How Exactly Do We Fight Compulsory the "Civil Defense" Army?

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Frenchy

I pretty much agree with you, but I also feel that if your willing to accept and enjoy the freedoms and opportunities that this country affords you, you could at least support it and build on it with your service.
There was a time in this country where this would have been a moot point.

I look back at how many people I went to school with chose to serve as a career just to get RIFd about 5 years shy of their 20 (1996) and find the answer as to why this is no longer a moot point.

[robinsre]

Originally Posted by Frenchy

I pretty much agree with you, but I also feel that if your willing to accept and enjoy the freedoms and opportunities that this country affords you, you could at least support it and build on it with your service.
There was a time in this country where this would have been a moot point.

I agree. A man has a duty to serve his country in the same way a man has a duty to protect his home and family.

No one can FORCE a man to fulfill his duties though. In much the same way placing a gun in the hands of a man unprepared to defend himself is a danger to himself and others, an individual who disdains his military duties and is slothful, ignorant, negligent or spiteful places himself and his armed comrades in danger.

Better that we keep the military as a voluntary service.

I also believe that everyone has different talents and abilities. Military life suits many folks, and this is their prime method of service to their country. I think that's wonderful. For other individuals, I think that other methods of serving one's country are a better use of their talents and abilities. My father never served in the armed forces, but spent his years working in the private field diligently to design and implement many of the devices that kept us on the cutting edge of military technology during the cold war. You'd be hard pressed to convince me that his service was not as important as those who have served their country at arms.

I have never personally served in the armed forces. I have a great deal of respect for the men and women who have, however after hearing many of their stories I don't feel that I would adjust as well to military life as others do. If I were drafted, or knew my country needed me I'd gladly accept the burden but until that time I think I can better serve my country where I am.

[Frenchy]

Very well stated robinsre. I can't argue with any of it.
The idea of "service" was part of my family heritage, so it was easy for me.

[AZXD]

I am in favor of encouraging those who want to volunteer, and making it as easy as possible for them to obtain the knowledge required to make good choices about what is available to volunteer for .... But mandating, and especially penalizing those who do not volunteer ... Nope ... I'm not in favor of that.

[Frenchy]

Originally Posted by AZXD

I am in favor of encouraging those who want to volunteer, and making it as easy as possible for them to obtain the knowledge required to make good choices about what is available to volunteer for .... But mandating, and especially penalizing those who do not volunteer ... Nope ... I'm not in favor of that.

I agree. A carrot works better than the stick, in this instance.

[Ishpeck]

Let's step back and look at this, though. BHO/his staff want to force people 18 to 25 years old to do three months of basic training and some community service....

... In all likelihood, it's going to be a nationalistic indoctrination program where some people can feel self-important and put on orange vests to direct evacuees at their next natural disaster.

I'm not worried about the "civil defense" force being much like Hitler's brown shirts simply because I'd pit my marksmanship against a buffoon with a glowstick. Any day.

What bothers me is the attitude that a human being can be treated like gov't property. I hold nothing but the highest respect for REAL volunteers. But this mandatory service business is just jacked up. If your country was really free and really worth fighting for, you wouldn't need to REQUIRE service.

[Etta Place]

Originally Posted by Powerman

I have yet to ever hear an exact explanation of exactly what the hell he want to do. It seems that Obama was trying to mobilize those that felt left out and with out a voice. He wanted to take all that antiwar sentiment and give it a direction. He wanted to show he wasn't about handouts but about hard work.

So he said all these things like the civil defense force and community service and earning money for college and all this crap. However, I never heard any specifics about what exactly was the problem he was trying to address and what exactly he was going to do. I just took it as a bunch of election bull$hit.

He has mentioned this defense force a lot, yet no specifics. I haven't got a clue what it would look like, or even if the government can legally wield such a force. The Constitution is quite specific about military and National Guard. Smoke and mirrors as far as I concerned.

I have posted the explanation for this force, but people here continue to distort what this civilian force is.

[ichy_trigger]

Originally Posted by robinsre

I agree. A man has a duty to serve his country in the same way a man has a duty to protect his home and family.

No one can FORCE a man to fulfill his duties though. In much the same way placing a gun in the hands of a man unprepared to defend himself is a danger to himself and others, an individual who disdains his military duties and is slothful, ignorant, negligent or spiteful places himself and his armed comrades in danger.

Better that we keep the military as a voluntary service.

I also believe that everyone has different talents and abilities. Military life suits many folks, and this is their prime method of service to their country. I think that's wonderful. For other individuals, I think that other methods of serving one's country are a better use of their talents and abilities. My father never served in the armed forces, but spent his years working in the private field diligently to design and implement many of the devices that kept us on the cutting edge of military technology during the cold war. You'd be hard pressed to convince me that his service was not as important as those who have served their country at arms.

I have never personally served in the armed forces. I have a great deal of respect for the men and women who have, however after hearing many of their stories I don't feel that I would adjust as well to military life as others do. If I were drafted, or knew my country needed me I'd gladly accept the burden but until that time I think I can better serve my country where I am.

Nothing at all wrong with how you feel and at least your man enough to say it, that deserves alot of respect and kudos to you.
I happen to be a proud man who was always intriqued with the stories my grandfather told of his service. For me it was a sense of duty coupled with honor and a challenge.

[ForTehNguyen]

conscription and forced servitude is implying you are govt property, and totally against the ideals of freedoms and liberty. You will not have an effective soldier from a person that doesnt want to be there.

[Frenchy]

Originally Posted by ForTehNguyen

conscription and forced servitude is implying you are govt property, and totally against the ideals of freedoms and liberty. You will not have an effective soldier from a person that doesnt want to be there.

I will show you a lot of Vietnam vets that will argue that point.