My concerns with this war is that there hasn’t been a compelling reason given yet to actually go to war.
I’d like Bush to come out and give the facts. Say this is why we’re going. Present the case to the American people in simple terms and show why we’re going there other than the generalizations and political statements we’ve had so far.
Currently, I don’t have enough facts to back a war. I don’t think a lot of people have enough facts to support a war either. So what’s the harm of giving us the facts, telling us the truth about what’s going on, what they’ve found so far, and letting us make up our minds before we go head first into yet another war?
It just would make sense to me for all of us to know exactly what we’re getting into before we continue to blindly support the action or blindly come out against it …
k9
Actually Juli if you look at the disposition of troops in combat units you’ll find they are disproportionately white and middle class. Minorities in the military tend to go into specialties that don’t see combat. Still want a draft?
This is my problem with the “We Are The Big Boys” argument. If you go over there and start bombing these people all you make are more terrorists. So we have a choice: Either go Cap. Marvel style and try to take over and control the entire world or give peace a chance. Think about it: These children in Iraq (Afghan, i.e others) are being told how we are the evil dictators of the world. So let’s say little Tommy’s brother is in the Iraq army. We easily dispatch him and all his friends. Do you think Tommy is going to believe us telling him “We did this for you.” or will he believe “These bášŧárdš killed my brother. I’ll show them.” Now by no mean do I think that if we don’t attack that Tommy wont become a terrorist. But it’s a higher percentage that he will if we attack. All I’m saying is eventually someone will set off a nuke here. Let’s try to make sure it’s not a Tommy, that we’ve made.
Most of the ‘facts’ are contained within US Intelligence analysis. Obviously intelligence just can’t be given out willy nilly, but next week we’ll begin to see what’s being declassified.
I’m in the Navy and I’ve seen first hand how things work over there. I’ve made two cruises in the Persian Gulf, and I can tell you Iraq is smuggling more oil out of that country than you cn shake a stick at. Not only does he have a pipe-line running up through Syria, but there are between 20-50 ships leaving Iraqi ports full of oil every day. They skirt down along the Iranian territorial waters, hoping to cross through international waters into UAE/Omani territorial waters before the US ships can snap them up. We probably catch one out of 20 or so. And then as soon as you do catch them, the ships go into receivership and are sold at auction within a month to the very same people who owned them previously. It’s all a game.
Well that money from the smuggled oil is funnel back to Saddam, where he uses it to purchase illegal arms, and research weapons of mass destruction. We know for a fact he has mobile labs for gas/biological production and research. We know for a fact that he’s purchased weapons that are illegal. We know for a fact that he’s killed thousands of his own people just in the past 10 years alone. We know for a fact that his people are in contact with Al Qaida operatives, and that they’re harboring some of them inside Iraq.
So excise me for not understanding just how much more information you need. We’re talking about a mad man who’s trying to develop nuclear weapons for god’s sake. How bad would you feel if by some off chance he were to smuggle one device into the US? I bet you’d wish we’d taken care of that problem when we had a chance then right?
We can not allow him to ever have that opportunity. Just because you are not privy to all the intelligence and reasons for going to war, doesn’t mean there isn’t a solid reason for doing so. Last week there was a closed comitte meeting of the foreign intelligence board, wherein every Senator that walked out of that meeting… Republican and Democrat… said there was ample proof of what the President has been saying. That should be enough for us all.
War, if truly justified, cannot wait for perfect social conditions. World War II occured just as the United States was limping out of the Great Depression. Should the nation have waited to do something about the Axis until the economy was running smoothly? Similarly, the United States became involved in Viet Nam during the relative prosperity of the 1950s and 60s. I’m not so jaded as to believe that Saddam is Hitler, but I wanted to make a point.
Frankly, I am not sure what to think about Iraq. Given Saddam’s secular nature, I have doubts about any ties to Al queda. I also doubt that he has any real nuclear capacity. However, nuclear technology is such that the very threat of it should be investigated. The United States, in the 1950s, gave large amounts of nuclear material to third world nations in an attempt to encourage peaceful use. India was able to use this material to jumpstart its own nuclear weapons program, and Iraq was also a recipient of this nuclear aid. Iraq could also have made contact with black market brokers from the former Soviet block, China, or North Korea. It is not impossible.
