When the draft comes...

2»

Comments

  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    spyguy wrote:
    Iran wouldnt stand a chance against the US military based on those numbers.


    We have our hands full in Afghanistan and Iraq and we aren't even fighting an organized army but a bunch of rag tag militias. I'm not trying to put down our men and women but our military is over- stretched and is not trained and built to fight a prolonged urban style war. We march into Iran and it will be 10x worse than anything we have seen in Iraq.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Kel Varnsen
    Kel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    _outlaw wrote:
    I guess having 9.5 million more people means nothing.


    But how many of those are conscripts who would surrender to CNN? Not trying to suggest it means nothing just wondering since if they force everyone to do military service then that would of course make it look like they have a giant military, even if a bunch of them have little or no training.
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    _outlaw wrote:
    I guess having 9.5 million more people means nothing.

    compared to the US. no it doesnt
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    mammasan wrote:
    We have our hands full in Afghanistan and Iraq and we aren't even fighting an organized army but a bunch of rag tag militias. I'm not trying to put down our men and women but our military is over- stretched and is not trained and built to fight a prolonged urban style war. We march into Iran and it will be 10x worse than anything we have seen in Iraq.

    I'm talking based on his numbers alone. (assuming we are not involved in any other countries) I agree with you. right now, we wouldnt be able to wage an all out war with Iran.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    spyguy wrote:
    I'm talking based on his numbers alone. (assuming we are not involved in any other countries) I agree with you. right now, we wouldnt be able to wage an all out war with Iran.

    Even if we wrapped up in Iraq and Afghanistan we still wouldn't be able to go it alone. I'm pretty sure that The Iranians have learned something from seeing us Iraq. They know that head to head their military doesn't stand a shot at beating us. Those elite Revolutionary Guards will simply blend in with the population. It will be an insurgancy the likes we have never seen.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • stickfig13
    stickfig13 Posts: 1,532
    mammasan wrote:
    Even if we wrapped up in Iraq and Afghanistan we still wouldn't be able to go it alone. I'm pretty sure that The Iranians have learned something from seeing us Iraq. They know that head to head their military doesn't stand a shot at beating us. Those elite Revolutionary Guards will simply blend in with the population. It will be an insurgancy the likes we have never seen.

    We should just nuke them god dang towel heads!


    Yehhhhhhaw!

    Freedom.....Evil Do'ers....With us or against us....The don't like our way of life!


    (The American public is still dumb enough to by the government's BS)
    Sacramento 10-30-00, Bridge School 10-20 and 10-21-01, Bridge School 10-25 and 10-26-01, Irvine 06-02-03, Irvine 06-03-03, San Diego 06-05-03, San Diego 07-07-06, Los Angeles 07-09-06, Santa Barbara 07-13-06, London UK 06-18-07, San Diego 10-9-09, San Diego 2013, LA 1 2013
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    mammasan wrote:
    Even if we wrapped up in Iraq and Afghanistan we still wouldn't be able to go it alone. I'm pretty sure that The Iranians have learned something from seeing us Iraq. They know that head to head their military doesn't stand a shot at beating us. Those elite Revolutionary Guards will simply blend in with the population. It will be an insurgancy the likes we have never seen.

    I'm just talking head to head. i'm sure they would do just find fighting behind women and children.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Nevermind wrote:
    2,369,239 US Soldiers vs 11,770,000 Iranian Soldiers = Draft.


    Good lord ... Its hardly that simple. No one even knows at this point how many ground troops would be needed, or you know, if there will even be a ground war period.
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    “The conservative government is said to be keen to avoid angering Washington over the issue.”

    Nice. Harper IS a lapdog...

    I realize that our ties to the US economy are the main reason we don’t want to piss them off….but enough is enough. We should be promoting other markets instead of tying our lifelines to a sinking ship by appeasing them at every turn….the energy crisis and our bountiful resources are putting us in a much better bargaining position with the US, we don't need to keep bending over for them. anyway...

    I don’t have a problem with US soldiers coming here before a draft…the Iraq war is unjust, illegal, immoral, and crooked as fuck. The US military did not sign up for what they are doing now….and, as mentioned above, the National Guard DEFINITELY didn’t sign up for that. I keep reading that Iraqi refugee family example in the media up here… We wouldn’t be so worried about Iraqi refugees if US soldiers were deserting (or rebelling) en masse.

