Close

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 216
  1. #31
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    visit-red-300x50PNG
    I think Koolking is right

    though that we need a draft.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  2. #32
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    "No. Our all-volunteer

    armed forces are that way for a good reason. I am of draftable age, and I am not afraid of a draft. It's not about

    whether a war is "justified" or not, because all that is completely subjective. It's about service on behalf of my

    country. If am called upon, I will step up. As JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can

    do for your country."

    You were called upon. President Bush and others have spoken often about the need for

    our young people to step up and defend their country. Are you now in the military?

    I could have taken you to

    task to explain what I find is a lack of accurate historical information but will just ask that you explain this

    statement (for the moment, I may have more questions later).

    here's what I want to you to explain please:



    "The repositioning of forces further south of the DMZ is to get them out of range of first strike mortar

    fire."

    Now, you may be wondering, why ask that. Well, it's because it's a very definitive statement on

    your part and I'd like to get some background on it, I really am curious.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  3. #33
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    94
    Rep Power
    7458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koolking1
    "No. Our

    all-volunteer armed forces are that way for a good reason. I am of draftable age, and I am not afraid of a draft.

    It's not about whether a war is "justified" or not, because all that is completely subjective. It's about service

    on behalf of my country. If am called upon, I will step up. As JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you.

    Ask what you can do for your country."

    You were called upon. President Bush and others have spoken often

    about the need for our young people to step up and defend their country. Are you now in the

    military?
    No, I am not in the military as I mentioned in my first post here. Although I have

    considered the route my brother has taken when I am done with my current work. He is applying his engineering

    skills to the design of weapons systems for the Air Force. With my particular skills, I'd guess I'd be working in

    biological/chemical research as an officer. Right now I think I'm doing good by working in the civilian medical

    research sector.

    My feelings have not changed. If situations were grave enough whereby a draft is

    indeed needed -- which is not at the current momemt, although you disagree -- and I am selected, I would not resist.




    Quote Originally Posted by koolking1
    "The repositioning of forces further south of the DMZ is to get them out of range

    of first strike mortar fire."

    Now, you may be wondering, why ask that. Well, it's because it's a very

    definitive statement on your part and I'd like to get some background on it, I really am

    curious.
    North Korea has not been bashful about "re-uniting" the Korean people under communist rule.

    Any action in the Korean peninsula would be initiated by a first strike by the North Koreans, which appeared more

    likely 7 months ago but not now. Having American ground personel survive the first encounter would be important in

    coordinating a counter-offensive. If a war did break out in Korea, it think it would still not require a draft. I

    think nukes would be dropped on NK and it would be over before it really even gets started.

    I'd be happy to

    answer any more questions. This is an interesting discussion.
    Last edited by Biohazard; 09-25-2005 at 12:32 PM.

  4. #34
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    October 4, 2005 latimes.com

    : National News Print E-mail story Most e-mailed Change text size

    THE NATION
    Army to Lower Bar

    for Recruits
    By Mark Mazzetti, Times Staff Writer


    "WASHINGTON — Facing recruiting shortages brought on

    by the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has decided to accept a greater number of recruits who score near

    the bottom of military aptitude tests, the secretary of the Army said Monday.

    Coming off a recruiting year

    in which the Army fell short of its goal of 80,000 active-duty soldiers, Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey announced

    that the Army would allow up to 4% of its recruiting class to be Category IV recruits — those who scored between the

    16th and 30th percentile in the battery of aptitude tests that the Defense Department gives to all potential

    military personnel.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    The Army until now allowed no more than 2% of its recruiting

    class to be from the Category IV level, fearing that letting too many low-achieving recruits into the Army might

    dilute the quality of the nation's largest military branch.

    The continuing violence in Iraq has made the

    Army's annual mission to bolster its ranks especially difficult in recent months. The Army fell nearly 7,000

    recruits short of its goal for the 2005 fiscal year, which ended Friday. Army officials have said that recruiters

    might be faced with an even bigger challenge during the current fiscal year.

    Harvey insisted that the Army

    was not lowering its standards but merely conforming to Department of Defense guidelines that allow up to 4% of each

    military service's recruiting class to be Category IV troops.

    Yet one Army official said that the policy

    change is also a concession to reality. The Army failed to meet its benchmark for 2005, and decided to widen the

    pool of recruits it could target during the 2006 fiscal year. The Army official spoke on condition of anonymity

    because the 2005 recruiting figures would not be formally announced until next week.

    Before being admitted

    into the military, a potential recruit takes a group of tests known as the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude

    Battery. The recruits fall into categories based on their performance on the aptitude tests.

    Harvey said he

    saw no reason why the Army standards should be more stringent than Pentagon guidelines, and pointed out that the

    Army already allows more Category IV troops to join the National Guard than it does the active duty

    ranks.

