Since we are on the current affairs around here

[bellelass]

I've been hearing a lot about this lately and frankly it upsets me just a little too much. I dont really want to go back to the states as it is, but a war with Iran would be the kicker. :greenguy:

[Sijuki]

I guess if you figure the war on terrorism starter just after 9/11 then by time George leaves office it will be about 7 years. So sure I guess it could last that long. Although thus far this is not a very deadly war compared with wars in the past. At least not for the U.S.

While our economy may be driven by fossil fuels we do have the technology to become more reliant on other sources of energy. Advances in solar and wind power have been great over the years. Not to mention natural production of methane from our trash and cow manure. While most cities burn off the methane as a waste product some places use it to provide electricity to homes. Cow Power
7 years ago I drove an electric Ford Ranger that was a prototype, while fossil fuels would provide the battery energy it still produces a bit less waste, or in my area part of that energy would come from nuclear power. With some funding and good research we should be able to lessen our demand on fossil fuels and become less dependent on one source of energy.

[LiveFreeorDie]

But once a requirement is set for one it will be set for all, as we are all equal, regardless of who our father is.

Unfortunately, this is not really true...witness GW's ability to stay home in Texas flying planes for fun during Vietnam. The priviledged have always had a way out of the draft if they so desire. My point on the number of politicians who have children in the military was to demonstrate that is far easier to commit people to war when you do not have a personal stake in it. In the middle ages, ruling families lead their troops into battle (and their troops usually consisted of all able bodied sons) which in theory at least is fair. Today, the connected get to stay safe at home and the poor fight the wars. If you don't think this is true, look at the stats. The notion of our military being entirely volunteer is mis-guided. Are you truly a volunteer if you grow up with little education from an impovershed area with no prospects for making something of yourself other than the military (or dealing crack??) Even though this post sounds like it comes from a bleeding-heart liberal, I am far from it. However, I would wager a sizeable number of our "volunteer" troops would have chosen another career path if they truly had options....and I hope this comes across as not disrespecting our troops....because in no way do I want to do that. Every single one deserves an incredible amount of respect and admiration for their sacrifices. Societally, however, the system is far from perfect. That's my only point. Good overall discussion on this thread.

[Sijuki]

Originally posted by LiveFreeorDie@Feb 10 2005, 12:31 PM

Unfortunately, this is not really true...witness GW's ability to stay home in Texas flying planes for fun during Vietnam. The priviledged have always had a way out of the draft if they so desire. My point on the number of politicians who have children in the military was to demonstrate that is far easier to commit people to war when you do not have a personal stake in it. In the middle ages, ruling families lead their troops into battle (and their troops usually consisted of all able bodied sons) which in theory at least is fair. Today, the connected get to stay safe at home and the poor fight the wars. If you don't think this is true, look at the stats. The notion of our military being entirely volunteer is mis-guided. Are you truly a volunteer if you grow up with little education from an impovershed area with no prospects for making something of yourself other than the military (or dealing crack??) Even though this post sounds like it comes from a bleeding-heart liberal, I am far from it. However, I would wager a sizeable number of our "volunteer" troops would have chosen another career path if they truly had options....and I hope this comes across as not disrespecting our troops....because in no way do I want to do that. Every single one deserves an incredible amount of respect and admiration for their sacrifices. Societally, however, the system is far from perfect. That's my only point. Good overall discussion on this thread.

My comment was once you require a presidents offspring to be enlisted, everyone will be required.

As for poor underprivileged people being in the military, that is a choice they have to make. It's a risk for a pay off that will give them a better future. I too weighed the risks of being granted a free education and bonus money to join the armed forces. I chose not to, for some reason i felt it had been too long between wars. But for those same underprivileged is it any worse then living a life on the streets risking getting killed in their own neighborhood? At least if they survive this they can go to school on the gov't. They are paid, they get a roof, they get 3 squares, and skills.