    As far as not questioning superiors in the military…total bullshit. Read your constitution, and the oath that is taken when joining the military.

    "I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God"
    The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Drowned Out wrote:
    “The conservative government is said to be keen to avoid angering Washington over the issue.”

    Nice. Harper IS a lapdog...

    I realize that our ties to the US economy are the main reason we don’t want to piss them off….but enough is enough. We should be promoting other markets instead of tying our lifelines to a sinking ship by appeasing them at every turn….the energy crisis and our bountiful resources are putting us in a much better bargaining position with the US, we don't need to keep bending over for them. anyway...

    I don’t have a problem with US soldiers coming here before a draft…the Iraq war is unjust, illegal, immoral, and crooked as fuck. The US military did not sign up for what they are doing now….and, as mentioned above, the National Guard DEFINITELY didn’t sign up for that. I keep reading that Iraqi refugee family example in the media up here… We wouldn’t be so worried about Iraqi refugees if US soldiers were deserting (or rebelling) en masse.

    As far as not questioning superiors in the military…total bullshit. Read your constitution, and the oath that is taken when joining the military.

    "I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God"
    The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

    There is no need to single out Harper here ... Another PM would do the same thing. There is a long history of us having to appease our larger neighbor to the South. Harper is not suddenly the problem.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Drowned Out wrote:
    “The conservative government is said to be keen to avoid angering Washington over the issue.”

    Nice. Harper IS a lapdog...

    I realize that our ties to the US economy are the main reason we don’t want to piss them off….but enough is enough. We should be promoting other markets instead of tying our lifelines to a sinking ship by appeasing them at every turn….the energy crisis and our bountiful resources are putting us in a much better bargaining position with the US, we don't need to keep bending over for them. anyway...

    I don’t have a problem with US soldiers coming here before a draft…the Iraq war is unjust, illegal, immoral, and crooked as fuck. The US military did not sign up for what they are doing now….and, as mentioned above, the National Guard DEFINITELY didn’t sign up for that. I keep reading that Iraqi refugee family example in the media up here… We wouldn’t be so worried about Iraqi refugees if US soldiers were deserting (or rebelling) en masse.

    As far as not questioning superiors in the military…total bullshit. Read your constitution, and the oath that is taken when joining the military.

    "I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God"
    The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

    What is this Constitution you speak of.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    reborncareerist wrote:
    There is no need to single out Harper here ... Another PM would do the same thing. There is a long history of us having to appease our larger neighbor to the South. Harper is not suddenly the problem.
    Don't agree that another PM would do the same thing ...but we definitely have a long history of appeasement.
    mammasan wrote:
    What is this Constitution you speak of.
    exactly
  • Kel Varnsen
    Kel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    Drowned Out wrote:
    I don’t have a problem with US soldiers coming here before a draft…the Iraq war is unjust, illegal, immoral, and crooked as fuck. The US military did not sign up for what they are doing now….and, as mentioned above, the National Guard DEFINITELY didn’t sign up for that. I keep reading that Iraqi refugee family example in the media up here… We wouldn’t be so worried about Iraqi refugees if US soldiers were deserting (or rebelling) en masse.

    As far as not questioning superiors in the military…total bullshit. Read your constitution, and the oath that is taken when joining the military.

    "I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God"
    The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

    So if a US soldier signs up for the military and then decides what they are doing is wrong and wants to protest, he should do the time in jail as a sign of protest, not hide out in Canada and expect our country to bail him out.
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    _outlaw wrote:
    I guess having 9.5 million more people means nothing.

    It would mean a lot more in 1862.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    Kel Varnsen wrote:
    So if a US soldier signs up for the military and then decides what they are doing is wrong and wants to protest, he should do the time in jail as a sign of protest, not hide out in Canada and expect our country to bail him out.
    Not sure how you’re defining ‘bail him out’? Do you mean “not deport him”? I doubt these soldiers would move here as permanent welfare-reliant citizens or expect state funded legal assistance…
    They can protest a lot more effectively from Canada than from jail.
    I have no problem helping out someone with the integrity to do the right thing in a situation like this…


    Edit: so if the US military is engaged in an illegal action and a soldiers opposes, you think he should go to jail as a form of protest? That’s messed…what exactly are they doing to deserve jail time?
  • Kel Varnsen
    Kel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    Drowned Out wrote:
    Not sure how you’re defining ‘bail him out’? Do you mean “not deport him”? I doubt these soldiers would move here as permanent welfare-reliant citizens or expect state funded legal assistance…
    They can protest a lot more effectively from Canada than from jail.
    I have no problem helping out someone with the integrity to do the right thing in a situation like this…


    Edit: so if the US military is engaged in an illegal action and a soldiers opposes, you think he should go to jail as a form of protest? That’s messed…what exactly are they doing to deserve jail time?

    But how many of them actually object to the war on moral grounds compared to how many of them who signed up for the military happily collected the all the bonuses and benefits thinking they would serve their time and never have to war. And now that there country is at war they are like "oh crap I don't really want to get shot at" and now are trying to bail on their commitment.

    Not to mention what if someone else in the US thinks that the penalty for armed robbery in the US is too high so he runs to Canada. Are we supposed to accept him as a refugee too?

    And as far as going to jail, I do think if you feel so strongly about something that you think is wrong and immoral and want to take a stand against it you should take responsibility for your actions, its called civil disobedience.

    Plus as much as people throw the phrase 'illegal war" around I am not really sure how it is illegal. Stupid idea of course, but I always though that the way the US and most governments work is that if the president feels that another country is a threat to national security then he has the authority to use the military. If he felt that Iraq was a threat and congress agreed with him (you know the system of checks and balances) then I am not sure how it is illegal.
  • Anon
    Anon Posts: 11,175
    spyguy wrote:
    there will be no draft
    Thank you Mike Gravel. Thank you.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxMOGgUiCLw
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    Kel Varnsen wrote:
    But how many of them actually object to the war on moral grounds compared to how many of them who signed up for the military happily collected the all the bonuses and benefits thinking they would serve their time and never have to war. And now that there country is at war they are like "oh crap I don't really want to get shot at" and now are trying to bail on their commitment.

    I'm sure there are military personel that fit both the moral and 'cowardly' descriptions...it's my opinion that they should all be saying no, but I don't see a US mass-mutiny happening anytime soon....unless there is a draft. If there was a draft, it would mean they were going to invade another country...if that was the case, I'd support the dodgers as well; they have no reason to invade another country.
    Kel Varnsen wrote:
    Not to mention what if someone else in the US thinks that the penalty for armed robbery in the US is too high so he runs to Canada. Are we supposed to accept him as a refugee too?

    Isn't that exactly what we're talking aboot?
    oops...not armed robbery in the US, armed robbery in the middle east.
    Are you really comparing people fleeing prosecution of a violent crime, to people fleeing persecution for not wanting to commit violent crime?
    Kel Varnsen wrote:
    And as far as going to jail, I do think if you feel so strongly about something that you think is wrong and immoral and want to take a stand against it you should take responsibility for your actions, its called civil disobedience.

    Plus as much as people throw the phrase 'illegal war" around I am not really sure how it is illegal. Stupid idea of course, but I always though that the way the US and most governments work is that if the president feels that another country is a threat to national security then he has the authority to use the military. If he felt that Iraq was a threat and congress agreed with him (you know the system of checks and balances) then I am not sure how it is illegal.

    Good point on the civil disobedience.... I'm unsure how many US soldiers have gone this route? makes me wonder how much press coverage this form of protest would be given...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehren_Watada
    I can only speculate as to why more american soldiers aren't following this guy's lead.

    As for the legality of actions in Iraq...On a domestic level, I guess the question they (Americans) need answered is whether BushCo. knowingly misled congress (and the public) in order to go to war?
    ... in keeping with US tradition, we will ignore and avoid discussion of UN law and protest when it involves their military ;)

    Check out the Watada case...the US army can't even prove the legality of the war to themselves! He was given a mistrial because the legality of the war was a political issue that could not be decided in a military court...

Categories