An Open Challenge

[ QUOTE ]
That's like saying that if a woman supports abortion, but doesn't have one then she is being a hypocrit.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's not the same. A woman having an abortion can handle it herself, and it's between her and her doctor. But a war involves multiple countries and millions of lives are at stake. To even compare the two shows what an ignoramus you are.

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's like saying that if a woman supports abortion, but doesn't have one then she is being a hypocrit.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's not the same. A woman having an abortion can handle it herself, and it's between her and her doctor. But a war involves multiple countries and millions of lives are at stake. To even compare the two shows what an ignoramus you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think abortion is worse. With abortion, you murder a child that you never gave a choice to. In a war, at least in the current war the US is involved with, the soldiers CHOSE to be there.

Of course, this totally and completely destroys your pathetic idea.

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's like saying that if a woman supports abortion, but doesn't have one then she is being a hypocrit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if someone supports legalized abortions, yet claims to be morally opposed to abortions - then yes, of course, they're hypocrites too. Please review the posts in the thread that I linked, which dealt with Ted Kennedy, abortion, and being a hypocrite.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't expect you to understand.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by this you mean that you won't be trying to argue with me, I'll guess I'll just be left to wonder what deep, profound, and unfathomable arguments you would have made, had I only the capacity to understand.

O cruel Lord, why must you consistently send my intellectual superiors to torture me so? With their intentional misspellings of 'hypocrit' and purposefully poorly-written arguments, how I only wish You would give me the power to comprehend them...

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly you do not have the capacity to understand. You still think its hypocritical to be for the war, yet not enlist. If only you could see past your own smug world view.

I am all for the people who volunteered for our military to do their JOB and fight this war. I CHOSE not to enlist, mainly because I had other more profitable paths I could choose from.

Clearly you do not support the war. I believe you think people who enlist are ignorant. To me that can be the only conclusion you could come to if you even approached rationality given your writings. I am glad that you have a voice, I really am. I am also glad that most people aren't like you. If they were, the US would still be a colony of England.

So, go ahead and fight for your cause, however misguided, uninformed, and grotesquely ignorant it may be. Thank God there are people to protect you from yourself.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
If that's true, and let's just assume it is, because I have no knowledge to the contrary - then the only implication is that you ought to be willing to go fight in any war that you also support; which is what I've been saying all along.

[/ QUOTE ]
The point of the question was to illustrate the ridiculousness of your contention that the military is in some special need of new recruits. The military has and will always need new recruits. Now is not any different.

[ QUOTE ]
No. It may be name-calling, but it's not name-calling without a purpose. War supporters should be reconsidering their support for the war, in light of the fact they're hypocrites.

[/ QUOTE ]
Everyone should reconsider their support of any institution they support but don't actively take part in. See how stupid this is? (Clearly you don't, but you can't say I didn't give you a chance). I support the need of my village having a police and fire department, but I'm neither a fireman or a policeman. Why? Because that's not what I want to do with my life at this time. Being a soldier is no different. You may think it is, but that's because you want to disparage any war-supporter as a hypocrite and therefore not worth listening to. Your arrogance is unbecoming...

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]

Everyone should reconsider their support of any institution they support but don't actively take part in. See how stupid this is? (Clearly you don't, but you can't say I didn't give you a chance). I support the need of my village having a police and fire department, but I'm neither a fireman or a policeman. Why? Because that's not what I want to do with my life at this time. Being a soldier is no different. You may think it is, but that's because you want to disparage any war-supporter as a hypocrite and therefore not worth listening to. Your arrogance is unbecoming...

[/ QUOTE ]

A good, and accurate analogy. Furthermore, I think your conclusion is dead on.

[Rearden]

