I don't like it, I love the volunteer army ... but we don't have enough troops. When George Bush wanted to have the surge, he was told by the senior generals we didn't have the extra 20,000 troops to finish the war. ... Now Obama wants to go to Afghanistan ... but he says we don't have the troops unless we pull them out of Iraq. What happens if Pakistan goes jihad-y? We don't have the troops to go in there and stop them from taking over the nuclear weapons.Not only, Mr. Blankley, do you not have the troops, you don't have the money either. So get out of the Middle East and support a rational policy that brings all troops home. Start supporting individual freedom and stop worrying about civilizations clashing.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Conservative Columnist In Favor Of Slavery
TheRawStory.com has reported on Conservative columnist Tony Blankley's assessment that the draft is necessary in order for the US government to win the clash of civilizations. This provokes the question, why is it important for one civilization to win over another? Isn't this really as frivolous as which team will when a baseball game, and doesn't this line of thinking have the potential to kick start a war the likes of World War I? Of course, that's the whole purpose, as he explains on Fox News:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Until there is an amendment outlawing the draft and asserting an individual citizen's right to choose to join the army, it is constitutional. How is it constitutional? The legislative branch can legislate anything NOT explicitly prohibited by the constitution.
You're defending slavery?
I'm not defending anything. I'm making a statement of fact.
That you would interpret the constitution to allow for slavery shows your poor interpretation it.
The constitution is a series of laws that state positive rights. Until amendments are written outlining other positie rights, the legislature can do what it wants. And, no, its not an interpretation. It's a fact of the constitution.
Slavery violates those rights which are listed.
"Slavery violates those rights which are listed."
And so does banning same-sex marriage, but dont worry, Josh, you can be a hypocrite!
Draft is technically not slavery, but you are right, there is no free choice involved. But since it is not technically slavery, it is not technically outlawed by the constitution. In principle, maybe, it application, no.
"Draft is technically not slavery, but you are right, there is no free choice involved. But since it is not technically slavery, it is not technically outlawed by the constitution. In principle, maybe, it application, no.`
Yes. It is slavery.
"Yes. It is slavery."
No, Josh, the draft is a democratic, communal decision to force people to fight in a war. Therefore, there is no master and slave. It's pretty close to slavery, I'll agree, but technically, i.e. based on definition, it is not.
The master is the state and the slave is the soldier. Under a democratic society, slavery existed in the US for 60 years. It was still slavery, and so is the draft.
"The master is the state and the slave is the soldier. Under a democratic society, slavery existed in the US for 60 years. It was still slavery, and so is the draft."
There is no such thing as the state apart from people. And, no, the draft is not slavery. It may be like slavery in the sense that it entails sacrifice, but no it is not slavery.
Post a Comment