It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

H.R. 4752: Universal National Service Act of 2006

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2006 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by pawnplayer

Originally posted by LogansRun

Originally posted by pawnplayer

That is the attitude I most despise from you. Yes, I have shown my true colors and I'm not ashamed of it, bud. If you aren't fighting for this country and for your community, then you are not worth fighting for. Go back to your big vaunted global village, bud.



Ok...........so let me get this straight......American christian that agrees with you, good. Anything else, bad?


You know what's your problem? You keep assuming and assuming. Bad habit you have?


I am only drawing the only conclusion I can from your illogical rant.


Originally posted by pawnplayer

Originally posted by LogansRun


The aware for being naive is your honor alone my friend. I am not wearing rose colored glasses, I merely speak the truth. How many people do you personally know from other countries? I happen to be quite well informed with many people in this global community. And YES we are a global village. You forget that EVERY person living here in the states (with the exception of native americans) have their history in one of those "other countries" that are out to "destroy us". I really am not going to waste my time debating you any more as I have far more productive things to do like advocating a global community and doing as much as possible to enlighten peolple with your point of view. I hope for your sake, and the sake of those around you, that you educate yourself and become more of a positive person as living amongst 5% of the population (US) and thinking ther other 95% (rest of world) wants you dead must be a very sad life. Good luck to you.



Assuming, assuming, assuming.... stupid bad habit you have already, you know?


No, not assuming, drawing a logical conclusion from your illogical rant. No assumptions here, BTW you never answered my question. I will ask again. How many people do you PERSONALLY know from other countries? Do they all want to kill you?




posted on May, 18 2006 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by pawnplayer

Yes, that was a big mistake for Christianity in general in the past, but you have to remember a lot of politics and economic factors played the Christian sides in order to gain some strategic advantages. Even Christians fought against other Christians on difficult theological and political grounds.

You should not be forced to bow down before a cross or a crescent. You should follow your own spiritual matters on your own terms.


Ah, thank you! This is the best statement I have heard from you in this debate. I must go for now, this has truly been fun!





posted on May, 18 2006 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by pawnplayer
Aw, that's too bad. Cry me a river. I don't advocate murder but I DO advocate a willingness to survive and that means by any mean necessary. Human history have shown me plenty of reasons that survival matters above all - especially important for my family, friends, my community, my faith and my country, right and wrong.


Ok, so I am pulling something from earlier. I said that I was an athiest. You said, that's not what you meant, you asked me if I believed in a global community as a faith. To a degree, yes I do, just not the NWO type, so I thought we had hit an end.

Then... you go on to say how you're against it, and now you're hitting on it, saying you only care about your community.

Yes, I have had a glass of wine, but I still think my point can be made as clear as the crystal that I'm drinking from. Hello??? Ok, you bring up faith, then you say it's not faith (when you already brought up community in the first place apart from faith), then you leave faith altogether and talk about how you're against a global community.

By this, I see that our conversation has obviously ended. We cannot see eye to eye, and after that, we can't get an obvious point out of you without unveiling some new veil of confusion that brings us back to the beginning.

Like I posted earlier, I have much respect for you, I would shake your hand and bow if this was in person. I still don't feel any need on carrying this out any further because your responses have began to make no sense whatsoever, and I am still sober enough to see this.


I hope to debate with you at some other point again, I really enjoyed this PawnPlayer, and I think this was a healthy exercise of our beliefs.



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogansRun
I am only drawing the only conclusion I can from your illogical rant.


The same I can say for YOUR illogical rant.



Originally posted by LogansRun
No, not assuming, drawing a logical conclusion from your illogical rant. No assumptions here, BTW you never answered my question. I will ask again. How many people do you PERSONALLY know from other countries? Do they all want to kill you?


Funny, that's the first question: Plenty. Maybe. Human nature takes precedence over normalcy for survival's sake. When people get desperate and angry, forget civility.

Yes, you keep making assumptions. You don't know me well and I don't share your global-village baloney. The whole global community is a global BS. Do you wanted your life to be dictated by some appointed officials thousands miles away?

Your belief in global village/community is very illogical.



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
Then... you go on to say how you're against it, and now you're hitting on it, saying you only care about your community.


LOCAL community! NOT globaloney.



Originally posted by niteboy82
Yes, I have had a glass of wine, but I still think my point can be made as clear as the crystal that I'm drinking from. Hello??? Ok, you bring up faith, then you say it's not faith (when you already brought up community in the first place apart from faith), then you leave faith altogether and talk about how you're against a global community.


You're NOT seeing my point I've explained earlier: if people fail to look after each other in a community, everyone lose faith in each other in the process, be it local or global. I've personally seen it before. In the local part, it can be repairable but I'm not totally sure about the global part.


Originally posted by niteboy82
Like I posted earlier, I have much respect for you, I would shake your hand and bow if this was in person. I still don't feel any need on carrying this out any further because your responses have began to make no sense whatsoever, and I am still sober enough to see this.


Your beliefs in global community stuff make no sense to me either.

It seem that there is obviously a huge gulf of misunderstanding between you, me and logan's run. We just failed to see each other's points, I admit.