    "We had sort of an artificial system. When I asked the question how we got there, I never got a

    straight answer," Harvey told reporters Monday. "They really weren't standards. They were just kind of guidelines,"

    he said.

    Harvey spoke to reporters during a convention of the Assn. of the U.S. Army, a private organization

    that supports active duty and reserve soldiers.

    Harvey said the Army would also ease the service's

    requirement that at least 67% of every recruiting class be made up of recruits who scored in the top half (50th

    percentile or above) on the aptitude tests. The new threshold would be 60%, Harvey said, in accordance with Defense

    Department benchmarks.

    The Pentagon benchmarks were established to prevent the military services from meeting

    recruiting quotas by accepting too many people with low IQs. Despite these parameters, the Pentagon allows each

    service, if it wishes, to set more rigorous standards.

    Until the last fiscal year, the Army had few problems

    staying below the 2% threshold for Category IV recruits. According to data provided by the Army, Category IV

    recruits comprised less than 1% of the 2003 and 2004 recruiting classes.

    The Army's recruiting problems have

    become more pressing as the violence in Iraq has intensified, scaring potential recruits away. Recruiters in 2005

    accepted more individuals whom they might have rejected previously.

    Harvey denied Monday that the Army was in

    the midst of a recruiting crisis, pointing to a series of new initiatives — including increasing the Army's

    advertising budget by $130 million and putting 3,000 more recruiters on the streets — that he hoped would reverse

    the downward trend."

    Sounds to me like another call for you, BioHazard, to enlist!! Just joking.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  5. #35
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    Aren't they called cannon

    fodder?
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  6. #36
    Phero Enthusiast Netghost56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Texas, USA
    Posts
    359
    Rep Power
    6977

    Default

    I scored a 207 on my ASVAB in

    99. That's 66% academic, 97% verbal, and 45% math.

    But in the military's eyes, I don't exist, so I'm not

    worried the least bit about a draft.

    I do worry about my friends, and if I had siblings, I'd worry about them as

    well.

    Three of my cousins have married military men, and they are haggard these days as their spouses are

    overseas. I don't think it's worth the hardship to go through that.

  7. #37
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    94
    Rep Power
    7458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koolking1
    Sounds to

    me like another call for you, BioHazard, to enlist!! Just joking.
    There's always been a call for a

    few good men to enlist in the military, since the founding of this country. Every president, from Washington to

    GWB, has felt that military service is an honorable career option for our nation's youth.

    Falling

    short of recruiting goals doesn't mean a draft is coming. I doubt there is even one general who would welcome a

    draft, much less the rank and file soldiers who's backs should rightly be covered by someone who wants to be on the

    front lines. A draft would weaken the effectiveness of the armed forces IMO, and I do not see how that would

    improve the "morality" among the men and women who serve, as you seemed to have implied.

    I think a

    large part of recruiting shortages is the result of selective negative reporting by the media. If 99.99% of the

    soldiers carry out their duties with honor, then 99.99% of the news stories should focus on the good work that is

    being done. I'm not saying that bad deeds ought to be covered up, but one must really question the sensationalist

    mentality of the media in what it chooses to focus on. Surely, one has plenty of material to use to bash the

    current administration without having to use our servicemen and women as tools for a political

    agenda.

    Anyhow, have you decided to use a third party mediator to make the payout?

  8. #38
    Phero Enthusiast Netghost56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Texas, USA
    Posts
    359
    Rep Power
    6977

    Default

    Media? Ok. I don't think

    billing the military as a great career move is right. The military is a tough job that requires you to go against

    what you believe. They don't show the killing in their recruitment commercials.

    And I'm primarily against

    their recruitment tactics where they prey on the lower class people. Our military is turning into the French Foreign

    Legion.

  9. #39
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    from the Army

    Times:

    October 04, 2005

    Senate gives nod to
    recruiting older citizens

    By Rick Maze
    Times

    staff writer


    Legislation allowing military recruits to enter service up to age 42 and to create a new

    $1,000 finder’s fee for service members who tip off recruiters to good prospects has received tentative approval in

    the Senate.
    A package of 81 approved amendments to the 2006 defense authorization bill unveiled Monday includes a

    recruiting and retention plan, proposed by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and prepared by the Army, that also:



    Raises the maximum enlistment bonus.

    • Allows people with prior military service to get more than one bonus

    for joining the reserves.

    • Increases the maximum bonus for officers joining the reserves.

    Sen. John

    Warner, R-Va., the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman who submitted the package of approved amendments, said

    the 81 amendments in it represented those on which agreement had been reached between Democrats and Republicans

    during the two-month delay in work on the defense bill.

