Forums: Community: The Soap Box:
Troop Increase
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Soap Box

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


Partner j_ung


Jan 11, 2007, 7:25 AM
Post #1 of 55 (1399 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Troop Increase
Report this Post
Can't Post

Bush's proposal did have something new, if not unexpected: the propsed troop "surge" of 20k. Will Bush's plan work? Why or why not?

My opinion: I don't think it will, but not because I favor withdrawal -- I don't. In fact, I favor a much larger troop increase combined with high-level diplomatic engagement with Iran and Syria, perhaps using troop withdrawal as some sort of benchmarked incentive. If a stability goal is met, then troops will decrease in this region, for example.

Gates is also proposing a general military increase by 92,000 troops. I think that's on the right track, but I also don't think it's enough, and let's face it, recruiting is a problem these days.

Instead, I favor a mandatory conscription program. That's right, boys and girls, a motherfuckin' draft. This would be a permanent program, mantatory two years for all men and women of a certain age with no deferrals. None. If you're physically unable to serve in a military unit, fine. We'll find something for you to do. If it's peacetime, swell. We have an unlimited labor force to respond to wild fires, hurricanes, homeless shelters and any number of areas where manpower is needed, yet lacking. Call it what you will, the Army, the kiddie corp, I don't care.

I further propse we tie that mandatory service in some way to college education. After or during the two-year service and in return for that service, conscripts receive a college education, enough for a standardized bachelor's degree in the field of choice, in "public univiersities," per se, which would be a kind of cross between public school and typical college life.

This way, everybody serves. Everybody goes to college if they want, regardless of ability to pay.


(This post was edited by j_ung on Jan 11, 2007, 7:39 AM)


ihategrigris


Jan 11, 2007, 7:29 AM
Post #2 of 55 (1395 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Ha.... see, they won't cut 'n run!

Alright, just missed your screwed up post. I think a manditory draft program is a terrible, terrible idea (in the way you're proposing anyway). Ordinarilly (when not involved in two seperate conflicts in the world) theres more than enough troops for homeland defence, especially if you concider that the risk of a conflict involving conventional warefare in the US itself is miniscule, as the US doesn't have a land boarded with any remotly hostile country. Nuclear conflicts and terrorism are of course threats, but you don't NEED a huge force to deal with those, just a reletivlty small group of well trained specialists.

The United States has the second most active troops in the world... only China has more. OF the worlds most powerful contries (the G7 countries + Russia, China and India) the US has the second most active troops per capita, second only to Russia.

If the US put a stop to imperialistic campaigns like Iraq, the number of troops today would be more then sufficient for home defence.


(This post was edited by ihategrigris on Jan 11, 2007, 8:42 AM)


Partner j_ung


Jan 11, 2007, 7:37 AM
Post #3 of 55 (1390 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [ihategrigris] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I screwed up my post. Sorry 'bout that. I'm also proposing a draft. Frown


atg200


Jan 11, 2007, 7:59 AM
Post #4 of 55 (1382 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Well j_ung, I vehemently oppose a draft because I dont trust our government to make intelligent decisions in the use of force. I can't imagine sending a child of mine off to die in a stupid, unnncessary conflict like vietnam or iraq - my life and my family are far more important to me than some asshat political hack's agenda.

I can't imagine mandatory service working well for a lot of other reasons as well. The cost would be extremely high - the training costs for 2 years of military service for disinterested people would be along the lines of setting big piles of cash on fire. I don't trust the ability of our government to effectively use talent on a large scale. I think mandatory service only works very well for wealthy countries with small populations that don't have the infrastructure costs the united states has, or for fairly poor countries that don't have nearly the cost associated with personnel that the united states would have.


Partner tradman


Jan 11, 2007, 8:31 AM
Post #5 of 55 (1375 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159

Re: [atg200] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Do you think giving the US government an even bigger army would result in less wars or more wars?

As for the "surge", I'm not sure I agree with Bush that what he really needs to put out all these fires is a bigger flamethrower.


Partner j_ung


Jan 11, 2007, 8:58 AM
Post #6 of 55 (1365 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [tradman] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

tradman wrote:
Do you think giving the US government an even bigger army would result in less wars or more wars?

As for the "surge", I'm not sure I agree with Bush that what he really needs to put out all these fires is a bigger flamethrower.

Replying to both of you...

Of course it isn't a tidy little package. There are thousands of details that would need to be worked out. What I'm prosing is only the foundation of an idea.

I think that if every family has something more than cheap gas at stake the result will be far fewer wars. Maybe then we can get back to only attacking when we've been attacked, IMO, the only honorable war. Andrew, this goes back to your point, as well. If every politician has children and grandchildren who are either serving or about to serve, I trust the decision making far more.

