OUR DEFENSE POLICY
One sense of the meaning of freedom is the ability to make choices unfettered by any externally imposed restraints. Common sense tells me that given the reality of disparity of circumstance of birth in America that when a person comes of age, it is not consistent with freedom to have an all volunteer military. Circumstance is an externally imposed restraint that does not make the choice to serve, one that is grounded in freedom.
Now, before my statement is misunderstood, it must be said that this meaning of freedom excludes from the discussion those bound by a sense of duty or obligation to serve. It is important that this be said because many are proud to be Americans and feel that it is a privilege to serve one's country. Many serve out of a sense of duty or obligation to the country they love. However, my first sentence is not referring to those that choose to serve out of a sense of duty or obligation. Patriotism is not the circumstance of birth that I am talking about.
Freedom always implies responsibility. The best solution is to create the opportunity for universal service. Citizens need to be able to serve in all kinds of ways that are consistent with their beliefs and freedom. The military is now offering a $20,000 signing bonus to lure people into the middle of the war in Iraq right away. $20,000 is only a lot of money if you don't have it. Is that consistent with our definition of freedom?
A Veteran
It is kind of sad that the military is a way to move up the social economic ladder - the one that America is not supposed to have!
i think in a time of war we need a draft. i think perhaps we should have some type of service draft at all times. perhaps a draft reserve? i am not sure of the how to's. i think the draft should be for men and women. should it be men & women equally? again i do not know. law might dictate it has to be 50 / 50. i think perhaps immigrants should have to serve to be citizens. of course of proper age and in good health. but ultimately shouldn't everyone give a little back, some sacrifice for their country?
You mention that immigrants should have to serve to become citizens. President Bush signed an Executive Order in July of 2024 that puts non-citizens on a fast track to become citizens after one year of honorable military service (see link FastTrack Citizenship).
All volunteer military is merely warmed over Jim Crow Legislation or is a class based predatory practice:
$20,000 Signing Bonus
Mitt Mobile
WHERE ARE THE SHARED BURDEN POLICIES?
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
I agree Phil! We need a greater sense of Shared Sacrfice/Endowment For the Future Mentality beyond what little most of us do now. We so often demand the Entitlements of Citizenship without providing the other half of the equation - The Responsibilities and Duties of Citizenship. We need a rebalancing thru some system of 2 year National Voluntary Service. Give people options that are needed (inner city assistance, eldercare help, military, peace corp, VISTA, Americorp, etc fill in the blank there are many needs out there).
For that 2 years we could maybe provide Education Assistance much like the GI Bill for undergrad or grad school. I would not limit it for age either for the many non-military tasks. Esp on the Military we need to have that reflect America once again and share/spread the sacrfice of making our Country/World a better place. WAY too much burden has been placed in recent years on the brave brave Military in far ramparts and their struggling vastly overburdened families!! We MUST do much more than slap yellow-ribbons on the back of our SUVs!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Two years is a good length of time. Not too much and not too little. Good point that mandatory service is consistent with citizenship in a free society.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
And it could give the young some good eye opening real life experiences at service that may focus their lives better and broaden their horizons and make them better citizens to boot! We can still keep a career path if people that choose the military track choose to stay after 2 years service. The 2 years of schooling freebie would be very enticing esp for the loaned-out-to-the-hilt grads! and I would open some paths for those who chose in Mid-Career or in Retirement (gets younger and younger nowadays it seems) to serve 2 year volunteer stints in a non-military path of their choice. Minimum requirement would be 2 years of something for those under 22. So it would be a combo of mandatory and volunteer really. But service orientation is the key!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I think it is absolutely necessary that the military career path remain open. The military is one occupation where experience is crucial to its readiness. Despite all our technology it is no accident that America's fighting men and women are considered the best! It is because of the fighting experience of senior members that new recruits have the benefit of valuable experience.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
I say bring back the 1930's work programs. Fix bridges, build roads and get a bonus to start a life. In Italy, Israel and the Swiss, to name a few all have mandatory military service. I had a friend who was a Italian citizen (green card working on being naturalized) who went back to Italy for a visit with relatives. He was arrested for draft evasion, and drafted into military for 2 years. He was brought to America when he was 5 years old. How about that America?
Stumpy, the types of programs appear to be without limit. I have some limited contact with a non-traditional educational program whose teaching methods are successful with those that have dropped out of school early because they did not fit the mold. We owe it to these young citizens and ourselves to build such a system into society. What an anti-poverty program too! National service would enhance our ability to turn out a productive citizenry. I only see benefits.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
some sort of national service program is needed. i can only see good coming of this. what are the negatives?
The only downside that I can see with such a program is directly related to whether or not U08 is well received among the voters. Arguments will hit us from all sides that America does not need a draft. Of course, we already know that national service is not merely a return to the draft. Getting a clear message across will ultimately depend on how well the Centrist agenda is received. How well it is received by the voters, IMHO, will depend on how we define the principles that underly the governing agenda we offer. See this link for my take on what still needs to be done.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
One of his Four Pillars of the New American Patriotism is Service to America.
“Giving back to our country is a proud American tradition. All Americans should serve in the Armed Forces or in their communities, volunteer or paid, part time or full time..” In addition to the military and military reserve, there should be a Civilian Reserve where citizens register talents, skills, and willingness to serve. The commitment should be for up to six months if called. The President could activate up to 5000 citizens to handle emergencies (floods, terrorist attacks, international crises); more if Congress approves. Responding to call-up is voluntary, but a civilian reservist could be deployed domestically or internationally as needed. While on active duty Civilian Reserve personnel would receive a stipend, health care, guarantee of return to job.
I have always supported the idea of mandatory military service for all physically and mentally able men and women, similar to what they have in Israel. My son was home on leave last week and we talked about this a great deal. One source of opposition we figured out would be the private sector civilian contractors and the companies they work for.
My son tells me that more and more of the jobs traditionally performed by military personnel are being privatized. Some government functions could be turned over to the private sector, but not the military. He told me that he had complained to his commanding officer several times (to no avail) that if he gets thirty minutes a day of real work out of the civilians in his shop, he's doing good! They spend more time on break in the "Butt Hut" than they do at their job. For this they are being paid 2 to 3 times what the military personnel that used to do that job were paid!
Here's the plan:
Mandatory two year military service for all High School graduates, in exchange for time in service equals college education with a stipend provided for housing, food, etc...,
If you drop out of school, at age 18 you immediately go into the Army for FOUR years and must get a GED by the time your service is up.
What e. mclean says about privatization, is a real and true threat to our country. Young people are being exposed to what his son describes and before long, even a positive and good-spirited young person will be forced to say; "Oh well. Might as well join the crowd."
What e. mclean says about privatization, is a real and true threat to our country. Young people are being exposed to what his son describes and before long, even a positive and good-spirited young person will be forced to say; "Oh well. Might as well join the crowd."
and I,
Agree with mandatory but the rich would bitch.
(is somebody going to tell me how to delete a double post on this forum. Or not?)
Newtoro, the double post has happened to me too. I think U08 has to take care of it. I see nowhere to delete.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
I believe education is the poor man's best chance to right an unlevel playing field. However, I don't believe we can force people to learn and graduate against their will. I think the idea of a national service should be devised to be something distinct from the reinstitution of a military draft policy. A mere return to the draft is a non-starter. I believe it does make to sense to pay those that opt for serving in the military be compensated at a higher rate than those not choosing to take on the risk.
It makes sense that the support functions for the military be based on national service too. There are lots of ways to strengthen America through a better citizenry. Such a system promotes the general welfare and creates a tight weave of the cultural fabric.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
If our nation cannot inspire it's people to voluntarily engage in it's defense, exactly what is it we are attempting to defend?
Conscription is the most vile form of slavery (interesting that the first conflict utilizing extensive conscription was the Civil War).
To force someone to involuntarily participate in murder and mayhem on behalf of a gov't, or policy, they do not support is the ultimate evil.
Those willing to participate in the defense of their country should receive high praise, generous reward, and elevated status among the citizenry. Full tax exemption for life for combat personel would be reasonable.
Any one who's moral conscience, or lack thereof, prevents them from willingly participating should not be forced to do so.
No nation has a right to secure it's continuance by conscription.
It is indeed sad that over thirty years after my service during the Vietnam conflict, people are stll both figuratively and literally spitting on our military personnel and accusing them of "murder and mayhem". My son and I are proud of our service and our country, and committed none of the afore-mentioned atrocities while in the military!
My time in service taught me much. I learned for example, that a leader is responsible for everything those they lead do or fail to do. If you can't accept that kind of responsibility, then you have no business being in a position of leadership! This lesson would be one well learned and adhered to by anyone who wishes to be the leader of the free world, which is what U08 is seeking to find.
The lesson that more than anything changed my life was in how I relate to my fellow human beings. Before I went in the military, I was a typical white boy, raised in the segregated south, who looked on others that didn't look and act and talk like I did, as something akin to lower life forms. That changed when my life was saved by a black marine, who didn't see the racial differences, but only that I was a fellow American in trouble!
I also met a Montagniard who with single minded purpose, allowed himself to be captured and horrifically tortured for the purpose of locating American POW's and helping them escape. He had done this when I met him after he had his feet and ankles crushed to prevent his escape, and still managed to literally carry a wounded and sick GI to safety and rescue!