I also think it would be in our own best interest to begin disarming our own nuclear arsenal. Keeping 10 or 20, on the off chance of outright attack, would probably be prudent, but junking the hundreds, if not thousands, of warheads, is an absolute neccesity. As someone noted, we are the only nation on the planet to have used nuclear weapons in war. I think, in honesty, that we are thus, along with the Japanese people, the only nation that can credibly speak of the potential hazard that nuclear arms truly pose.
And as far as North Korea is concerned, the reason that we don’t attack is because South Korea would surely be hit with either massive retaliation or fallout. Souel(sp?) is within 50 miles of the DMZ. I think that the wisest course of action would be to allow China to intervene. China borders N. Korea, has been the North’s major trading partner, and would probably be far more effective in applying pressure to Kim Jong Il.
I will reserve my full judgement on the matter until Colin Powell makes his case to the UN on Ferbruary 5. Just some thoughts, to be pondered or lampooned as the reader sees fit.
Ben Hunt
Well, I can’t honestly say whether or not I’d support a draft, I’m 26 and male, but I don’t know if I’d be accepted anyway due to chronic knee problems. Due to that, I can’t unbiasdly say if I’d support one or not.
That said, I gaurdedly say this war may be a bad idea. Unfortunaly, I also saw this coming when we went into Afghanistan. While I can’t agree completly with those who say that the president it doing this for revenge, to get more oil, what have you, I think that all of these things have SOMEthing to do with it. I truly think that no conflict, dicision, or policy is made with pure motives. To think so is nieave. And I don’t say that to insult. Yes, I do think there are tons of ultieror motives at work here, but I don’t think there’s any real evil at work here.
My real worry, is that this is the start of a drive towards imperialism. I don’t think it’s meant that way, don’t get me wrong! But over time, who knows that the next chief exec will do? What policy will they set?
I mean, let’s face it, I don’t think any of us believe that politicions are the most moral of people. One day, we may very well get someone in office who will intend an imperialistic view.
I agree that Saddam is a threat. However, there are tons of other scumbags around the world doing equally evil things to their people and we’re not even paying attention to them. Sure, take out Saddam, but then explain to me why we’re ignoring other goverments that are just as “evil”.
The problem is our government tries to have it both ways. If you do nasty things to your people and you don’t like us, we threaten to bomb you. On the other hand, if you do nasty things to people, but make us money, we turn a blind eye. That’s my own problem with this. Not taking action against SOBs like Saddam, but being half-assed about it and ignoring other SOBs because they benefit us financially.
If Bush wants to go after Saddam, fine, but when he’s done he either has to start getting these other governments to shape up, or else admit that there was more to going after Saddam than doing what’s “right”.
As far as Israel and Palestine, they’re both in the wrong. They’re both killing innocents, Israel’s just doing it more “legitimately”.
I’m 20 years old, certainly draftable. I believe that Saddam is a threat to this country, and if we do need a draft, I’ll be there.
Jim, your comment of “If it takes action now to ensure that ny unborn child can go to school w/o worrying about suicide bombers, I’m all for it.” ignores one thing.
The second worst terrorist act on U.S. soil, and still one of the worst in the world, was committed by a white, non-Islamic American: Timothy McVeigh.
Who do we bomb as a result of that? Did he have connections with Hussein? Doubt it.
I have no love for our idiot of a Canadian Prime Minister, but I was delighted when he spoke out and commented that maybe it was time North America examined how it did business with the rest of the world. Just MAYBE some of that had some bearing on people wanting to blow us up? It doesn’t justify their actually doing it to us, but it’s awfully hard to solve a problem effectively, never mind permanently, until you actually understand its roots. Now, we’re just content with trying to blow it up. And, guess what? It works in the short term, but it does seem to have a nasty way of coming back to bite us later. Look at how well blowing up Germany worked in WW I, for example. It wasn’t until we changed our approach post WWII that we started seeing more effective results.
Maybe it’s way past time we started reconsidering a lot of things?
And, yes, I agree Sø-dámņ Insane is bad news and needs to be dealt with. I’m just not sure it’s being done for the right reasons. I keep thinking … where was the U.S. (or anyone else) when people were being slaughtered in wholesale lots in Rhuwanda(sp?) some years back? You’d think THAT would have merited outside intervention, but, no …
So much for the human race.
I’m against this war, but not the Afghanistan war, or lethal actions to take out terrorists, and I have loved ones who are already in combat situations in other areas of the globe. I am of draft age, and would only support a draft if the military said they needed it, and since they say the exact opposite (they are strongly opposed to it) it’s a moot point.
But none of this has any bearing on my support or lack of support for a war; the only question is, is the war justified? War is only justified when you’ve been attacked, or when there is a clear and present danger. Iraq doesn’t fall into either of these categories, and those who make the argument that it might someday be a threat, ought to ask themselves; where is the line of attacking countries over potential threats drawn, and whom are we entrusting to draw it?
“I agree that Saddam is a threat. However, there are tons of other scumbags around the world doing equally evil things to their people and we’re not even paying attention to them. Sure, take out Saddam, but then explain to me why we’re ignoring other goverments that are just as “evil”. “
The moral argument is valid. I believe that we should work for regime change on any regime that tortures their citizenry. Even so, Saddam went so far as to invade Kuwait. That provides justification. He did not disarm in accordance with the ceasefire so no ceasefire.
If you go after China, you end up destroying the world. If you go after N. Korea, they may nuke Japan. Every pressure we can apply to these evil nations who abuse their populace we should apply that would not endanger more innocents.
If no one acts, Evil will continue to thrive on weakness, appeasement and rationalism, as a crippled Saddam has survived so many more years to continue to abuse and torment his citizenry. And this is why we in no uncertain terms need to use all judicious means at our disposal to move to change those regimes that torture innocents.
That so many here are ready to continue to appease him saddens me greatly. I only hope that those views of appeasement and “containment” does not succeed and the Iraqi people are liberated.
I am past age to serve, though if called upon I would.
I don’t understand how more people need proof about what Saddam has done.
He was told to disarm over 10 years ago.
He didn’t.
Someone has to make sure he does, so we’re going to do it.
My god — the U.N. doesn’t care about Iraq the possibility of what he could do with the weapons he has, but the second North Korea came out and said “we have nukes”, who did the U.N rush to to solve the situation? A little bit of hypocrisy, don’t you think? After all, N.K. “promised” at one time not to develop nuclear weapons but lied without a U.N Resolution against them.
Iraq was told with a U.N. Resolution to disarm, and he hasn’t, but they (the U.N.) don’t care.
How can you have a 13,000 page document of weapon declarations but not show the inspectors the weapons themselves?
And I’m probably draftable, and I would go do it in a heartbeat. I would rather do it than some other person who just “doesn’t get it”.
The whole Iraq argument is being based on things we KNEW the first time around, and I had trouble with that war.
I come from a strong Miltary background, my dad was a Navy recruiter, I grew up on Navy Bases. I like to think I know how the Military runs things.
That is why I didn’t sign up. I have a nephew who is draftable, and 6 months ago I was encouraging him to sign up. He just got out of High School and still doesn’t have a steady job. It would have been good for him, helped him keep up his education and a place to live. Not now, as soon as Iraq came up again I could not get behind that choice. Too much risk.
We had/have Saddam blocked up, he is old. The only thing we had to worry about was that he would take Iraq with him when he goes.
Now we may force him to do that.
Front-line troops disproportionately white, not black
By Dave Moniz and Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The American troops likeliest to fight and die in a war against Iraq are disproportionately white, not black, military statistics show — contradicting a belief widely held since the early days of the Vietnam War.
Read it and weep at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-01-20-army-usat_x.htm
The New Republic, a strong supporter of Gore in the last election (the EIC is a personal friend), came out with this editorial: http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030210&s=editorial021003
How do we know Hussein has chemical and biological weapons? He admitted it in 1998. Defectors revealed it and he confessed to having 1.5 tons of VX and 30000 chemical warheads, among others. The regime has never accounted for them. They supposedly destroyed them on their own without the inspectors. They can’t supply evidence of this, and 16 of those warheads have turned up. 3000 pages related to uranium enrichment turned up in the home of an Iraqi scientist. Hans Blix, a man handpicked to be soft on Hussein, says Iraq isn’t cooperating.
Hussien’s regime stands out in evil. He has special units dedicated to raping female prisoners and sending the videotapes to their families. he’s conducting ethnic clensing against the Marsh Arabs, creating 500,000 refugees. How many here condemned the campaign against Kosovo? If Milosevic was bad, Hussein is worse.