    Warner said the package has amendments offered by 68

    of the 100 senators, and that he and Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, his committee’s ranking Democrat, would urge its

    adoption when the Senate gets back to work on the bill, which could be this week.

    Raising enlistment and

    re-enlistment bonuses is the military’s traditional response to past problems in manning the force, but increasing

    the maximum recruiting age and paying a referral bonus are new ideas, both aimed at the Army and its recruiting

    difficulties.

    The current age limit for active-duty recruits, 35, would increase to 42 for the all of the

    services.

    The provision is not controversial because it is expected the military would use the new authority

    sparingly. The Army is the only service to express interest, and Army officials told the House Armed Services

    Committee earlier this year that the new authority would be used only for a few critical specialties.

    The

    finder’s fee idea, however, does come with some controversy. Under the proposal, a member of the Army, Army Reserve

    or Army National Guard could receive a $1,000 bonus for referring a person who has never served in the armed forces

    to a recruiter.

    For the finder to get the fee, the potential recruit would have to enlist in the Army, Army

    Reserve or Army National Guard and finish basic and advanced training. No payments would be given for referring an

    immediate family member, and anyone in a recruiting or career counselor assignment would be

    ineligible.

    McCain’s proposal limits the number of bonuses to 1,000 as an initial test and would cancel the

    program on Jan. 1, 2008.

    Army officials have talked about wanting to offer bonuses of up to $2,500 and

    another new enlistment incentive of up to $25,000 that could be used as a down payment on the purchase of a home.

    "

    are nursing homes next stop for recruiters?

    BioHazard, I'll be replying to you shortly.



    Alas, no one here has stepped up to the plate to hold the dough so it's back to plan A. One of us pays up

    on the 1st of Jan 2005. However, should I lose and I'll be confident that I've lost if nothing happens prior to

    Dec 25th, I'll get the cash out to you then as I will have a lot to do shortly after that.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  10. #40
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    94
    Rep Power
    7458

    Default

    Koolking, I don't see how

    opening the recruitment requirements suggests that we are heading towards a draft. One thing you have overlooked is

    the long-term political agenda of the Bush administration. They are establishing dominance of the Republican party

    for generations to come. Bush has appointed Hispanics to positions of power, he's kissing Vincente Fox's ass, not

    touching the illegal immigration issue, making deeper inroads with Black churches, and has appointed "stealth"

    conservatives (one a woman) to the Supreme Court in order to appear more bipartisan. I see Republicans gaining even

    more seats in 2006. All of this is negated by the re-instution of a draft.

    If anything, it will be a

    Democrat who will re-institute a draft. I remember there was one Democratic congressman (forget who) who proposed a

    bill last year to re-institute a draft in order to force ruling presidents to be more prudent in using military

    force (since now their relatives are liable to be drafted). A draft amounts to political suicide.

  11. #41
    Full Member wood elf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    158
    Rep Power
    7041

    Default

    Many nations around the world

    use a draft. Is it such a terrible thing? Some have a fine military tradition where others do not. Is it likely that

    the problem is leadership, principle and patriotism rather than the draft itself? Two fine examples. Switzerland has

    a draft but has a fine and honorable military. The French Foriegn legion was volunteer but had no such reputation

    for their behavoir.

  12. #42
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    Armies are sometimes called

    upon to settle civil unrest. Up until Hurricane Katrina, USA Federal troops were never called upon, Constituional

    requirements were honored. Neither were armed security company contractors called upon. All Federal troops today

    are volunteers and have been for some 30 years now. The Army has been changed from a concept of "citizen-soldier"

    to "professional warrior". In contrast, the Soviet Red Army had been, up until the demise of the Soviet Union,

    made up of mostly conscripts with a cadre of professional officers and nco's. During the counter-coup attempt by

    remnants of the Soviet regime, Soviet troops with heavy tank support were ordered in to give some teeth to the

    counter-coup elements holed up in the Kremlin. 1000s of protestors outside of the Kremlin were in grave danger.

    But, a miracle happened, the mostly conscripted Soviet Army troops refused to shoot their fellow citizens. The

    counter-coup was finished off without bloodshed.

    Up until it seems yesterday, the United States government

    was not acknowledging any serious problem with the Avian bird flu. Now, the Commander-in-Chief, President George

    Bush, is suggesting that only the Army will be able to handle possible forced quarantines of specific geographical

    areas that my be affected by this flu. This could get interesting.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  13. #43
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    You make a good case for the

    draft. An army of citizen soldiers would seem less likely to fire on their fellow man. My biggest fear is a

    government that is becoming more and more oppressive. The use of an all volunteer service to quell the masses is a

    scary thought.