My son and I both became better persons and citizens, and that is something all of us should endeavor to achieve!
Great story eugene! I think we need to instill a sense of shared sacrifice and a sense that all the wonderful entitlements this blessed country bestows on us comes with the all imprtant other half - the obligations and responsibilities of citizenship. This disconnect is our biggest failing now as a nation as we put way too much burden on our troops (disproportinatey poor and non-white) in far ramparts and their families. It's time for some shared sacrifice and I think mandatory national service would go a long ways to share the burden and maybe instil that lost sense of obligations/resposibilities of citizenship. It may even make our policies wiser and more circumspect in the process.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
My use of the words "murder and mayhem" were in no wise intended to accuse or offend, nor where they intended in a legal sense. Never the less, that is what war is.
Don't confuse national service with an automatic requirement to become a soldier.
Phil
Join the Unity08 Delegate wiki today! http://unity-usa.org
While good leaders are hard to find, great leaders know how to serve.
I assume we speak of required public service. If a nation cannot inspire it's citizens to perform public service, without coercion, we should look to the substance of the nation, and see what generates the apathy.
Whatever profitable enterprise one engages in IS public service. I would prefer the market determine what that service is, rather than some criminal group/commitee/board/czar in the City of Thieves. We have too many "civil servants" as it is.
The military is a dictatorship, and rightfully so. What difference in any required "public servic"? A compelled participation in communism for 2 years? A requirement to perform any task set by the local BOSS without the option of refusal? Spy on your neighbors? Make unwarranted searches?Report "suspicious" behavior? This is worse than the military draft, as it is involuntary servitude without need, much less justification.
The number in this string that support this idea speaks volumes. Quite republican, regulating your neighbors social behavior. Now if you would require the public servants to "donate" 50% of their pay to to your favorite gov't program , you could bring the democrats on board.
The moderate center at work.
We could give people choices/options on the type of service they could go into - military, inner city, peace corps, eldercare, infrastructure improvement, americorp, etc. Shared experiences required at a very young age in service to others would solidify the sense of responsibilities of citizenship that is the true underpinning of all our freedoms JWK. ALL would serve no matter how rich/priveleged or poor/deprived. It would/could be a common touchstone of citizenry that we lost long ago.
There will be plenty of time for profits if one chooses not to stay on for longer than 2 years (offer that stay-0n provision) in their opted service. Also provide them a GI-Bill like program for that 2 years of service. A good education paid for is money in the bank and will enhance those profits for sure later on in spades. The experiences gained will be invaluable! It would give all some context and perspective on other kinds of people other than their demographic and give people some context maybe for what being a citizen means and the larger picture beyond their navels.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Any worthwhile definition of freedom implies responsibility. Why bother stopping at stop signs? Don't laws enslave us if nobody is hurt? How would you fund defense? Serving is one method of funding. It's called a barter system. So, does your definition of freedom make a distinction between how it can be paid for? If you have the loot, that's all you need? You can't just buy freedom. Terrorists don't take dollar bills. Ask any veteran.
Phil
Vet
Join the Unity08 Delegate wiki today! http://unity-usa.org
While good leaders are hard to find, great leaders know how to serve.
Having served in the military, you are quite aware of the distinction between being ordered to commit acts of violence, and stopping at a stop sign; the difference between military command structure, and civilian legal structure.
I agree, freedom requires responsibllity. A conscript is not demonstrating responsibility, they are trying to stay out of jail.
I would fund defense through taxes, just like we do now. "Provide for the common defense".
If volunteers cannot be found, we do not deserve defense.
Groups that merely band together and think that all they have to pay for is defense are either guerilla bands or are eventually ruled by dictators. In which case they implicitly abdicate their claim to civil liberties. All democracies offering freedom as a benefits package involve more requirements than just a few bucks for defense.
Phil
Join the Unity08 Delegate wiki today! http://unity-usa.org
jw, i see where you are coming from, however i see it differently. if people are forced to participate in some sort of national service i feel the far reaching apathy we see in our youth today and the american public in general would be lessened considerably.
just think how this whole iraq quagmire might have been avoided if we had a draft beforehand. people would have looked more closely at the facts and would have had a much louder voice, not like the sheep we were after 911. i think the government would not have been so carefree in spilling american blood for what i feel is a war more about oil and profiteering than security, because again, i think there would have been much more scrutiny about how we approached the aftermath of 911.
I see your point of view quite clearly, and it may be your evaluation of the effects may be accurate. The ends does not justify the means. That's how the Bolsheviks came to power.
delete