As for him being a threat to the US, his speeches constantly bring up that he hopes to be remembered as the man who brought the United States down. We ignored bin Laden when he used rhetoric like that. Look what happened. Churchill was dismissed a washed up politician trying to use a war to regain power when he warned about Hitler. The same thing seems to be happening here.
Here’s another point of genuine curiosity: if this President’s name had been George W. Smith, would you be condemning him? And does it bother you that you’re on the same side as Pat Buchanan?
PAD-
I am not in the service, don’t have children (or even relatives/relatives with children) who would be required to go, and am a few years shy of 35 and unlikely to be drafted. In short – I have no participatory ties to any military action.
That said, I would go if asked.
And that said, I disagree with everything you’ve opinioned on the “war” or state of the union (including the Animal Farm-Homeland Security parallel). But my being in a position to take a bullet for something you don’t agree with is my choice, just as it is your choice to try avoid such a situation for all involved. After all, you did things to Supergirl I totally disagreed with…
As an aside…after reading through 100+ posts, I was hard pressed to find “unspeakably rude sentiments” in most posts (maybe a handful could be construed as rude). Did you delete out the unspeakable ones, or do you grow thin skinned from your recent U-Decide and JoeQ flayings? (being sincere about the deletions question, jabbing good-naturedly about the flayings…)
Bill
Ben Hunt: Given Saddam’s secular nature, I have doubts about any ties to Al Qaeda.
Luigi Novi: If Al Qaeda were dedicated to hurting America, and Saddam were able to form a relationship with them, do you really think their theistic motives would matter to him?
Let me start out by saying there are some reasonable motives for going to war in Iraq. Saddam is a horrible guy who is a permanent destabilizing factor in the region and getting rid of him might open the door to improvements in that part of the world. There are also some legitimate reasons for not going to war. An intelligent person can either support or oppose going to war in Iraq.
However, whenever people talk about Saddam or Iraq being a direct threat to the United States I can only say….BÙLLSHÍT! COMPLETE AND UTTER BÙLLSHÍT!
Iraq had a large military 12 years ago. We smashed it in Desert Storm and every expert today says the Iraqi military is far weaker today than it was then. There is no actual evidence that Iraq possesses or is close to possessing nuclear weapons. They likely have some bio and chemical weapons, but they lack any ability to use those weapons against the United States. And before you talk about Iraq giving weapons to terrorists, please explain why Saddam hasn’t done that yet or why he’s more likely to do that than North Korea, Iran or any of the other equally evil regimes around the world.
The United States of America is the most powerful and dominant nation that may have ever existed on Earth. The idea that we or our “way of life” are seriously threatened by Saddam Hussein is hysterical, paranoid and fundamentally irrational.
Let me repeat, getting rid of Saddam Hussein may not be that bad of an idea. Childish panic and fear that Saddam might be able to do what the Soviet Union, Nazis and Imperial Japan could not is crazy.
By the way, for all you people worried about America, Osama Bin Laden has murdered more Americans that Saddam…yet how many times did President Bush mention him in the State of the Union?
Mike
To be honest, I am really conflicted on the whole thing. I see this coming was as the brginning of a much larger conflict. We see (in theory anyway) this war as a battle to remove an evil despot and bring freedom to a region. Fine, and nice in theory. But there are way too many people in the world who see it as an attack on their faith. This could turn into a holy war with consequences that we cannot even imagine. I don’t think that anyone is considdering the fallout. Is Saddam a bad guy? Sure. Do we need a war that’s going to make more blood flow in the streets of New York? I don’t think so. Terrorism is a very real threat. We shoule be pro-actively hunting down anyone that is going to attack us. I’m just not convinced that we are looking in the right place.
Just a little thing; I’m not of firm enough opinion to jump in on this issue.
Alan: Xavier, we got UN support back in the fall, which France, despite it’s current series of lies, voted in support of. And we do have the support of our Allies. The Czech Republic, Spain, Portugal, Italy, the U.K., Hungary, Poland and Denmark. You know, the New Europe. The people who weren’t Nazi’s and didn’t collaborate with them.
Um, Alan…
Italy not a Nazi collaborator? Does the name Mussolini ring any bells? Nor was Spain’s Gen. Franco that much nicer.
Another question is: how likely is it that war with Iraq will make us more likely to be attacked? And how much sympathy can we expect from the world if we are? Bush is obviously too stupid to realize this and would prefer to appease his buddies and $ people than to take steps that will truly protect America. If Saddam hadn’t already helped arm terrorists, he certainly did once Bush became completely hëll bent. The recklessness of the drunk driver is still in him, it seems…
OK, good point Alan M. That’s what I get for jumping back to this site between calls.
Let me correct myself:
And we do have the support of our Allies. The Czech Republic, Spain, Portugal, Italy, the U.K., Hungary, Poland and Denmark. You know, the New Europe. The ones who despise the cheese eating surrender monkeys and their schnitzel eating lapdogs as much as we do.
I didn’t make any comments to the previous thread. I have commented to PAD in a private email a couple of months ago that I supported his right to say what he wished, and that no matter the views he expressed I still like the way that he writes.
To answer the questions posed…
1. No longer in service, separted (end of enlistment) US Air Force. Served during Desert Shield/Storm. I would serve again if needed, but my job code (in the AF) has moved so far beyond what I did that I’m not sure I’d be much help.
2. I have a 9 year old daughter, I think she would understand that I had to do my job.
3. A draft is foolish. The volunteer force is much hardier and commited to the job than a draftee would be. We know our job, we ASKED for our job, we weren’t forced to do it. I just don’t understand why Rep. Rangel of New York would want a draft, it just doesn’t make sense.
jeff
Here’s a sentiment I haven’t seen, and apologies if I’m repeating here.
Remember after 9-11, when a lot of people complained that we should have seen it coming, and furthermore, why didn’t we do something about it to prevent it from happening in the first place?
Now, the government has identified what it perceives as a threat, and are taking measures to do something about it, and the same people are complaining that we have no right to do anything.
Hypocricy? You BETCHA.
I don’t know what’s right or wrong in this war situation. I support the war only because I think ignoring the situation would be worse.
And while the military would have to be incredibly desperate to accept me into service, I do have a stepson who just turned 18, and many of his friends are in the service.
sigh I dunno. There are no good answers. Some are just better than others, I think.
Mike
And while I’m thinking about it, just to pìšš øff both sides…
How about this paraphrasing by Bush:
‘Saddam needs to learn that he can no longer ignore the United Nations and the rest of the world with impunity. We will continue in this war no matter if the Security Council or our allies agree or not.’
Whoopsie.
Mike
Alan, I pity you and your ignorance. Really, I do.
As for the talk about war, well, I oppose a draft. I’m 19 and in good health, a prime candidate to be drafted. I also believe I’m a patriate. But our country is not amazing. It’s an evil, corrupt nation just like every other nation on earth. We do good, yeah, but we also do a lot of evil. But I’m getting away from my point. I believe in the ideals of our country, and would fight to keep it free…if it was nessecary and right. A war with Iraq would not be just. The whole world knows that Bush mainly wants to go in there for oil, no matter what the media tells you. Watch BBC America sometime…that’s the way to really learn about our country. If there was a threat to our country or the world like there was in WW2, I would have enlisted in a second. Hëll, just the war on terrorism, against Al-Qaida an’ all, if there was a draft for that, I would have gone. But this is the Bush vendetta. This is wrong.
I am not yet convinced that we should attack Iraq – but here’s more proof that the US is not acting alone:
from http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110003006
Wednesday night The Wall Street Journal published a letter from eight European leaders expressing full support for America, putting to rest the “unilateralism” canard.
The Associated Press reports the leaders of Slovakia and predominantly Muslim Albania have also pledged to back America. The Irish Independent reports that the taoiseach (Irish prime minister), Bertie Ahern, “expressed his annoyance” with the countries whose leaders signed the letter–not because he disagreed but because they didn’t invite him to sign it. “Mr Ahern said he would have signed the letter if asked, but had not.” And the Canadian Broadcast Corp. reports that Prime Minister Jean Chr
Here’s a good argument for action rather than appeasement:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell.html
So, we have agreement from our allies. Now all we need is the presentation of evidence. Perhaps it is yet to come, but so far we have been shown nothing but innuendo and shadows. I eagerly await any actual “evidence” Bush has before jumping into a war at a time when the top rich are being rewarded with tax breaks while the vast majority of US citizens get stepped on and our rights are abrogated.