The Heretic
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2002
- Posts
- 28,592
"Burden" or not, no individual owes one minute of their life to another person without actively doing something to incur that debt. As I said earlier, service to one's country is a gift, whether the giver realizes it or not.moana15 said:That was his point. And like others have said, it isn't a new point, so don't worry, you're probably safe.
Charlie's argument has always been that war is less likely to be waged if there is a chance that sons and daughters in your constituency might be in it. If the burden of defending the country is fairly distributed, you won't have a scary nut job with power (Bush) sending people into battle for needless, stupid reasons. Even a nut would hopefully consider it more carefully before you know saying shit like "bring it on."
However, as the head nut proves, a draft is no guarantee that the burden gets shared across the country. There are those that can still get out of it easy enough same way they get out of paying their fair share of taxes.
Beyond that, most people who have ever been in the military, or are still in it, are of the opinion that they do not want to serve with someone who was coerced into service - or even serve with someone whose heart isn't in it. Indeed, so do a lot of people who haven't been in the military - and rightly so.
As I said, if we need more people in the military, then we should make such service less of a hardship by giving those who serve enough pay and benefits commensurate with their effort and risk.
Saying that forcing people into the military against their will is "social justice" or "fair" is just beyond all logic. Saying it will make us less likely to engage in war is naive and wrong.
The fact that there are at least two posters in this thread who believe this bovine fecal matter just shows that I was right to start the thread in the first place.