My responses are to the point and direct, though others may not see or even grasp well enough because they are still wearing rose-colored glasses when it comes to talking up "global village, global community" nonsenses. I took mine off after 9/11/2001.



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 07:41 PM
link   
PawnPlayer

You are one fun guy to debate with. I have enjoyed it immensely! Thank you so much for realizing that we aren't seeing eye to eye, but we're ok.


If I think of anything else, I'll add it, but I fear that we've already gone far enough in hijacking the original purpose of this thread.

Cheers to ya! Totally cool!



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 08:04 PM
link   
I have read through this thread; however I can not find a reference to HR 163 was introduced in January of 2003. Perhaps I missed it, but this type (if not exact) attempts at legislation on this topic appear from time-to-time. This is really nothing new just as 'compulsory service' is nothing new to many nations/states.

HR 163, January 2003



mg



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
If I think of anything else, I'll add it, but I fear that we've already gone far enough in hijacking the original purpose of this thread.

Cheers to ya! Totally cool!


Well, the whole thing with us started with your doubt on a "higher cause". I've read plenty of stories about people in the 1930s and 1940s involved in the Great Depression and World War II, how they were able to serve a higher cause than themselves. That's real 100% dedication and passion among these American generations that have not been seen in the American history, even though the Great Depression and World War II were caused by insidious factors that are a stuff of conspiracy theory lore so widely discussed for years, of which it's still being discussed on this noteworthy forum board called AboveTopSecret.com.

Nevertheless, in spite of "insidious factors", Americans DID answered that higher cause and responded in a great deal of sacrifice and tragedy for the sake of the greater good.

Nowadays, if people in the West so cherish and value their freedoms so much, I wonder how much they would be willing to fight for their freedoms at any cost? Dedication and passion in these freedoms today seem so sadly outdated.


I based my whole faith on the four freedoms: freedom of speech/expression, freedom to worship (any faith), freedom from want and freedom from fear. Granted, these were echoed from President Franklin D. Roosevelt's State of the Union speech, Jan. 6th 1941 - particularly known as The Four Freedoms Speech. Though the speech indirectly called for a new world order fear of armaments and dictatorships, of countries and governments in responsibility for a perpetual peace with each other, it was so resoundingly convincing, if idealistically emboldened, to the majority of Americans listening that day of the State of the Union speech. A few stout-hearted cynics, including yours truly, would even be moved by this speech if delivered today.

Alas, in this current generations, I may fear none would ever answer that higher cause - that freedoms are not worth fighting for because we are so cynically jaded and more starkly informed than the American generations from the 1930s and 1940s.


That is why I would rather serve and fight for my local community and my country than in some asinine "global community" baloney.

The only thing I would fight for the world is when the aliens from outer space actually invade the planet Earth. But that's not happening in my lifetime.


[edit on 5/18/2006 by pawnplayer]



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Has anyone thought of this scenario?


A false flag operation gives the President under the ruse of the Patriot Act Power to disolve congress in a time of war (correct me if wrong)

Could President Bush as the Supreme Leader (in the war act terminology) sign the HR4752 Bill into law, giving him the soldiers needed to fight a global war?

Just a thought....


JC



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 08:15 AM
link   
I think mandatory homeland defense service would be a good idea.

But only for a short time like 6 months. Two years is way too long in my opinion.

You get a month of training, and 5 months at the border, ports, doing security. You get paid decent and you get to go home after your 6 months. Would bring back a little more national pride that so many people seem to lack nowadays.

I bet with the hundred thousand people that the government would have at their disposal would make our border and coast line ALOT more secure from drugs and foreign intrusions.



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Violent
Someone help me out here - how is this different from a reinsitution of the draft??

....


The difference...this requires a period of service. A draft does not garantee a period of service, this appears it would....much like Israel does.



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
....much like Israel does.


The model, which appears to be the discussed baseline (and has been historically) for this proposed service, has been that of the Swiss.

The Swiss have mandatory service and training entry at age 20. This service usually continues though various stages of reserve duties for a thirty year period after the completion of training ( Rekrutenschule) before discharge age 50-55.


Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
Two years is way too long in my opinion.


The combined period of service for the Swiss is (plus or minus) the equivalent of one full year active service after age 21. Time can be broken up into ‘blocks’ and still fit into a two year window with training and duty requirements.


mg



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
I think mandatory homeland defense service would be a good idea.

But only for a short time like 6 months. Two years is way too long in my opinion.

You get a month of training, and 5 months at the border, ports, doing security. You get paid decent and you get to go home after your 6 months. Would bring back a little more national pride that so many people seem to lack nowadays.

I bet with the hundred thousand people that the government would have at their disposal would make our border and coast line ALOT more secure from drugs and foreign intrusions.



We would be a nation of warriors. Artists would be trained to kill, against their will. I know for sure that I wouldn't do it. Besides, I wouldn't trust having everyone serve. Remember how many people are against the military action of the government. Giving them weapons and opportunity for sabotage.



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Ahh well I don't give a damn I will fight. I am to assume this draft would no longer discriminate against recruiting convicted felons. Because if it still does, well I guess I will be sitting at home watching you guys fighting a foreign war against your will



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join