I know nobody will go for my proposals above. There's just no way a draft would ever fly with the electorate. But I can't see a way out of Iraq right now that doesn't plunge the region into even greater chaos. Simply withdrawing at this stage is only slightly less stupid than "staying the course." I think Bush's premise that, if the security is there, it'll give the government a chance to catch it's breath and actually govern, is a sound one. I don't, for a second, however, think that 20k troops is enough to do it. We peaked at higher than this "surge," in 2005, and we all know how successful that was.


(This post was edited by j_ung on Jan 11, 2007, 8:59 AM)


waynew


Jan 11, 2007, 9:14 AM
Post #7 of 55 (1355 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 80

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Re: this 'Surge' thing; I support the President in trying this proposed solution, and understand that its not a simple situation. I'd like to believe that he's paying attention to what the soldiers in the theater think they need, and am pretty sure that folks that haven't been over there (me included) don't have the entire picture. (Not quite sure how the recent changes in military leadership fit into this picture)
And I really hope that these additional troops come more from extending tours of duty than from shortening the training cycles.

Notwithstanding, I really have to support the idea of tying a couple of years of Federal service (not necessarily military) to some sort of a subsidized college education... Not quite ready to support a draft (I recall the last one) but perhaps attach some additional perks to those that will stand up and serve in our armed forces.

And thanks again to our veterans and those currently serving!


Partner epoch
Moderator

Jan 11, 2007, 10:10 AM
Post #8 of 55 (1335 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2005
Posts: 32034

Re: [waynew] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

this ideas is wholly uncapitolistic. it may work in countries where by having everyone of a certain age be mandated to military service. i was of your same mentality until i was in the military. understand the financial burden that would be imposed on the government and the amount of $$ required to pay for thier wages, training, and post-service education. the way that the education laws are written pertaining to the gi bill you have to serve at least 3 years on active duty, thus making the 2 year draftee that is known from korea and vietnam inelegable for the benefit. it's a bit of money, i'm getting my benefit now and am in college,

the plan on surging in iraq in the hopes that it would allow the government to be able to govern sounds good on paper and is appealing to the general population, but will only work if the iraqi government comes together as one unified body...

i'm mumbeling again....


atg200


Jan 11, 2007, 10:14 AM
Post #9 of 55 (1334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
I think that if every family has something more than cheap gas at stake the result will be far fewer wars. Maybe then we can get back to only attacking when we've been attacked, IMO, the only honorable war. Andrew, this goes back to your point, as well. If every politician has children and grandchildren who are either serving or about to serve, I trust the decision making far more.

i wish i could believe that, but i just don't. i think the only sort of people that would subject themselves to an election in this day and age either don't have a soul or are just so jaded and callous that things like this wouldn't matter to them.

i'm not opposed to your idea of making war more of a sacrifice to the people, but as long as we keep doing shit like iraq risking my family's lives is just much too big a gamble. something more along the lines of requiring war efforts to be paid for up front by raising the hell out of taxes and cutting government programs, keep fuel usage level by implementing a gas ration, pressing defense contractors into service by making them provide services at cost, etc would be more appropriate in my opinion.

i think haliburton, lockheed martin, northrup grumman, etc. making just enough to cover operating expenses but not a dime of profit and no bonuses for execs would do much more to reduce unnecessary wars than a draft.


the_pirate


Jan 11, 2007, 10:37 AM
Post #10 of 55 (1323 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 3983

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
Andrew, this goes back to your point, as well. If every politician has children and grandchildren who are either serving or about to serve, I trust the decision making far more.

i recall reading a statistic a while back, wish i could find a link to it at the moment, you'll just have to take it with a grain of salt: that said less than 1% of congressmen have family in the military, but ~ 35% have family that are lobbyists.



As for the idea of a permanent draft and large standing army........ armies are in the business of waging war. Recall if you will the warnings of our founding fathers about the dangers of a standing army.


(This post was edited by the_pirate on Jan 11, 2007, 10:40 AM)


bobd1953


Jan 11, 2007, 10:57 AM
Post #11 of 55 (1310 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 13, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: [the_pirate] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Bush's proposal did have something new, if not unexpected: the propsed troop "surge" of 20k. Will Bush's plan work? Why or why not?

The "new plan" is the "old plan" with failure written all over it.

There have been three surges so far that have fail.

Bush and company have made every mistake possible from the start of the invasion of Iraq.


Partner j_ung


Jan 11, 2007, 11:42 AM
Post #12 of 55 (1298 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [bobd1953] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

bobd1953 wrote:
Bush and company have made every mistake possible from the start of the invasion of Iraq.