    The other side of it is the overall poor quality of the soviet army. Rather than rely of skill

    the soviet army relied on massive number making a lot of young people not much more than living targets for their

    opponents.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  14. #44
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    "The other side of it is

    the overall poor quality of the soviet army. Rather than rely of skill the soviet army relied on massive number

    making a lot of young people not much more than living targets for their opponents."

    That's exactly true and

    one big reason the Soviets (behind closed doors though) were never really considered a serious threat to USA

    security. Of course, the general public only heard of the Red Menace to keep them frightened.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  15. #45
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    There's a whole mentality

    discussion here that I intended to address in another thread. In order to maintain the fiction of our need for a big

    government there must always be an outside enemy. Think "1984". Without an outside threat to stand together against,

    much of the government's purpose wanes and they can't have that. Mustn't let the taxpayer funded empires within

    our government be dismantled. Once the USSR collapsed it was critical to develop new enemies to protect us from. A

    majority of government functionality is no more than smoke and mirrors. They create and fill the need where without

    the government's interference those needs would not exist in the first place. I've always found it rather

    appalling that otherwise intelligent people fall into that trap.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  16. #46
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    93
    Rep Power
    6825

    Default

    If they would pass a law that

    makes it mandatory all high school grads must serve a minimum of two years in the military , They would not need to

    reinstate the the draft . We would have plenty of military man power , Not only that it would be a great Character

    builder , For the screwed up youth our society is putting out in the streets today.

  17. #47
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    Hi Michael, the problem

    with your proposal is that the military doesn't need that many people. They really only need a small percentage of

    the pool of 18-22 years olds but even so, they are having trouble recruiting. I sorta like your idea and sorta

    don't. Honestly, not everyone is cut out for it. I would prefer to see them draft in the college age bracket -

    smarter, more level-headed folks.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  18. #48
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    His idea does have merit,

    Koolking. Add the stipulation that only some of the draftees serve in the armed forces. There is a lot of civil

    service work to do as well.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  19. #49
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    that I would go for. Would

    be good for the kids too but they wouldn't realize it for years later.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  20. #50
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    That wouldn't be much

    different than you and me, would it?
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  21. #51
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    94
    Rep Power
    7458

    Default

    There's an ideological problem

    with mandating military service in today's era of America. It's basically inferring that .gov owns each person to

    some extent. The citizens of a more socialistic society might be okay with that idea, but Americans tend to view

    themselves as individuals. Volunteerism and charity, rather than obligatory action, is today's accepted norm.

    Know anyone who is truly happy about the amount of income tax they pay? How many people would be in favor of a

    "volunteer tax," whereby you can pay anywhere from let's say 5-50%?

    I disagree with you guys on the merits

    of a draft. Each generation of older guys has the same negative view of the youth in their era. And in 20 years

    when I'm in my 40s, I'm sure I'll be saying the same thing of the then 18-25 guys. But I actually believe

    today's youth are contributing more to society than in previous eras. Sure, there are more fat, lazy,

    nintendo-playing kids today. But I get the feeling that volunteerism and generosity is also more common among

    today's youth than ever before. Just look at all the different social help groups that exist today. And also

    educational pursuit is as high today than it has ever been. Look at the stiff competition for spots in top tier

    colleges now. So to say that today's youth need some shaping up is a little off-base. Besides, it's not .gov's

    responsibility to shape kids up. That's a job for parents.

    Now, why doesn't the volunteerism of today's

    youth translate to increased popularity of military service? That's a tough one to answer. Possibly, in the

    absence of a grave foreign threat equivilent to the German-Japan axis of WWII, today's youth don't feel a real

    sense of urgency to serve the country in a uniform.

  22. #52
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Biohazard
    There's an

    ideological problem with mandating military service in today's era of America. It's basically inferring that .gov

    owns each person to some extent. The citizens of a more socialistic society might be okay with that idea, but

    Americans tend to view themselves as individuals. Volunteerism and charity, rather than obligatory action, is

    today's accepted norm. Know anyone who is truly happy about the amount of income tax they pay? How many people

    would be in favor of a "volunteer tax," whereby you can pay anywhere from let's say 5-50%?
    Citizens of

    less socialist societies generally recognize an obligation to serve their country. I make a differentiation between

    country and government here. IMHO, our government sucks big time. However, this is still our country and if more

    people took an interest in helping it to be a better place instead of demanding the country and the government do

    for them or even just apathetically sitting on their hands, it would be a different place. What exactly is your

    obligation to your country and what do you do to fulfill it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Biohazard
    I disagree with you guys on the

    merits of a draft. Each generation of older guys has the same negative view of the youth in their era. And in 20

    years when I'm in my 40s, I'm sure I'll be saying the same thing of the then 18-25 guys. But I actually believe

    today's youth are contributing more to society than in previous eras. Sure, there are more fat, lazy,

    nintendo-playing kids today. But I get the feeling that volunteerism and generosity is also more common among

    today's youth than ever before. Just look at all the different social help groups that exist today. And also

    educational pursuit is as high today than it has ever been. Look at the stiff competition for spots in top tier

    colleges now. So to say that today's youth need some shaping up is a little off-base. Besides, it's not .gov's

    responsibility to shape kids up. That's a job for parents.
    While I respect the fact that you have every

    right to an opinion, the belief that older generations have a problem with younger ones is pure tripe. Having grown

    up in the 60's and 70's I'd also strongly disagree that there is more involvement from younger people today. I

    work with a service club, we built a playground recently. Despite all our efforts to recruit younger people to help

    us, the average age of workers was close to 50. Maybe our years has given us perspective on involvement and

    responsibilities that younger people don't have yet because they haven't been there and done that.

    I do agree

    with you that it is the parent's part to provide early education in social particiation. It would be nice if more

    parents would do so. However, that does not change anything once they turn 18, they then have the rights and

    obligations of an adult. The parents work is, in theory, done. Like it or not, social participation is at an all

    time low with young people leading the trend.

    In my own case, I did not start college until completing military

    service. I can tell you from experience how much more I got out of school than the people just a few years younger

    than me who had no real world experience. A lot of bright young people who just didn't get what the prof was saying

    because they had no experience to relate to it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Biohazard
    Now, why doesn't the volunteerism of today's

    youth translate to increased popularity of military service? That's a tough one to answer. Possibly, in the absence

    of a grave foreign threat equivilent to the German-Japan axis of WWII, today's youth don't feel a real sense of

    urgency to serve the country in a uniform.
    You didn't address the other part of the suggestion. For those

    who feel strongly about not wanting military work, what about civil service work? There is a huge, unfilled need

    there too.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  23. #53
    Phero Enthusiast Netghost56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Texas, USA
    Posts
    359
    Rep Power
    6977

    Default

    I'd be interested in taking

    an active role in government (if not for my background), but I doubt my views would be accepted, plus I'd be the

    only green liberal in a room full of redcoats

    Quote Originally Posted by belgareth
    I do agree with you that it is the parent's

    part to provide early education in social particiation. It would be nice if more parents would do so. However, that

    does not change anything once they turn 18, they then have the rights and obligations of an adult. The parents work

    is, in theory, done. Like it or not, social participation is at an all time low with young people leading the

    trend.
    You have to realize what a young person is thinking about when they're 18. Once they graduate they

    need a job (if not already employed), or go to college. With the way things are, I believe more and more will head

    into the workplace right out of high school, which means they'll be working menial jobs. Obviously, many will be

    able to advance, but for the rest, it's a grim future, and with no job security, they won't be much dedicated to

    their job duties. Hence, you have young people drifting from job to job, they've already given up their dreams long

    ago, now they just want to survive, and many are full of anguish, which hurts them and their jobs (and the

    consumer). What's left? For many, acceptance of their place in life, marriage, kids, mortgage. For others,

    drugs/alcohol, crime, and/or depression. Neither outlook is tantalizing to me.


    Quote Originally Posted by belgareth
    In my own

    case, I did not start college until completing military service. I can tell you from experience how much more I got

    out of school than the people just a few years younger than me who had no real world experience. A lot of bright

    young people who just didn't get what the prof was saying because they had no experience to relate to

    it.
    Most young people don't have the luxury of time these days. Financial aid (The ones you actually have

    a chance to get) institutions most often want you to go right to college, the time of eligibility is usually just

    one year, starting in your last semester of high school. If you were to take a full year off (or more) then even if

    you get FA you'll have to pay part of the fees out of your pocket. True, if I were to go back to college next year

    I wouldn't have sleep through all my classes. But most people just can't afford to waste time

    now.

    Quote Originally Posted by belgareth
    You didn't address the other part of the suggestion. For those who feel strongly about

    not wanting military work, what about civil service work? There is a huge, unfilled need there

    too.
    There's no openings in this area. Plus most of our civil employees are the rudest people you could

    meet. That's not very encouraging for those jobs.

  24. #54
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Netghost56
    I'd be

    interested in taking an active role in government (if not for my background), but I doubt my views would be

    accepted, plus I'd be the only green liberal in a room full of redcoats
    Have you tried it? You might

    be surprised. I also wonder why you wouldn't want to voice an opinion if they are so far away from what you

    believe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Netghost56

    You have to realize what a young person is thinking about when they're 18. Once

    they graduate they need a job (if not already employed), or go to college. With the way things are, I believe more

    and more will head into the workplace right out of high school, which means they'll be working menial jobs.

