Badnarik campaign challenges another Democrat about conscription

Discussion in 'Politics' started by tpahl, Aug 6, 2004.

  1. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    http://www.badnarik.org/PressRoom/archive.php?p=728

     
  2. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/tuccille5.html

    To be an equal oppurtunity critizer, this article questions the republicans plans for a draft.

     
  3. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    I just noticed todays position statement on badnariks homepage is on the draft. It goes into more detail on his opposition to the draft.

    http://www.badnarik.org/Issues/Draft.php

     
  4. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Thanks for the link! I found some other things here that I think are worth taking a look at.

    I guess one of the things that bothers me in 'debates' has been the attempt to 'shrug off' a point one knows is not winnable. Note the use of the hightlighted 'regardless' in the Badnarik quote below? In effect, that is an acknowledgement that more money would, in all probablility, render a draft unnecessary. Which contradicts the original message that people are not supporting the war.

    I read yesterday that the Army, the only branch which enlistment numbers were falling short of need, is more than doubling, the sign-up bonuses available: You can read more here: http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=23648

    Another thing that is missing from the entire discussion of the military benefits and salaries being too low, which I still do concur with, is the admission that the case has been grossly misrepresented, based on what I've heard from friends and read. Here is one explanation, from a woman who served for a number of years:

    http://baldilocks.typepad.com/baldilocks/2004/08/my_how_some_peo.html



    Now the following I personally agree with. While I believe that service is something that we should all do, I do not think anyone but parents should be able to 'coerce' anyone into forced labor. Parochial schools certainly have the right to make it part of their curriculum, you can opt out of that school. I don't think the public schools should though. (Note: my district's Middle Schools and High Schools do require service hours). As far as WHERE are troops are stationed, well I guess I am comfortable letting DOD and State argue it out.



    I just thought this might broaden the discussion a bit.
     

Share This Page