To the OP:
- As was previously pointed out there has quite possibly been no time frame within which the US military turned away otherwise qualified volunteers... why should they now with a war on? (you'll certainly get to keep your 250 dollars... unless someone knows a recruiter really well and can arrange some fake evidence)
- Calling those that are not currently serving in Iraq phonies, chicken hawks, etc. does nothing.... If you wish to place the burden of total commitment style support on to one party (in this case those that supported the war) why not be fair and give it to everyone. If you support environmentalism why arent you chained to a tree in Oregon? If you support peace why arent you in the Peace Corps currently? As you can/should obviously notice this becomes quite irrational. If the action in this case is meant to be a litmus test of "true" support... then I ask you personally why you are not over in Iraq with the Red Cross easing the suffering of this war in support of peace(judging by the time you've spent arguing this issue on an internet forum Im going to guess that you are not)... and if you choose to man up and answer this question, now that I have put the burden of action on you, please remember that we're only counting total support according to your logic... no donations or protests work against the same sort of morals test you attempt to impose upon those you are arguing against. (I also do doubt the Red Cross with turn you away due to them having a sufficient number of volunteers for a war zone [on this of course I must admit Im less sure than the US military turning people away]). Also take note of whatever cop out you may use and recognize that if it works for you in this case (even: "I dont want to be in physical danger" others are free to use it)... come on you chickenhippy. (Atleast in the Vietnam era protestors had balls and would go to jail or get police-owned for what they believe in... not just post on an internet board trying to put the job of action on the opposition... what have you done to really stop this war or help the people suffering in it OP?)
-An additional issue in this case is the volunteer nature of the armed forces at present. No individual is being taken unwillingly into the military system (in some sense there is a backdoor draft.. stop loss, etc which retains some still in service). However individuals signing up for the armed forces are making the (hopefully) well thought out decision that it is the choice for them. Every soldier from reservist to careerist ought to recognize the nature of US deployments post 9/11 and that today, and throughout American history, an individual soldiers support of an individual war only matters in so far as their vote as a citizen (you accept a job and the responsibility [also please note accept... the burdens of morality come into play in a forced draft which is why Ill admit stop loss scares me] that you may well be posted in harms way in a dangerous, unpopular, and perhaps not well thought out conflict. If you feel an obligation to serve or if the reservist money is just "too good for 2 weekends a a month etc etc" you sign up... if not... you stay home. I respect them for putting their lives on the line. I also wish that every war they would ever fight (though even better I wish they wouldnt have to fight) would be a "good war" with crystal clear rights and wrongs, motives, widespread popular support while doing something actually tangibly defending the homeland and making the world a better place. However, whether war or peace time, and though in my mind in a job atleast on par in terms of courage and risk on par with policeman and firefighters, military service is... like those jobs... an individuals choice at present (the big reason why recruiter misrepresentation and sheer lying is a huge evil) and just as the two other occupations mentioned have little to no control over where they wish to risk their lives and for what specifically (firefighters have died rescuing house pets :-/) it is a job they choose to assume. Until the situation totally changes, ie until and unless there is a draft, it's a reach that because one supporter of the war sits here in the states another man is forcibly conscripted to service to take his place (this I think is the part of the core of your arguement... Im sure there are countless soliders there [Iraq} against the war, I just hope that after their time is over they still feel their choice to join and accept risk is a good one) Yes, I feel bad for a mother/family who had a family member die over there... I wish it never happened... but their loved one willfully joined the service and in doing so assumed the implied risk that everyone in a uniform takes in the sense that they may someday be called upon to fight a nasty war in a nasty place under some nasty pretenses (or perhaps a conflict they personally do not support).
-OP I agree with you however on another key statement I think you are trying to make... that the military is in dire need of recruits (though I think they always want soldiers). Today more than ever it is more difficult to hit their targets. Anyone who is not able to understand the pentagon's own estimates and press releases on their shortfalls in recruiting and to recognize that fact is likey not worth an arguement and really shouldnt be posting in any forum at all... except OOT.
-To the guy who said something about the Bush economy and the military racing against the private sector: Please note the base pay for enlisted persons and then tell me it should be a walkaway... barring some huge recession or a large, and IMHO well deserved, pay increase the military has been and will always be a hard sell even solely in terms of basic financial reasons. It is not a testament to the Bush economy nor was it to the Clinton economy in the 90s (and though recruiting shortages are now than the 90s please dont argue that its because the economy is stronger... not only is the accuracy of such a statement highly questionable (stupid dot com boom... now everyone expects insane growth) but the more likely answer isn't terribly pro Bush... its because there's actually a "hot" conflict going on... why join now if you're in it for economic reasons?) but rather it is a testament to how we shortchange servicemen/women (if reviewed on the economic reasons alone the military likely wont be a large favorite... factor in risk... time abroad and you can see why even being a reservist throughout history has been risky.
- To the guy with the frat guy like avatar (that I assume is a self portrait... popped collar?) who also claims to have caught his girlfriend with another girl and then posted the results over in OOT.. didn't you also claim that tonight you were promised a threesome? if youre not lying on that then please take my advice and log off and get some (or else you'll have to wait until your frat semi after homecoming for a piece :-()... I enjoyed you more when your posts had solid content... if only a flimsy story about finding your girlfriend macking it without you.

Addition: Me personally... assuming the above is all read (laf) individuals may ask why I myself, a Republican though not a hardcore Bushite (McCain 2008), and of service age, am not in the Armed Forces. The answer is simple; though after 9/11 I intended to enlist and was given acceptance into West Point I could sadly not attend due to medical concerns (I think theres another post on here by me explaining what specifically). I can of course prove this. I wished to enlist because my family has maintained a long tradition of public service (atleast one individual in every major conflict since the war of 1812 with the sole exception of my father, Vietnam,... a hippy who spent more than a few nights in jail due to protesting and then joined the peace corps to back up what he believed in) I felt it was my time to step up... since that area was denied to me Im just enjoying college while pondering another way to pay for what I have now in terms of service to my country (hope the state dept still needs Chinese interp skills when I graduate :-)). I supported and still support the war in Iraq and our troops there. If there was any way I would be allowed to serve currently I would indeed join.

[warlockjd]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, if someone supports legalized abortions, yet claims to be morally opposed to abortions - then yes, of course, they're hypocrites too.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is fallacious. Those that do not think morality should be legislated but personally would not have an abortion fall in this camp.

Similarly, men who think it is a woman's choice, while advising their wife/girlfriend against it but ulitmately letting her choose.

[Darryl_P]

The law doesn't require everyone to pay taxes, only those who make money in certain ways and spend it in certain ways.

I could live as a hermit in the wilderness, hunt my own food or bum off of other people and I wouldn't pay a red cent in taxes, all legally of course. Heck, I'd probably be eligible for some free money from the gov't if I am clever in the application process.

Or I could choose to work a modest amount in a reasonable comfortable job and pay a modest amount of taxes.

Or I could choose a high stress job in which I earn a lot and pay a lot of taxes.

Which one I choose (and which one everyone else chooses) makes a big difference for the armed forces. If everyone chose to be a hermit or have a low stress job with modest wages then under current tax laws there would not be enough revenue for the government to run a strong military.

IMO It is wise for everyone to respect the source from which his income and livelihood are derived, and the military is no exception.

[Edited to add this part]

Besides, if a good army General could choose between me signing up for the army myself, or continuing to work at what I'm good at producing enough tax revenue to pay for 3 soldiers who are younger, stronger, and faster than I am, then which do you think he would choose? And if you say there are not enough applicants, raise the salaries and make the benefits better and you'll still be able to get two for the price of one.

It's just basic economics.

[ QUOTE ]
And if you say there are not enough applicants, raise the salaries and make the benefits better and you'll still be able to get two for the price of one.



[/ QUOTE ]

They've been trying this for months and it hasn't worked.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I am all for the people who volunteered for our military to do their JOB and fight this war. I CHOSE not to enlist, mainly because I had other more profitable paths I could choose from.

[/ QUOTE ]

In which case, I think you're a hypocrite.

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly you do not support the war.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't support it enough to go fight in it; that much is clear.

[ QUOTE ]
I believe you think people who enlist are ignorant.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Where did this come from?

Either way, no - I don't think that. I think they're consistent. They're willing to a war they believe in. Kudos to them; I don't know if I would have such courage. It's certainly difficult to make sacrifices and risk your life for a cause you believe in. They have ideals, and they fight for them. I have respect for that.

I'm not sure it's true to say I support them, either; if I really supported them, I would go fight along side of them.

But I don't think they're ignorant at all.

[ QUOTE ]
To me that can be the only conclusion you could come to if you even approached rationality given your writings.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I understood this correctly, then no, I think there are other conclusions you could rationally come to.

[ QUOTE ]
I am glad that you have a voice, I really am.

[/ QUOTE ]

We agree, I am also glad I have a voice.

[ QUOTE ]
I am also glad that most people aren't like you.

[/ QUOTE ]

My wife frequently says that she wishes our kids don't end up like me (we don't have any children yet, but she's critical of all the time I spend idling away on the computer, playing poker, etc. - and she would like our kids to be much more active than I am); so on this point, I would say you have allies.

[ QUOTE ]
If they were, the US would still be a colony of England.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, maybe. Having not been alive at the time, it's difficult to say whether or not I'd have been willing to fight against Britain during the Revolution.

[ QUOTE ]
So, go ahead and fight for your cause, however misguided, uninformed, and grotesquely ignorant it may be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, at least I have your permission now.

[ QUOTE ]
Thank God there are people to protect you from yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually don't really understand this part. Is someone actively protecting me...from myself? I don't get it, honestly.