    Obviously, many will be able to advance, but for the rest, it's a grim future, and with no job security, they

    won't be much dedicated to their job duties. Hence, you have young people drifting from job to job, they've

    already given up their dreams long ago, now they just want to survive, and many are full of anguish, which hurts

    them and their jobs (and the consumer). What's left? For many, acceptance of their place in life, marriage, kids,

    mortgage. For others, drugs/alcohol, crime, and/or depression. Neither outlook is tantalizing to me.
    You

    have to realize I was a young person at one time too and have a decent memory.

    So, why wouldn't many, if not

    almost all, of them want the opportunity to do something to gain job skills and build up some educational funds. The

    latter is the only reason I joined the military. Times have been worse and have been better but those that succeed

    in either of those times were the ones who took every opportunity they could get.

    You need to understand a

    different point of view. Dispair and dejection are your choice to make. You are exactly what you decide to be, same

    as I am. Anguish is fine if that's how you choose to live your life but, by what right do you take that out on the

    job you do for somebody else? When you hired on you agreed to do a job. Part of doing that job is doing it the best

    you can despite circumstances. If you are unwilling to do the job to the best of your ability, go find another job

    you'll do better at. To accept a job and not do the best you can at it is to break an implied contract with the

    employer and the public you serve. That's no different than breaking your word any other time and it is always

    wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Netghost56
    Most young people don't have the luxury of time these days. Financial aid (The ones

    you actually have a chance to get) institutions most often want you to go right to college, the time of eligibility

    is usually just one year, starting in your last semester of high school. If you were to take a full year off (or

    more) then even if you get FA you'll have to pay part of the fees out of your pocket. True, if I were to go back to

    college next year I wouldn't have sleep through all my classes. But most people just can't afford to waste time

    now.
    You are contradicting yourself. Are these the same 'most' that are drifting around trying to

    survive? Every grant I've seen has stipulations for military service but I haven't seen them all by any measure.

    You are also forgetting that a person can attend college classes while in the military. The military also has sign

    up bonuses that can be banked and funds matching programs to help build up a nest egg for school.


    Quote Originally Posted by Netghost56
    There's no openings in this area. Plus most of our civil employees are the rudest people you

    could meet. That's not very encouraging for those jobs.
    So? And...? Are you telling me that you would turn

    down an opportunity to move to New Orleans if the government was willing to feed, clothe, shelter and pay you to

    work there for two years? How about Arizona? New York?

    Netghost, I am going to apologise in advance because I

    am going to be blunt and you'll probably be offended.

    So what if you can't get a job in your home town, move!

    I did it, as did many others. The above is defeatist bullshit! I got the same bullshit from one of my daughters

    about six months ago.

    In my daughter's case, she was whining that she couldn't find a job and wanted me to

    take over her car and insurance payments. We made a deal, she would follow my instructions to the letter on job

    hunting for one month, if she wasn't working by then we would help her on a month to month basis. In four days she

    had half a dozen job prospects, in the next week two offers. She went to work. Next she claimed she didn't make

    enough money so we went back to my instructions and within a month she had a better job.

    The process is so

    simple as to be absurd, any child can do it. Dress nicely, carry notes of everything you'll need for an application

    and go to a business area. Start at one corner and enter every business and tell them you are looking for work.

    Don't turn down anything you are capable of doing, be willing to shovel manure or clean toilets and be prepared to

    start work right now. Have a great, not just good, attitude. When you get to the end of the block, cross the street

    and work your way back. Repeat as needed. Once you are working, do the job to the very best of your ability, no

    matter what the job is. After a couple of months you can use your free time to look for a better job if this one

    doesn't suit you. You look for a better job in much the same way but have the freedom to turn down anything equal

    to or less than what you already have.

    My own story is going to sound like one of those "Why, when I was your

    age..." tales but I assure you every word of it is true. When I finished high scool there was little work as the

    economy was in a recession. I joined the army. After my release from duty I decided to go to school. The school that

    I wished to attend was about 400 miles away. I arrived there with about $250 in my pocket and all the possessions I

    could carry on my motorcycle. Sold the motorcycle to put a roof over my head and feed myself, bought a bicycle.

    Followed my instructions from above which came to me from my dad who grew up during the great depression. Enrolled

    in school. For the next four years I worked evenings 40 hours a week, commuted by bicycle most of that and attended

    engineering school. Do you want to know all the different ways you can prepare a $0.10 bag of ramen noodles? I'm an

    expert at it.

    Since then I've had a number of jobs, been broke a share of the time and did well some of it.

    Worked my way up to a corporate executive level then started a small business. Damn near went broke my first year at

    that. Now it's a thriving business and I'm one of the most content people around.

