Sept. 11, 2003

[Scottler]

Pippin-I'm not saying they don't see combat.  I'm saying that, according to their charter, they are not part of the military.  That's all.

Second.  For Crumbso.

You guys are talking about freedom as being what America is about but mandatory National Service isn't exactly the freedom of choice.

Mandatory enlistment in the military would not be in violation of the First Amendment and "Freedom of Choice", because the choice being referred to is that of your religion.  The logic behind your analogy would mandate that criminals not be required to go to jail, despite being convicted, because they choose not to go to jail.  Not going to happen.

I however don't believe in absolute freedom and my country, (Britain if you don't know), isn't exactly free as the primeminister, I think, still has the power to anounce a state of emergency though I could be wrong about this.

This is not an example of anything discussed in this thread.  Of course, the leader of a nation does, and should, have the right to declare a state of emergency.

In my opinion the service should not have to be part of the department of defence and the coast gaurd sounds like an excellent option.

The reason we suggested mandatory military enlistment was not solely for the purpose of defending our country.  It was also mentioned for the purposes of instilling some sense of responsibility, teamwork, leadership, and discipline in those who enlist.  While yes, the Coast Guard does these things, there are plenty of services which don't.  By saying it doesn't have to be military service would be counterproductive.

The point also about the Army only being there to defend the country is not exactly, at least I feel, accurate.

Yes, it is.  The military is in place for one reason and one reason only.  Self defense.  I'd like to hear an example of when it was used for something else.  



Again for Crumbso.  Your reference to this current war did not go unnoticed, even though I can be very dense at times.

Look at it this way Guy A is you and you think Guy B looks a bit dodgy, in fact you've come across this guy before (sound familiar yet?). So you lunge at this guy and pummel him into the ground..... not exactly defense. Don't get me wrong, I am in absolutely no way against a necessary war but I think that at least we should wait until the guy getting beaten up asks for, or shouts for, help or someone has strolen, (with no intent on moving off), onto an island that is owned by you

This is not an equal representation of my A, B, C analogy, for a few reasons.  

1)  C is not, in this case, defending another country.  C is defending itself after a direct hit on its own soil.  (September 11th has been linked directly to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden multiple times.  Financial support, as well as training facilities, have been found in both Iraq and Afghanistan.)

2)  The United Nations passed several resolutions to disarm Saddam Hussein, none of  which have any indication that Hussein followed them, because he would not let anyone into his country, which was also in violation of the resolutions.

3)  President Clinton also bombed Iraq during his 8 year administration, and by his own admission, he wasn't sure that Saddam had gotten rid of the WMDs.  

[Crumbso]

Ok ok calm yourself.

but please tell me why non-military team building services that provide a sense of responsibility are counter productive?

I was reffering to all armies of many countries when I was talking about self defence. There are plenty of examples for instance to name an obvious one the Napolionic wars, don't forget until the whole Iraq thing you guys were good allies with the french in fact they played a big part in the war of independance you may not have won the battle of Yorktown ( I think thats the rightone) without em. If you examine US foreign policy in south america, I was quite surprised at this while researching for an essay I was writing you will find a few time were undue military force was used.

The logic behind your analogy would mandate that criminals not be required to go to jail

Well really thats just what I assume freedom of choice should be and besides thats what the point of my belief of not having absolute freedom. I don't live in the US so I don't know about all these ammendments.

The first gulf war is a legitimate use of the army as King Fahd actually formally requested US intervention in the conflict.

The US has been thought by the rest of the world to have been used in an illegitamate way. The last time the ICJ (International Court of Jutice) judged illegitimate U.S. intervention in a civil war (that in Nicaragua), the United States government simply ignored it.

I don't think the US army is overly abusive in fact its the same as many other countries (like Britain) but it can make mistakes we just need to accept that.

OK I will no post anymore of my opinions of the subject.

[Scottler]

Noooooo, Crumbso...this isn't me all riled up.  lol  I'm perfectly calm.  Personally, I LOVE opposing viewpoints.  I've said it here many, many times.  I'd much rather have people disagree with me, because at least then I know they're paying attention!  So please, until a moderator deems this thread political and locks it up, share your opinions, even if they're wrong!  (I'm so joking when I say that!)

Okay, so now for my (perfectly calm) rebuttal.

[qutoe]The US has been thought by the rest of the world to have been used in an illegitamate way. The last time the ICJ (International Court of Jutice) judged illegitimate U.S. intervention in a civil war (that in Nicaragua), the United States government simply ignored it.[/quote]

That may or may not be the case, I don't know about Nicaragua.  However, the rest of the world needs to remember that we as a nation do not NEED their approval to do ANYTHING.  We were attacked almost two years ago, and we've finally got leadership in place that has what it takes to stand up and say "STOPPIT!"

I don't think the US army is overly abusive in fact its the same as many other countries (like Britain) but it can make mistakes we just need to accept that.

Mistake or not, that's the decision which has been committed to by our leadership.  One thing you learn in the military is that the definition of "discipline" is (Say it with me OTTOL):

DISCIPLINE IS THE INSTANT WILLINGNESS AND OBEDIENCE TO ORDERS.

This means that sure, mistakes might be made.  But it's not my job, as a Marine, or as an American, to question those decisions, for they've been made with far more  knowledge on the subject than I'll EVER have.  They've been made for a reason, and that reason might just be to save my life.  That's good enough for me.

[Crumbso]

Aahh fantastic someone who also likes to discuss views as long as it stays like this it will be fine. oh yeah I will share my opinion then.

I was in the army cadets for a period ( about 2 years to be precise) and what I learnt was that most of the people the real army including CO's in it had very set priorities in the order of

Fellow Troops
Family
Friends
Country
Queen.

It may be very different in the US but I agree quite strongly with these priorities.

I think it is VERY important that the US does listen to what the rest of the world thinks of it otherwise it might lose the support europe or maybe other countries in the western world and then other terrorist organizations may sureface and turn their attentions to the west they do exist in europe take, for example, ETTA (I don't know if it was spelled that way though)

DISCIPLINE IS THE INSTANT WILLINGNESS AND OBEDIENCE TO ORDERS that may be true but it may also apply to self discipline as well. The only reason I would ever put my full effort into a conflict if I thought that my family or friends were in danger.

it's not my job, as a Marine, or as an American, to question those decisions, for they've been made with far more  knowledge on the subject than I'll EVER have.  They've been made for a reason, and that reason might just be to save my life

While that may be true I have always kept the view that the people who run the government are and always will be humans and it is in human nature (as already mentioned) to fight over sometimes insignificant differences in opinion. The motives of war are not always what they seem and power goes to some peoples heads. War is never fought unless there is something to gain whether it be freedom or money or even peace or many other less reputable causes.

[Scottler]

There are two objectives to the Marine Corps, and they are, in this order:

1.  Mission accomplishment.
2.  Troop welfare.

They have to be done in this order, because if you worry about what LCpl. Jones is thinking, you could get the rest of your fire team killed.

Second, as Americans, our lives, and those of our families ARE in danger.  This has been proven time and time again by radical fundamentalists who disapprove of our philosphies, and the only way they see fit to solve the differences is to irradicate our very existance.

Cases in point.

1.  Lebanon, 18 April 83-A car bomb detonates killing 61 people, including 17 Americans.  Islamic fundamentalists claim responsibility.

2.  September 11, 2001-19 Islamic terrorists hijack four commercial airliners and kill nearly 3,000 people.  While no responsibility has been claimed, there have been direct links to both Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

We ARE in danger.  It's no longer an issue for foreign soil to resolve.  It's on our backdoor.  If we don't stop it now, it will get into the house and all hell will break loose.

[OTTOL]

This means that sure, mistakes might be made.  But it's not my job, as a Marine, or as an American, to question those decisions, for they've been made with far more  knowledge on the subject than I'll EVER have.  They've been made for a reason, and that reason might just be to save my life.  That's good enough for me.

  As a marine yes, the footsoldier, or even the lower and mid level officers, need to unquestioningly obey orders(with rare intances like the My Lai massacre being the exception), for the MILITARY machine to run smoothly. As citizens, we need to be involved, and if the majority disagrees, try and act. There ARE situations, where the average citizen does not have all of the facts, and cannot make an accurate judgement as to what is the best course of action. But the "Powers that Be" are sometimes guilty of living in a "bubble", and cannot always be trusted to make the best decisions. Unfortunately, as a citizen, you usually cannot affect the outcome of individual events, only vote for the individuals that you hope will make the proper decisions. This most recent war is a prime example. Many, if not a slight majority of Americans were against the war. Personally, I think it was necessary, but they used a "sledge hammer", when they should have used a scalpal. The reason being, wars in the current environment, are fought with the TV camera, more than the rifle. Ultimately once the decision was made(hammer or scalpal), we, as US citizens, need to stand behind our government, or risk looking like fools. Something which is occuring now, due to the internal conflict amongst our own political parties. The "bad guys" know this and are banking on it.

[Smoke2much]

I am agreeing with OTTOL here.  Hyperions statement about blind obidience does have a place in the military.  In the rest of the world we need to be questioning our elected representitives constantly.  We need them to account for every decision that they make and ensure that if they make the wrong ones they don't get a second chance.

Will

[loomex]

Though the debate about the military is a good, intelligent one, that is not what this post was intended to be. The intent was to discuss what you all are doing to remember or how you are paying  tribute to the victims and families of the attacks.

I am sorry if it sounds like I am being an a$$  about this, but to me, knowing that I watched thousands of people die in an instant kind of hits me hard.

Chris

[Smoke2much]

I see your point Loomex, but at least it is vaguely linked to the topic and it has not digresed to food yet, which is what usually happens...

Will

[OTTOL]

I can appreciate that, and as seems to be the case more often than not, we started talking about relativity theory and ended up talking about tuna fish sandwiches! (figuratively speaking of course) But where praying or donating or crying may be one way to show respect. Talking about what we have done since and why, and the importance of Patriotism, are also very relevant and important.

[OTTOL]

LMAO
Will, I swear I didn't read your last post until I had made mine. (We must have been typing at the same time!)

the topic and it has not digresed to food yet, which is what usually happens...

[Smoke2much]

Some sort of weird psychic thing going on, or perhaps we just know what happens round here...

Will

[OTTOL]

I'm going with the latter!!

[Professor Brensec]

Further to Hype's earlier flag ettiquette.

I haven't read the whole thread but I did go through his post and I don't think this is included.
It's one I've seen constantly broken or ignored, every time a flag is handled by someone other than a trained soldier or someone 'specially versed'.

I don't know if it is so for the US Flag, but it is for the Australian Flag.

"At no time should the Flag touch the ground"

This is usually why 2 men are required for the raising and lowering of the flag in the morning and evening. It's very difficult to do with a full size (or even half size) flag without having it drag all over the ground.

It's always some poor school kid or Boy Scout that gets lumbered with doing a job which should be done by two men.  :(

[Smoke2much]

Except in homage to the fallen.