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.

 

If you were drafted into World War III, would you fight?

page: 10
26
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   
i would help any way i could with a nursing degree however i object to fighting anyone




posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by SonicInfinity
 


World War III in America would mean more than likely defense. So it wouldn't matter either way, the war would be to fend off encroachments.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   
You would'nt be left with much of a choice, since for one, you might be shot if you dont, or you will have to if attacked by "the other side"...



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
All of you saying you wouldn't fight are the most unpatriotic bunch of losers I've ever seen. If you are in the military or are drafted it is your duty to fight. Where would this country be if everyone got to pick and choose every war they thought was important or not?

You elect people to represent you and they may have information about a particular action that needs to be taken they haven't necessarily explained to you. By you acting all high in might with your noses in the air is doing a huge disservice to those who have fought and died so you have the right to be snooty.

Do you not think there have been people dying on the battlefield taking their last breath wondering if it was worth it? You have the right not to live in this country but if you do you are expected to respond if your country says it needs you.

What gives you the right to supersede the country that's given you so much just because you have certain political feelings...sickening.

Here's a quote from Washington when he was facing the deserter problem within his army, which would be all you people whining...."Wars can be fought for independence but independence cannot fight a war."

Think on that for awhile.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


Why are you so intolerant of people with opinions that differ from yours?

For someone who cries about intolerance and bigotry, you sure do seem obsessed with being intolerant of those with a different mindset.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by aorAki
 


Why are you so intolerant of people with opinions that differ from yours?

For someone who cries about intolerance and bigotry, you sure do seem obsessed with being intolerant of those with a different mindset.


You can have different mindsets about whatever you want but if your enjoying the benefits of this country and deciding when and how you want to contribute they have a word for that in political science. Free Riders



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Not sure what that has to do with my post directed at someone who claims they would only fight bigotry and racism(lol), but uh at least you posted something.

Thats good. I guess



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by kro32
 


Not sure what that has to do with my post directed at someone who claims they would only fight bigotry and racism(lol), but uh at least you posted something.

Thats good. I guess


You have me really confused so I have no response. When did I use bigotry or racism in the slightest? Or even the implication?



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Ah crap, just realized I quoted the wrong post above. My responses were directed at Aoraki, not you.

Apologies.
edit on 14-4-2011 by ViperChili because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by kro32
 


Ah crap, just realized I quoted the wrong post above. My responses were directed at Aoraki, not you.

Apologies.
edit on 14-4-2011 by ViperChili because: (no reason given)


Oh I do that alot too



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by SonicInfinity
 


War is unnecessary and useless, especially since bankers and weapons dealers who bet on both sides win no matter which country falls. If we fight, it just shows that we are an immature species...

Dodge the draft for me.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
in a short phrase...."from my doorstep."
protecting this nation starts at home, and at this present day, with it being well known that corporations rule..in private and in politics, i will not FIGHT a worthless war.


of course, to kick start the killing, automated missile systems will be likely be used to rally the masses...."japan struck with australian missile.....USA struck with former USSR missile barrage.....CHINA struck by apparent american missile...." blah blah blah.....i will not fight. unless i see a physical threat(soldiers) here on my soil to my people.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ahmonrarh
in a short phrase...."from my doorstep."
protecting this nation starts at home, and at this present day, with it being well known that corporations rule..in private and in politics, i will not FIGHT a worthless war.


of course, to kick start the killing, automated missile systems will be likely be used to rally the masses...."japan struck with australian missile.....USA struck with former USSR missile barrage.....CHINA struck by apparent american missile...." blah blah blah.....i will not fight. unless i see a physical threat(soldiers) here on my soil to my people.


I'm sick and tired of people saying corporations rule the masses. Maybe you can give some specific examples how they right all policy decide exactly which wars to fight, exactly which laws to pass blah blah blah. Just because one sector of America has alot of influence does not mean they rule anything.

This is just a statement uneducated people throw out there when their political knowledge is lacking. And who are you to decide what war is worthless? Are you smarter than the collective minds making the decisions?
Do you have access to all the intelligence they have?

What if America's armed forces were asked to invade a country that is neutral because they knew there was something bigger coming up and it would be advantageous to have that strategic placement to save lives later?

Do you think our military should go around to all the soldiers and say something like "You know were thinking of starting this war because of human rights violations but we just want to get everyone's opinion on it first to make sure you think it's just before we start."

Do you think any military could function like that?

You said you'd fight if they were on your doorstep but did you ever think that maybe it would be too late by then?

Do us all a favor and move your unpatriotic self-serving body to sweden



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
All of you saying you wouldn't fight are the most unpatriotic bunch of losers I've ever seen. If you are in the military or are drafted it is your duty to fight. Where would this country be if everyone got to pick and choose every war they thought was important or not?

You elect people to represent you and they may have information about a particular action that needs to be taken they haven't necessarily explained to you. By you acting all high in might with your noses in the air is doing a huge disservice to those who have fought and died so you have the right to be snooty.


It's obvious, but I'll state it anyway. Your point of view is completely closed minded and rejects almost every single reality occurring in America today. It accepts that the only reality is that we live in a perfectly functioning democracy where the elected officials have only have in mind the rights and freedoms of the people that they serve.

Its all crap, gone are the days when it was just the will of the people that shaped the way the country was run. Nowadays, corporations are considered as people in almost every sense when it comes to the ability to affect politics. The vast majority of political money, which makes or breaks a campaign, comes from PACs or other established bodies of political influence, completely devoid of any influence from average Americans.

When a politician makes a political decision, he has to find a balance between two incentives. One is the affect that his political decision will have on his constituents, as they will vote or not vote him back into office. The other is the affect that it will have on the money that funds his campaigns. Most voters are apathetic (although understandably), but funding is extremely vital to a politicians chance of getting re-elected. This is why its understable that so much happens in this democracy that is not for the sake of the average voter.

That is also why, if world war III is declared, I would have to make sure that it was for something that was truly worth the extinguishment of my life and the lives of my future children.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by SonicInfinity
 


Your assuming the war would be an unjust one. Its hard to pick sides when you don't rightly know what side you are going to be fighting on. If I felt it was just, then yeah, I'd probably go fight. If I felt it were an unjust war, then I'd probably fake being gay to get out of it......er......wait a minute that doesn't work anymore does it? Crap........Hmmmm If I REALLY felt the other side was Just perhaps I would defect. Then again if both sides were unjust, I'd probably suddenly join a religious order that held pacifism as a religious belief and get out of it that way (that still works doesn't it?). Then again if both sides were unjust perhaps I'd fight still.....If neither side was Just at least I'd be helping my fellow American Soldiers to survive...many of whom probably felt the same way I did. Although I may try to subvert things subtlely somehow, with my own anti-war propaganda campaign. After all if I am risking my life for something I don't believe in, I may as well risk a court martial for something that I do believe in.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by SonicInfinity
 




and a lot of these brain dead people are too apathetic to even want to fight. maybe the brain dead, lethargic zombies of the world will finally bring about a world peace. maybe the so-called zombie apocalypse wouldn't be such a bad thing.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyCasual
 


fact of the matter is, outside of the societal perimeter that people either choose or accept to exist within there isn't anything that really rightfully belongs to you or anyone else.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by SonicInfinity
 


I'll fight a war where the ones I love are endangered and the ones who declare or goes to said war leads the way. There should be no war if the leader that started it is too much of a wussy to lead the way into it. If the leaders would be forced to lead the way into the battlefield there wouldn't be wars for just about anything and everything like there is today...

If not I won't go fight a battle that isn't mine, I rather be put in jail... its better than war and you have food + a roof...



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by beansanmash

Originally posted by kro32
All of you saying you wouldn't fight are the most unpatriotic bunch of losers I've ever seen. If you are in the military or are drafted it is your duty to fight. Where would this country be if everyone got to pick and choose every war they thought was important or not?

You elect people to represent you and they may have information about a particular action that needs to be taken they haven't necessarily explained to you. By you acting all high in might with your noses in the air is doing a huge disservice to those who have fought and died so you have the right to be snooty.


It's obvious, but I'll state it anyway. Your point of view is completely closed minded and rejects almost every single reality occurring in America today. It accepts that the only reality is that we live in a perfectly functioning democracy where the elected officials have only have in mind the rights and freedoms of the people that they serve.

Its all crap, gone are the days when it was just the will of the people that shaped the way the country was run. Nowadays, corporations are considered as people in almost every sense when it comes to the ability to affect politics. The vast majority of political money, which makes or breaks a campaign, comes from PACs or other established bodies of political influence, completely devoid of any influence from average Americans.

When a politician makes a political decision, he has to find a balance between two incentives. One is the affect that his political decision will have on his constituents, as they will vote or not vote him back into office. The other is the affect that it will have on the money that funds his campaigns. Most voters are apathetic (although understandably), but funding is extremely vital to a politicians chance of getting re-elected. This is why its understable that so much happens in this democracy that is not for the sake of the average voter.

That is also why, if world war III is declared, I would have to make sure that it was for something that was truly worth the extinguishment of my life and the lives of my future children.


We do live in a perfectly function democracy. Like it or not a democracy allows corporations as much access as an average citizen would have to their politicians. And yes the politicans do only have the rights and freedoms of the people they serve in mind but that also includes corporations.

The supreme court realized it was unconstitutional to forbid a particular faction, corporations, from having the same rights as other factions when it comes to campaing finances which is why they overturned the law they did. A perfectly functioning democracy doesn't discriminate.

Now your free to argue if that's positive or negative but don't try to say it's not constitutional. One of the biggest and most feared political body is that of AARP who definetly listens and is considered a very honorable body so it is incorrect of you to say that just because the majority of a politicians money doesn't come directly from an average citizen that that citizen is not being fully represented.

And as to the will of the people running the country, I would like you to name one time when that was actually the case. Possibly the only time I can think of is the election of FDR to combat the spread of the depression. If it was up to the will of the people we would never have joined ww2 if Japan hadn't attacked, or been involved in the Cold War, both very unpopular at the time but also very necessary in the long term.

This is why Hamilton insisted on the electoral college instead of direct elections. I could quote directly from the federalist papers but I'm sure you know them already. The will of the people is not always what is in the nations best interest.

And once again I have to ask, Do you really think any military could function if people had the option of opting out just because they don't agree with something? What if your out sailing one day and get caught in a storm but the Coast Guard just doesn't feel like saving you that day? Isn't it kinda their job? But according to you they have the right to debate it first and make sure the risk is worth it. Really unamerican of you to enjoy the benefits this country has given you than think your so supreme that you can dictate the terms on which you will repay that kindness.
edit on 14-4-2011 by kro32 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:37 AM
link   
The Elite can always hire one half of the poor, to kill the other half. Within in the last few centuries, name one morally justified war? If you can come up with an answer, then you haven't really studied history.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join