    Do you know what the point

    is? The point is I never once told anybody why I couldn't do something. Instead I found a way to get where I was

    going. ANYBODY who wants too bad enough can do the same thing, all it takes is hard work and a lack of excuses.
    Last edited by belgareth; 10-07-2005 at 10:16 AM.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  25. #55
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    "But I actually believe

    today's youth are contributing more to society than in previous eras. Sure, there are more fat, lazy,

    nintendo-playing kids today. But I get the feeling that volunteerism and generosity is also more common among

    today's youth than ever before."

    BioHazard, I do believe you when you say the above. You "feel" it to be

    true. Unfortunately, your feelings and reality are not in synch. I do believe you have a certain amount of respect

    for deceased President Kennedy based upon past posting(s), is that because of his Peace Corps initiative or ??? At

    any rate, back in the 60s the Peace Corps was filled mainly with idealistic youth, mainly of college age and

    somewhat older (22-28). In order for you not to have to feel your way around, why not do some research and find out

    the average age of a Peace Corps volunteer is these days - give it a shot, get the truth and not some feel good

    feelings!!!

    If we had a voluntary tax system we all know the country would be broke in short order (not

    that it isn't anyway). We have a voluntary military though, is it broke? Well I don't "feel" that it's quite

    broke but one might ask the CINCs of the Guard and Reserves what they think? Did you see the reaction to President

    Bush the last time he made a canned rah rah speech in front of a captive military audience? Those boys and girls

    ain't happy, who would be if they were on their way to their 3rd combat tour in almost as many years. Aside from

    all my other reasons why I want a draft (which I will soon chronicle here) let's consider those going over there

    for the 3rd time, might it not be a noble gesture on your part to volunteer and replace one of them? Yes, it would

    be.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  26. #56
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    94
    Rep Power
    7458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by belgareth
    Citizens of

    less socialist societies generally recognize an obligation to serve their country. I make a differentiation between

    country and government here. IMHO, our government sucks big time. However, this is still our country and if more

    people took an interest in helping it to be a better place instead of demanding the country and the government do

    for them or even just apathetically sitting on their hands, it would be a different place. What exactly is your

    obligation to your country and what do you do to fulfill it?

    You didn't address the other part of the

    suggestion. For those who feel strongly about not wanting military work, what about civil service work? There is a

    huge, unfilled need there too
    If someone gains a technical skill through formal education, let’s

    say in medicine, engineering, science, etc., it invariably helps our country be a better place. Technology drives

    our economy while at the same time providing services that generally make our lives more efficient. This is what I

    do, I just happen to be compensated fairly well for it. It might not have the immediate emotional impact equivalent

    to handing out food after a natural disaster, but it’s far from being apathetic. Serving food at a soup kitchen

    isn’t the only way to help our fellow citizens. But in my early adulthood, I have seen many of my 18-25 y/o

    colleagues volunteer for civil service for no pay. Some have volunteered at health clinics between med school

    semesters, some have tutored kids, and yes, some have even built a playground believe it or not. There are plenty

    of universities in the country that are filled with such self-motivated, driven young adults. They must be to have

    made it that far.

    Do I need to pick up a rifle to serve my country? I could (heck I even personally own

    military firearms), and I certainly would if absolutely needed as I stated in my first post. I just do not think it

    is absolutely needed now. And would it bother anyone if I serve in the military as a biological/chemical weapons

    scientist?

    In my own case, I did not start college until completing military service. I

    can tell you from experience how much more I got out of school than the people just a few years younger than me who

    had no real world experience. A lot of bright young people who just didn't get what the prof was saying because

    they had no experience to relate to it.
    Real-world experience can certainly enhance one’s educational

    experience in certain fields of study. Many MBA programs don’t allow applicants until they’ve been working

    full-time for 2+ years. Since I studied natural science, real-world experience wouldn’t have helped me much since

    it’s almost a purely technical field.

    So, I still do not think you’ve made a convincing argument for the

    benefits of mandatory military service. But it seems we do agree that military service can be beneficial for some.

    I just don’t think we need to make it mandatory.

  27. #57
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Biohazard
    If someone

    gains a technical skill through formal education, let’s say in medicine, engineering, science, etc., it invariably

    helps our country be a better place. Technology drives our economy while at the same time providing services that

    generally make our lives more efficient. This is what I do, I just happen to be compensated fairly well for it. It

    might not have the immediate emotional impact equivalent to handing out food after a natural disaster, but it’s far

    from being apathetic. Serving food at a soup kitchen isn’t the only way to help our fellow citizens. But in my early

    adulthood, I have seen many of my 18-25 y/o colleagues volunteer for civil service for no pay. Some have volunteered

    at health clinics between med school semesters, some have tutored kids, and yes, some have even built a playground

    believe it or not. There are plenty of universities in the country that are filled with such self-motivated, driven

    young adults. They must be to have made it that far.