Too true... too true... And, I think this is another. I say go all in and get the job done -- militarily and diplomatically -- which is the only thing I think will work at this time... or get the fuck out all at once.


trebork2
Deleted

Jan 11, 2007, 11:55 AM
Post #13 of 55 (1290 views)
Shortcut

Registered:
Posts:

Re: [atg200] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

atg200 wrote:
Well j_ung, I vehemently oppose a draft because I dont trust our government to make intelligent decisions in the use of force. I can't imagine sending a child of mine off to die in a stupid, unnncessary conflict like vietnam or iraq - my life and my family are far more important to me than some asshat political hack's agenda.

You don't want to send your son or daughter over there because you don't trust the government. While the Iraqi people are wanting the US to be there more than ever so they can have a great government. You make think it's a pointless war but you don't live there and you haven't been there to see the changes we have been making. CNN never tells the good side of a conflict. Imagine if they did. Imagine that when you flip on the tele you see reports of new schools being built and children being able to go to school and not have to carry an AK47 around all day. Have you ever had a child point a loaded AK47 at you. I'm thinking no. We are doing good things and Iraq isn't unnecessary.

As far as a draft. I think it's a great idea. I think it would bring some meaning back to America. It will never happen though. Most of the US has grown into a bunch of no set of balls fat people to put it nicely. Everyone is concerned about paying there $800 a month SUV payment and there mortage on the house they can't afford.

Cheers from Alaska,
Rob


ihategrigris


Jan 11, 2007, 11:57 AM
Post #14 of 55 (1290 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post




ihategrigris


Jan 11, 2007, 12:05 PM
Post #15 of 55 (1287 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757

Re: [trebork2] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

trebork2 wrote:
You don't want to send your son or daughter over there because you don't trust the government. While the Iraqi people are wanting the US to be there more than ever so they can have a great government. You make think it's a pointless war but you don't live there and you haven't been there to see the changes we have been making. CNN never tells the good side of a conflict. Imagine if they did. Imagine that when you flip on the tele you see reports of new schools being built and children being able to go to school and not have to carry an AK47 around all day. Have you ever had a child point a loaded AK47 at you. I'm thinking no. We are doing good things and Iraq isn't unnecessary.

You're kidding right? Under Saddam Hussein, although there was terrible starvation (arguably due to US sanctions) and repression, as well as torture, and general missery; however, the country was more or less peaceful. The people were under the iron fist of Saddam, and I can assure you that kids were NOT carring AK-47s in the streets. Today kids ARE carying AK-47s in the streets, since large parts of the country exist in a state of anarchy and civil war.

Under Saddam, there was pain, there was misery, there was repression, but there was no insurgency. There was no fighting, there was no bombing, there was no WAR. Kids weren't carring AK-47s in the streets, only Saddam's military was.


trebork2
Deleted

Jan 11, 2007, 12:20 PM
Post #16 of 55 (1281 views)
Shortcut

Registered:
Posts:

Re: [ihategrigris] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

And that's why you live in Canada


atg200


Jan 11, 2007, 12:39 PM
Post #17 of 55 (1276 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317

Re: [trebork2] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

trebork2 - have you been there?

as far as having nasty people pointing AK47s at me, yes, i have been there and done that, though not in iraq. i've been held at gunpoint in Colombia and Ecuador(Ecuador was during a coup), and a market I shopped at was blown up in Tashkent Uzbekistan a few days after I left. I'm not really a stranger to places that could use a little help.

However, I don't think we are helping in Iraq. I also think we never had a snowball's chance in hell at helping in Iraq, and think we were pushed into this by a bunch of incompetent adventurers who have no sense of history.

I think the only chance Iraq ever has of becoming peaceful is to be broken up into chunks and melded into parts of the countries they should have been in in the first place - though I doubt that will ever happen either for a variety of reasons. The splitup of the Ottoman empire after WWi and the artificial ways the borders were layed out, largely by the British in the case of Iraq, lead us into this mess, and I can't imagine military force helping people lay aside centuries of ethnic and religious hatreds.


(This post was edited by atg200 on Jan 11, 2007, 12:41 PM)


ihategrigris


Jan 11, 2007, 12:52 PM
Post #18 of 55 (1271 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757

Re: [trebork2] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

trebork2 wrote:
And that's why you live in Canada

Look buddy... do some research, cite some sources, otherwise don't spew your fox news inspired propaganda here.


Partner j_ung


Jan 11, 2007, 1:48 PM
Post #19 of 55 (1261 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [trebork2] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

trebork2 wrote:
CNN never tells the good side of a conflict.

Perhaps you could name me a country in which 20 people killed in a car bomb wouldn't be the lead story.


qdiggety


Jan 11, 2007, 2:06 PM
Post #20 of 55 (1252 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 2, 2004
Posts: 808

Re: [ihategrigris] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ihategrigris wrote:
trebork2 wrote:
And that's why you live in Canada

Look buddy... do some research, cite some sources, otherwise don't spew your fox news inspired propaganda here.

Doooooooooddddd..... Don't make the kanuckistanis mad..... They might keep all their Molson, Kokanee and Crown Royal.


lextalion


Jan 11, 2007, 4:08 PM
Post #21 of 55 (1235 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2005
Posts: 216

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Gates is also proposing a general military increase by 92,000 troops. I think that's on the right track, but I also don't think it's enough, and let's face it, recruiting is a problem these days.

Not true. Enlistment is up again according to the recent news.

In reply to:
Instead, I favor a mandatory conscription program. That's right, boys and girls, a motherfuckin' draft. This would be a permanent program, mantatory two years for all men and women of a certain age with no deferrals. None. If you're physically unable to serve in a military unit, fine. We'll find something for you to do. If it's peacetime, swell. We have an unlimited labor force to respond to wild fires, hurricanes, homeless shelters and any number of areas where manpower is needed, yet lacking. Call it what you will, the Army, the kiddie corp, I don't care.

I further propse we tie that mandatory service in some way to college education. After or during the two-year service and in return for that service, conscripts receive a college education, enough for a standardized bachelor's degree in the field of choice, in "public univiersities," per se, which would be a kind of cross between public school and typical college life.

This way, everybody serves. Everybody goes to college if they want, regardless of ability to pay.

I agree with what you propose for the most part. There need to be a little more responsibilty of ownership by the american people. We are to busy calling ourselves mexican americans, afroamericans, jewish american and the likes. To me I'm a American first and foremost. My family left their countries to come here because things sucked at home.
On one side the Roman catholic pope decided he didn't agree with my beliefs and ordered my family killed. We escaped and went to New York and eventually fought in the revolutionary war to start with.
The other side of the family, left germany because we're German Jew. Need I say more.

I also agree it would help reduce some of the cost of govermental responsibilities. This is basically what happened in the 30's under Roosevelt. Heck that how Hoover Dam was built. And for the times it was good money to get a job working on that project. Today a project like that would cost ineffective, let alone be tied up in litagation for centries.

As far as do I think it will succeed. No, because the political powers will not allow the troops to do their job. I also think to few to late and we're spread very thin already. Clinton goverment ought to have thought about that before closing all the bases back in the 90's.


bobd1953


Jan 11, 2007, 4:42 PM
Post #22 of 55 (1228 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 13, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I say go all in and get the job done --

What is the job??

Maybe understanding the Middle East culture and different religious fractions would have been a start.


Pretty fecking sad.


lextalion


Jan 11, 2007, 10:06 PM
Post #23 of 55 (1210 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2005
Posts: 216

Re: [bobd1953] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

The way I read the job description:

Increase the troop levels to speed up the training and deployment process of Iraqi police & military.

Second defend economical interests, and ensure the rebuilding of the economical & social structure. Get water & power working on a constant basis. Get people employeed and spending money.

People whom don't have jobs are more likely to commit crime or become terrorist.

Final point get our troops outta there.

Unfortunately with our goverment involved - who knows what will really happen. Seems as though they always put a puppy in front of the cart rather than using a horse.


trebork2
Deleted

Jan 11, 2007, 10:24 PM
Post #24 of 55 (1209 views)
Shortcut

Registered:
Posts:

Re: [ihategrigris] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ihategrigris wrote:
trebork2 wrote:
And that's why you live in Canada

Look buddy... do some research, cite some sources, otherwise don't spew your fox news inspired propaganda here.

Look here Canada... I don't spew fox new or anybodys news. I've been there. I've seen what's going on. So when you grow a set of balls and quit using that french douche of yours then we can talk. Until then STFU eh!

As far as Candas beer goes they can keep the shit


trebork2
Deleted

Jan 11, 2007, 10:27 PM
Post #25 of 55 (1208 views)
Shortcut

Registered:
Posts:

Re: [j_ung] Troop Increase [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
trebork2 wrote:
CNN never tells the good side of a conflict.

Perhaps you could name me a country in which 20 people killed in a car bomb wouldn't be the lead story.

It's going to be the lead story in any country. But when do you hear of the good things that are happening? You don't... because people don't like to hear the good things that are happening. That's the way society is today. Most countries are starting to act like Canada and just not give a shit about what's going on. They will learn a lesson though.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Community : The Soap Box

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$103.46 (10% off)
$144.71 (10% off)
$7.16 (10% off)
$4.05 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook