Except that history shows that the rich always find ways to shirk military duty, whether it's mandatory or not. I like the in-your-face sentiment of the proposed legislation, but it won't do a damn bit of good. Shrub and Dick will have their war no matter what anyone says and anonymous minorities and poor will fight amd die in it for them.
I agree...there's compulsory...and there's "compulsory" (although I personally don't have a problem with people who shirked Viet Nam).
Switzerland doesn't allow for many "loopholes": if you are physically capable-you serve. Not in the "Swiss Moose Mounties" either-you have to join a real branch and serve (although I guess the naval route is out).
Side note: The Coast Guard probably engages enemy fire more than any other military branch-due to the war on drugs-it'd be nice if we re-evaluated that too...
Anyway, I think we're missing this guy's point-I don't think he actually means to for the legistlation to pass, I think he's passing something in front of the American pubic that he knows will embarrass the Republicans. This is a guy who voted AGAINST the War referendum-wearing a liberal armband unabashedly!!!
I think everybody is really buying into the way the press is portraying this man as a clown. Yeah, I don't think compulsory military is going to solve the countries woes but at least this man is positing something. He's taking a stand and, as usual people are just pointing and sniggering.
As a liberal I'm going to try being a little less clever this year and a little more active (not at all trying to imply that you're not either of those BTW)
I can see why a lot of people WOULD find his line of reasoning objectionable. Viet Nam and the cold war changed the idea of military service from and honorable and necessary institution into something dark and scary. I don't. Almost everyone I know who has served in the military has been changed for the better....
I'm just frustrated with the direction we're going in and a lot of it has to do with others apathy (real or percieved).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2002-12-31 11:10 am (UTC)I'm not bitter. Much.
--sah
(no subject)
Date: 2002-12-31 11:20 am (UTC)Switzerland doesn't allow for many "loopholes": if you are physically capable-you serve. Not in the "Swiss Moose Mounties" either-you have to join a real branch and serve (although I guess the naval route is out).
Side note: The Coast Guard probably engages enemy fire more than any other military branch-due to the war on drugs-it'd be nice if we re-evaluated that too...
Anyway, I think we're missing this guy's point-I don't think he actually means to for the legistlation to pass, I think he's passing something in front of the American pubic that he knows will embarrass the Republicans. This is a guy who voted AGAINST the War referendum-wearing a liberal armband unabashedly!!!
I think he should get a medal.
(no subject)
Date: 2002-12-31 07:08 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-01-01 11:05 am (UTC)I think everybody is really buying into the way the press is portraying this man as a clown. Yeah, I don't think compulsory military is going to solve the countries woes but at least this man is positing something. He's taking a stand and, as usual people are just pointing and sniggering.
As a liberal I'm going to try being a little less clever this year and a little more active (not at all trying to imply that you're not either of those BTW)
I can see why a lot of people WOULD find his line of reasoning objectionable. Viet Nam and the cold war changed the idea of military service from and honorable and necessary institution into something dark and scary. I don't. Almost everyone I know who has served in the military has been changed for the better....
I'm just frustrated with the direction we're going in and a lot of it has to do with others apathy (real or percieved).
Thanks fer lettin me bitch.