Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That is probably a valid question to ask of individuals. If the US were invaded or threaten then I would volunteer to fight and urge others to do so, including my childern. I think that answers the question as posed.

-Zeno

[/ QUOTE ]

Your answer reveals your feelings on the war, and most peoples I would assume "if the us were invaded or threatened"........ In other words you don't really feel threatened by Iraq!! (I'm not sure of your stance on the war Zeno.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Zeno's answer reveals his feelings about what action he would take if the US was invaded. It gives no opinion on the Iraqi War.

You are now getting away from your original question, which in my opinion, has already been answered.

Unless the draft has been recently re-instated, everyone signed up for the military/reserves on their own free will. Getting sent overseas to fight is part of that package.

Did parents force their kids to join the military? Possibly. Not likely in every case. I stopped listening to my dad when I was 14.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

Everyone over 18 that supported 'the war' should go and volunteer for the military? Is this your stance? I am not trying to be sarcastic. Just want a clarification and to point out the consequences of what I think you are implying (I could be wrong).

-Zeno

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

[ QUOTE ]
That's kind of where I come down.

For what it's worth, would you feel better about a candidate who answers the death penalty question with something like:

"I would want him executed. That is precisely why I support dispassionate juries to decide these things. We want cool minds to make these decisions beginning with a dispassionate legislature and ending with an unheated jury. If my son were killed, I hope and pray that our system of justice wouldn't want me deciding the fate of his killer."

[/ QUOTE ]

What I think isn't important. I'm not the typical voter. I don't think the typical voter would respond to an answer like that. Its too cold.

Its tough to answer that question in an anti-capital punishment way without seeming like a wimp.

For what its worth, I oppose capital punishment, but my opposition has nothing to do with whether it is right or wrong to punish someone with death.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

I would be proud for my sons to choose to go into the military when they grow up. If they so choose, then I would expect them to go to war if called upon. I probably wouldn't be able to sleep, and would worry myself to death, but I would want/expect them to go.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone over 18 that supported 'the war' should go and volunteer for the military? Is this your stance? I am not trying to be sarcastic. Just want a clarification and to point out the consequences of what I think you are implying (I could be wrong).

-Zeno

[/ QUOTE ]

You're missing the point. The point isn't "An open heart surgeon couldn't go and fight cause they would need him here to save lives.." The point is, if the war is just, it should be so to the point where you would want to go and pick up a gun yourself. That's all.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

i grew up during the draft. so then that was a proper question as the poiticians got their sons out and sent the rest of the countries kids to die.
now they are mercenaries and fight for pay. even if they sign up thinking otherwise that is really what they are. but it is unfortunate that many join thinking it is patriotic. and turns out that they are really just pawns for the politicians to play with.
too many times in history has the services knowingly had many harmed for bad purposes. such as lining up our troops in trenches and making them watch the atom bombs go off so they could see how many went blind. salute that flag. or on the beaches of europe having wave after wave get gunned down untill the bodies piled up enough on the razor wire so others could get through. i didnt see any officers leading those parades.
war is hell and shouldnt be entered unless it means your survival.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

[ QUOTE ]
i grew up during the draft. so then that was a proper question as the poiticians got their sons out and sent the rest of the countries kids to die.
now they are mercenaries and fight for pay. even if they sign up thinking otherwise that is really what they are. but it is unfortunate that many join thinking it is patriotic. and turns out that they are really just pawns for the politicians to play with.
too many times in history has the services knowingly had many harmed for bad purposes. such as lining up our troops in trenches and making them watch the atom bombs go off so they could see how many went blind. salute that flag. or on the beaches of europe having wave after wave get gunned down untill the bodies piled up enough on the razor wire so others could get through. i didnt see any officers leading those parades.
war is hell and shouldnt be entered unless it means your survival.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you very much.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

First off, where is the evidence that soldiers were lined up in trenches to see how many would go blind? Not some website, evidence please? More importantly, the second part of your quote:

"or on the beaches of europe having wave after wave get gunned down untill the bodies piled up enough on the razor wire so others could get through. i didnt see any officers leading those parades."

Ray, what in you talking about in terms of officers not leading the men at Omaha beach? CO's and NCO's were the ones in the field leading those men onto the beach, and actually died in a higher percentage compared to the enlisted men they led. Obviously you can't have generals leading the first wave due to their strategic importance, but plenty of brave officers went in with their men.

Also, it was not the "piles of bodies" on the razor wire which helped the men get through places like Omaha beach. It was the percentage of them that got past the beach to the shingle and helped flank the defensive emplacements. There was a massive ship-bound artillery bombardment proceeding the battle, as well as flybys by Marauder bombers and parachute drops designed to hamper / disrupt the defenses. At every beach except Omaha did those measures prove successful in creating a relatively safe landing.

Any careful study of WWII will contradict almost everything you wrote in your post. Instead of pure cynacism towards the politicians that lead our country into military action, we should remember that at the time of the events in question, Adolf Hitler ruled Europe and was not planning on giving it up without a fight. Those in power had to make difficult decisions, and every possible outcome involved the unavoidable death of brave men. Don't confuse the present situation with the real dangers we faced fifty years ago. Vietnam, Iraq, and WWII are not the same no matter how much equivocation you want to heap upon them.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

It is a great question and it is precisely what the President of the United States should ask himself everytime he sends our sons and daughters into combat.

And the answer should be "only when it's absolutely necessary to protect our national security".

The fact that people in the military are all volunteers now is irrelevant. Yes, they should expect to go when it is necessary but only then.

Re: Send your loved ones to war?
 

They should expect to go when they are called to go. It's not your determination when that is the correct time, nor is it theirs. If you are not prepared to go to war for your leaders, DO NOT SIGN UP TO DO IT.