The world is not always pretty. Unfortunately there are people on the bottom. Always have been, always will be for one reason or another. A career in the military to profit from it later is a risk just like everything else in life. Someone like George Bush working in Texas during Vietnam is his deal. The wealthy enjoy privelige cause they can afford it.

In the middle ages it was seen as a high honor to have your son go into battle and survive and kill the enemy. If he died in battle he died a hero. That was a big part of life back then. There were always wars going on, do you not think that the poor weren't forced into war then? Who do you think the poor slobs that got slaughtered on the front line were? Surely wasn't the Kings Knight Son, he was cavalry. The poor despots of society were on the front line with a lance or sword knowing they probably weren't walking away alive that day, and if they did they had better thank the Lord above. Middle age war was an atrocity compared to war today.

War only 140 years ago in the Civil War was pure bloodshed. 26,134 casualties in one day at the battle of Antietam. That is horrible. To compare wars of past with our present situation is almost incomparable. Obviously we value our lives so much more now that we are appalled at 1000 deaths or so after a year of war. I don't see today's military personal nearly as underprivileged as those that fought in wars past, and usually were required to. To join is a choice now, there are other options besides drug dealer and military fodder. Just not everyone takes the time to look into it.

[The Monsignor]

Originally posted by voyd@Feb 10 2005, 07:51 AM

However, I don't think that site effectively discredits him or disproves his theories - only tries to cast vague doubt on him.* Well, dead men can't defend themselves, but I think he definitely has his side of the story on all that too.

Like I said, I would personally agree with some/a lot of the book, but not likely all. He did have his own biases, like his mainstream Christian mythological worldview. And the UFO/"conspiracy theory" field is heavily-infiltrated and rife with sp00ks spreading disinformation. Like you said, intentionally mixing lies with truth. C00per was well-aware of all that though, and basically just presented his hefty book as laying out everything he knew or suspected out on the table. It was just a snapshot of his beliefs at that time - to the best of his knowledge. And he did not deny he could be wrong on things, too. But, even if you could disprove some of it - some of it is still already CLEARLY correct/proven. Nothing has to be either completely accepted or completely rejected. I think that's a realistic POV. Have you read it before?

I have read the book, years ago, at the urging of a friend of mine... I didn't pay it quite the attention I should have, however. (It was sandwiched in the middle of college courses)

The site I pointed out was chosen to illustrate just that point, actually, that if you mix fact with assertions (or falsehoods) it lends credence to the statement as a whole. (I acknowledged that they were biased) I wasn't trying to discredit the author, merely point out that his position needed to be examined more closely.

There is a lot of shadow maneuvering going on out there. And todays rumor may be tomorrows crackpot theory (or fact). The will of the government changes, and the military, by nature, has to prepare for any scenario, whether or not it's realistic, or actually on the table. (I'm sure there's battle plans in some Top Secret file for the invasion of Canada, or Great Britain, or France and none of those are even remotely likely to happen in my lifetime)

All of this can give the conspiracy theorists fuel for their hypotheses, and with just enough facts to back them up, it makes their ideas more plausible. With the advent of the internet, it gives them a global soapbox with which to spread their ideas, and communicate with others whose worries may very well dovetail with their 'facts'.

Even with a disclaimer that not everything may be true, merely true to the best of their knowledge, it leaves it up to the reader to do the research and try to separate fact from assumption. I just wanted to emphasize that, rather than pooh-pooh his assertions. I frankly agree that people do things for selfish motives, not for the greater good. I find it hard to believe, however, the far reaching conspiracies that are supposed to be behind it. (imagine getting large groups of selfish people to do anything together)

My father subscribes to a lot of right-wing conservative newsletters, I get my fill of their conspiracies. I particularly dislike the assumption that because it appeared in the bible, it's incontrovertable fact. It's a blindness on their part, and they assume that it must be the same for everyone else. Usually, I wind up tuning out as soon as those sorts of assertions are made. To me, it demonstrates someones inablility to view things objectively and casts doubt on their research methods.

Other than that, I generally agree with you.

[LiveFreeorDie]

Hey Sij - I really do not disagree with anything you said in your last post. I just wish that more people in power today had experienced war if they are going to be so quick to wage it. Out of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld there is zero war experience. Rumsfeld was a Navy pilot for a couple of years....big deal. Cheney has no military experience, and we all know what Bush did. It boggles my mind that Rumsfeld and Cheny would be put in positions having so much influence over military operations, strategy and planning with absolutely no practical experience or a first hand understanding of what it is like to be in a kill or be killed situation. Your points about the military being a way out for many people is true...but that does not change the fact that that is not nearly an ideal situation. We as a society could greatly decrease the overall numbers of people in that position in the first place if we focused more on education and on developing ways to raise up poor communities and actually give those kids hope instead of despair. I am not talking about welfare programs either because that helps no one. You have to admit that the money being spent in Iraq is mind-boggling...especially in light of all the cuts in educational programs being announced. In case no one has noticed...our students are not exactly world leaders in intellectual prowess as it is. Shit...I guess I wandered off track. This could be debated forever and I respect everyone's opinion. Like most major national issues there is not a clear right or wrong answer....just a lot of gray.

[voyd]

Originally posted by The Monsignor@Feb 13 2005, 04:12 AM
I frankly agree that people do things for selfish motives, not for the greater good.* I find it hard to believe, however, the far reaching conspiracies that are supposed to be behind it.* (imagine getting large groups of selfish people to do anything together)

Well, but a lot of people with common goals DO network and form alliances in order to execute plans in their own common interest. There is really nothing all that mysterious about gangs, frats, mafia, cults, Skull & Bones, Freema5ons, I11uminati, NSA, CIA, Al Queda, etc etc. All the same concept. It is actually human nature to form packs and find strength in numbers. Some are just more underground, secretive, powerful and exclusive than others.

Again, let's take the NSA - a HUGE government agency, for example. It was officially denied to exist up until just like 8 years ago. Same with Area 51 - which may still not exist legally. These are not solitary individuals - but mass organizations that are intentionally kept hidden. We have billions of dollars funneling into Black Projects every year - do you know what they're all for? I can tell you that people working on them are not even allowed to tell their own families what they're working on.

Otherwise, I think we basically agree that most topics out there are mixtures of truth and fiction and it is up to the discerning reader/witness to use critical thinking to try to separate the 2. Absolutely, I totally agree.

[worldwidemike]

Good discussion, guys.

I do have to disagree with LiveFree's assertion that most of the military is lower class folks who have no other choice other than crime. I think that is pretty innaccurate, when you consider that just about any service industry job pays better than our military. So, clearly they are NOT in it for the money.

I enlisted in the military between high school and college. My family is solidly middle class, I scored high on all my aptitude tests and I had a wealth of choices ahead of me. In the end, on the basis of my experience with six years in the Army Reserve, I decided the military was not the career for me.

I would wager that our men and women in uniform across the country and world enlisted for an incredibly diverse number of reasons. Some for family tradition, some as a economic way to pay for college, some for the experience. We could even take a poll here with all our military or ex-military folks.

Reason enlisted?
Me: Always interested in the military, read tons about it, and felt it was important to try something that was so intriguing to me.

Peenkfloyd?
Lil Wings?
Monsignor?

If you guys don't mind, why did YOU initially enlist? And if it's not too personal, what is your family's economic backgrounds?

I apologize if this is too sensitive of a topic, but I'm curious to see how accurate/inaccurate LiveFree's assertion is...

worldwidemike

[kingcrazylegs]

Originally posted by worldwidemike@Feb 14 2005, 08:41 AM
I would wager that our men and women in uniform across the country and world enlisted for an incredibly diverse number of reasons.* Some for family tradition, some as a economic way to pay for college, some for the experience.

Yea, I think so too. My family is one of those tradititional Catholic families. The military seems to be one of those traditions.... my grandfather, dad, two brothers, and now my oldest nephew all were/are in the military. I think for some folks there is a strong conviction to do that sort of thing. I don't have it personally, but I've grown up around it.

I also have a couple of friends who joined because they wanted the experience. They actually didn't want to go to college but wanted something to get there
career started.

What ever works I guess

[LiveFreeorDie]

I do have to disagree with LiveFree's assertion that most of the military is lower class folks who have no other choice other than crime

That is not what I was trying to say and I would never use the term "lower class". I apologize if my analogy was a bit of an extreme case which perhaps it is but I was trying to make a point. However, there are statistical facts that show the military is made up disproportionately of minorities and people from lower income situations. When I say disproportinately...I mean when compared with the overall population demographic of the U.S. I DID NOT want to slander or portray military personnel in any bad light at all. Two very good friends of mine served in the Marines and they are both great people. There are many, many tremendously talented and bright people in the military. What my point was is that if a certain percentage...even if its only 10% or 20% of the people that join the military do so because it seems as if it is the only way out for them, then that is unfortunate. I guess my overall point was that a truly voluntary military would be one formed by people that all had equal opportunities to choose alternatives...and I will maintain that a certain population did not feel they had equal opportunity to choose alternatives. I am sorry if I offended anyone...that was not my goal AT ALL. Our country offers the military as a way to better yourself...but couldn't we do a better job of offering college as well? What would happen then to recruiting....if the average person who could not afford college on their own was given a choice.....military service....or college with a required non-military national service job? Here is an excerpt from a NY times article from about a year and a half ago that discusses demographics, (along with a lot of other things). Take it for what its worth. Sorry again for any offense taken.....none was intended.

Signing Up - Recruiting Office as Melting Pot...

Compared to their contemporaries in civilian life, the armed forces have a greater percentage of minorities, a higher proportion of high school graduates and better reading levels. As a group, about 60 percent of enlisted men and women are white; they tend to be married and upwardly mobile, but to come from families without the resources
to send them to college.

While blacks make up about 12.7 per cent of the same-age civilian population, they constitute about 22 per cent of enlisted personnel. Perhaps most striking is the number of enlisted women who are black: more than 35 percent, according to Pentagon figures, indicating not only that black women enlist at higher rates, but that they stay in the military longer. In the Army, in fact, half of all enlisted women are black, outnumbering whites, who account for 38 percent....

The Race Issue - Equal Opportunity on the Battlefield

Though Hispanics are underrepresented in the military, their numbers are growing rapidly. Even as the total number of military personnel dropped 23 percent over the last decade, the number of Hispanics in uniform grew to 118,000 from 90,600, a jump of about 30 percent.

While blacks tend to be more heavily represented in administrative and support functions, a new study shows that Hispanics, like whites, are much more likely to serve in combat operations. But those Hispanics in combat jobs tend to be infantry grunts, particularly in the Marine Corps, rather than fighter or bomber pilots.

"The Air Force is substantially more white, and the officer corps is substantially more white than Latino," said Roberto Suro, director of the Pew Hispanic Center, which issued a report last week on Hispanics in the military. "So you won't see Latinos flying airplanes over Iraq."...

What Lies Ahead – A New Draft or a Warrior Caste?...

Those who warn of a warrior class cite a study by the Triangle Institute for Security Studies in North Carolina showing that between 1976 and 1996 the percentage of military officers who saw themselves as nonpartisan or politically independent fell from more than 50 percent to less than 20 percent. The main beneficiary of this shift has been the Republican Party.

"The officer corps has always been more conservative," said Richard H. Kohn, a professor of military history at the University of North Carolina. "But even so, the change there is dramatic."...

..."When the troops come back, many of them will get out; they'll have some memories," said John Allen Williams, a retired Navy captain who is a political science professor at Loyola University Chicago. "A military that self-identified as different from, and possibly superior to, the civilian society it served, with a distinct set of
values, and that might be willing to act on them opposed to civilian leaders? The thought that we could have that in this country is just inconceivable."...

Specialist Markita Scott, the reservist from Columbus, Ga., said she thought a draft was unnecessary. "Already with callbacks you can see the morale is down lower," she said. "They're like, `I had a job.' Just think if you had a whole draft of people who didn't want to be there. I think of that guy who threw the grenade - you wonder if
there would be a lot more like that."

[lilwings]

Well, for me... it was either the military or being the dictator of a small South American country... ok, not really.

I am from a fairly well- off family, good traditions, good morals, and some military tradition (grandparents, parents, uncles, etc have all been NCOs). My dad is a defense contractor for electronic warfare systems and aircraft survivability systems. I have been flying airplanes since I was 16. I have been interested in helicopters since 17. For me, the military was a natural progression in life for me to become a helicopter pilot. I like the lifestyle, I enjoy having a measure of responsibility in my life, and I am not scared of stress (I tend to excel with it actually). I also have a sense of loyalty to the people I work with. I am not a warmonger, I don't enjoy killing (though I have had to do that here), and I can't say that I am all that fond of being shot at (or shot down).

I think that most people in my line of work (scout/ attack helicopter pilot) have a higher standard of living and education (many of us are prior service NCOs and enlisted soldiers who opt for commissions to learn to fly). I didn't join for the college money... but it was a rather nice perk (130,000 for private education can be a little painful without help). There are countless different types that join the military... some want perks, some are looking for life validation, some are just looking for adventure.

I never expected to deploy for a year to Iraq (I never expected to go to war), but that's the risk you take. That's what you train and sign on the dotted line for.

[The Monsignor]

My reasons for joining are kind of a mixed bag of nuts. My family was wealthy, I was college bound (hell, I got in on SAT scores I took in the 8th Grade) but home life was crap. Drugs, abuse etc. I literally had an epiphany. (fade to introspective moment here)

I was in high school. Because of my home life, I really didn't get along with mainstream. I hung out with the stoners. A couple of these guys that I thought were pretty cool had broken into a mine shed in Arizona (where I lived) and stolen a bunch of explosives. We went to an abandoned gravel pit to set it off. We had at least 50lbs of dynamite, but only one blasting cap and no blasting machine or wire. We cobbled together about 100ft of wire, and the one guy had the brilliant idea that he'd use the car battery. The rest of us ducked behind a berm waaay far back. He hid behind his car (an old beat Ford P.O.S.) and touched the terminals. BOOM! The stuff goes up. We jump up and see that the shock wave blew all the windows out of the car. My buddy is laughing, stupidly, with a really bad concussion (nosebleed, ears bleeding etc) the other two guys with me think it's just the funniest thing in the world. As I'm standing there, these dirt clods start falling out of orbit and we're getting pelted with huge chunks of earth. At that point, I realize, I'm in high school, this guy bleeding out the ears in front of me is almost 30 years old, no girlfriend, no job, lives with his mother, and is so oblivious to how close to dying he just came that he thinks this is funny. I got this flash of me in 10 years being just like him.

In order to get out of the house, and away from those people, I pretty much made a clean break... Joined the Army, moved away, quit the drugs, stopped associating with losers, and started trying to figure out exactly what I wanted to do with my life.

16 years later, I have an accounting degree, a job (both military and civilian) that I enjoy doing, and skills to fall back on in hard times. The military bought me some time that I badly needed to get my shit straight.

Now, I'm an EOD technician in the Army National Guard (currently in the middle east, go figure) with a pretty decent unit. Plenty of challenge, and excitement (boy howdy) and a great job as a civilian when I get done with this. (The civilian job not only allows travel, it requires it!)

I don't by any means, think that this is the job for everyone. (no more than I want to be an accountant, for that matter) but it did well by me.

[worldwidemike]

Thanks, guys!

worldwidemike