    Do I need to pick up a rifle to serve my country? I could

    (heck I even personally own military firearms), and I certainly would if absolutely needed as I stated in my first

    post. I just do not think it is absolutely needed now. And would it bother anyone if I serve in the military as a

    biological/chemical weapons scientist?
    In other words, you don't feel you should do things to help out

    or that other than earning a living you have no obligation? So, you have a technical degree? Having a substantial

    technical education myself and having worked in technology all my life I think I have a grasp of how much good it

    can do. Your employment mostly helps you, what about the rest of society? You also didn't answer the question about

    doing it as civil service work. Overall, your reply is pretty much what I expected though. Without trying to be

    snide about it, that's a dodge.

    Why should it bother anyone if you served as a chemical or biological weapons

    specialist? We do not use those weapons so any work you might do would be life saving.
    Quote Originally Posted by Biohazard



    Real-world experience can certainly enhance one’s educational experience in certain fields of study. Many MBA

    programs don’t allow applicants until they’ve been working full-time for 2+ years. Since I studied natural science,

    real-world experience wouldn’t have helped me much since it’s almost a purely technical field.

    So, I still do

    not think you’ve made a convincing argument for the benefits of mandatory military service. But it seems we do agree

    that military service can be beneficial for some. I just don’t think we need to make it mandatory.
    I think

    in time you'll see it differently. So, you don't feel some type of real world experience in the natural sciences

    would have helped you? Real world experience helps in many ways that aren't apparent on the face of it. The people

    in calculus classes who had real world experience were better at grasping things too. I think it has more to do with

    a mindset than anything else.

    You still haven't addressed the part about the option of civil work rather than

    military. Would you be adverse to that? You haven't made any case yet for not making it mandatory either
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  28. #58
    Phero Enthusiast Netghost56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Texas, USA
    Posts
    359
    Rep Power
    6977

    Default

    Belgareth, I wasn't wasn't

    speaking of myself, except in the first paragraph. I was just generalizing and giving my opinion.

  29. #59
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8516

    Default

    The you was figurative in some

    cases as well. It's nearly impossible for me to accept "I can't" from anybody, most especially myself. I have no

    sympathy for those who choose their lives then complain or for those that do less than their best. For every bad

    thing that has happened in my own life I can see where my actions put me into the position for them to happen. For

    every good thing, the same applies. The point is still the same; each and every person unhappy with their lives can

    only blame themselves for not choosing another path or for staying on the path they are on. Each and every happily

    successful person can move forward knowing they are creating themselves.

    To be honest, I was quite impressed

    when we all thought the hurricane was coming our way. You got up and did all the right things to take control of

    your life. Not once did you whine about how unfair it was or abandon those around you or wait for others to do for

    you. You showed something of tremendous importance that you would do well to cultivate in all your personal affairs.

    If I seem harsh towards others, you should hear the words I have for myself when my actions are less than they

    should be. Don't ever accept less than you can be and if you are not what you want to be, you are the only one who

    can make it different. That can only be achieved by your own actions.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  30. #60
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    8013

    Default none

    Now all I hope is that they

    discipline any soldiers who sent in pics of war dead/wounded, a national disgrace ended finally.

    "Polk

    County Web site operator arrested on obscenity charges

    Anthony Colarossi | Sentinel Staff Writer
    Posted

    October 7, 2005, 10:23 PM EDT

    Chris Wilson (POLK COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE)
    Oct 7, 2005

    A Polk

    County man who operates a pornographic Web site that also displays disturbing images of Iraqi and Afghan war dead

    sent in by U.S. troops has been arrested on 300 obscenity-related charges.

    Polk authorities arrested Chris

    Wilson, 27, of Edgewood Drive in Lakeland, said his attorney, Larry Walters. Sheriff's officials said Wilson was

    being held at the Polk County Jail with bail set at $151,000.

    Wilson is charged with one count of wholesale

    distribution of obscene material and 300 misdemeanor counts related to 20 online films and 80 photographs obtained

    from his Web site.

    For each film and photograph there are three counts -- distribution of obscene material,

    offering to distribute obscene material and possession of obscene material with intent to distribute."
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Draft possibly could be implemented next year?
    By dping28 in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-24-2004, 04:03 PM
  2. Looks like war is imminent
    By bivonic in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-03-2003, 10:52 AM
  3. Cookbook Draft
    By **DONOTDELETE** in forum Women's Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 12-20-2002, 06:06 AM
  4. Phero Users Convention ? What do you think?
    By **DONOTDELETE** in forum Pheromone Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-27-2002, 12:09 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •