"John H." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:30:27 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:00:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:13:25 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
news:3qjvm198424nl2n9angvtsrbdvjove3eeu@4ax. com...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:22:17 -0500, Harry Krause

wrote:

Len wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 13:45:21 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

May the children of all the warmongers here suffer the same
horrific
fate.

Got a cold chill reading this Harry.
But I agree 100% with what you mean.

Regards, Len.


It is immoral to sit safe in your house while you urge that the sons
and
daughters of other families be sent off to foreign lands to fight
and
die in a war based on a president's incompetency, stupidity, and
deceit.

Harry, are you really one who should be talking of sitting safely in
your
house
while others are being sent to foreign lands to fight and die?

I think not.

For a non-participant, you are quick with the moral judgements.
--
John H

I disagree, John. I think that if an elected official votes in favor
of
the
war, whether to signify agreement or to provide funding, that person's
kids
should be the first to enlist. They should have 7 days to do this, or
be
arrested. People who voted for a candidate who declared the war - same
thing. Off with their children, or the voters themselves, if they're
otherwise eligible for service (age & health). A little over half the
country voted for Nookular Boy. Take away those who are too old to
serve
or
have no kids and I'd imagine we could still come up with
what.....maybe
10-20 million new soldiers? End of recruiting problem.

If there's a good reason not to think this way, I haven't heard it
yet.


That post displays one of the reasons the Democrats lost the last
election.

Would your proposal have worked for WW II?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but two countries declared war on us, and we
knew
which countries they were. Right?


Again, you failed to answer a simple question.

If my proposals were in place during WWII, I believe people would've
enlisted more readily whether they were required to or not because the
enemy
was clearly visible. That is NOT the case now. The 9/11 perps - where were
they from? IIRC, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and ??? Florida? We invaded Iraq.
Oops. Wrong country. Rumor had it Saddam might have let OBL sleep there
for
a couple of nights. Bzzzzzzzzzzt! Next contestant!


No one said anything about voluntary enlistments. That is what is
happening now
that your post would make mandatory (which is not enlisting, but being
drafted).
If your 'proposal' had been law, would it have worked for WW II?
--
John H

By would it have worked, if you mean "Would Congress have authorized war"?,
I think YES, it would have worked.

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 01:03:08 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:30:27 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:00:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
om...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:13:25 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
news:3qjvm198424nl2n9angvtsrbdvjove3eeu@4ax .com...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:22:17 -0500, Harry Krause

wrote:

Len wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 13:45:21 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

May the children of all the warmongers here suffer the same
horrific
fate.

Got a cold chill reading this Harry.
But I agree 100% with what you mean.

Regards, Len.


It is immoral to sit safe in your house while you urge that the sons
and
daughters of other families be sent off to foreign lands to fight
and
die in a war based on a president's incompetency, stupidity, and
deceit.

Harry, are you really one who should be talking of sitting safely in
your
house
while others are being sent to foreign lands to fight and die?

I think not.

For a non-participant, you are quick with the moral judgements.
--
John H

I disagree, John. I think that if an elected official votes in favor
of
the
war, whether to signify agreement or to provide funding, that person's
kids
should be the first to enlist. They should have 7 days to do this, or
be
arrested. People who voted for a candidate who declared the war - same
thing. Off with their children, or the voters themselves, if they're
otherwise eligible for service (age & health). A little over half the
country voted for Nookular Boy. Take away those who are too old to
serve
or
have no kids and I'd imagine we could still come up with
what.....maybe
10-20 million new soldiers? End of recruiting problem.

If there's a good reason not to think this way, I haven't heard it
yet.


That post displays one of the reasons the Democrats lost the last
election.

Would your proposal have worked for WW II?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but two countries declared war on us, and we
knew
which countries they were. Right?


Again, you failed to answer a simple question.

If my proposals were in place during WWII, I believe people would've
enlisted more readily whether they were required to or not because the
enemy
was clearly visible. That is NOT the case now. The 9/11 perps - where were
they from? IIRC, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and ??? Florida? We invaded Iraq.
Oops. Wrong country. Rumor had it Saddam might have let OBL sleep there
for
a couple of nights. Bzzzzzzzzzzt! Next contestant!


No one said anything about voluntary enlistments. That is what is
happening now
that your post would make mandatory (which is not enlisting, but being
drafted).
If your 'proposal' had been law, would it have worked for WW II?
--
John H

By would it have worked, if you mean "Would Congress have authorized war"?,
I think YES, it would have worked.


And only Democrats would have been forced to fight.

OK. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
--
John H

"It's *not* a baby kicking, bride of mine, it's just a fetus!"

Hypocrital Liberal

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 01:03:08 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:30:27 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:00:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
news:1imvm1dlvrkne1on8qg3eqk24icn7pa43u@4ax. com...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:13:25 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
news:3qjvm198424nl2n9angvtsrbdvjove3eeu@4a x.com...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:22:17 -0500, Harry Krause

wrote:

Len wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 13:45:21 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

May the children of all the warmongers here suffer the same
horrific
fate.

Got a cold chill reading this Harry.
But I agree 100% with what you mean.

Regards, Len.


It is immoral to sit safe in your house while you urge that the
sons
and
daughters of other families be sent off to foreign lands to fight
and
die in a war based on a president's incompetency, stupidity, and
deceit.

Harry, are you really one who should be talking of sitting safely
in
your
house
while others are being sent to foreign lands to fight and die?

I think not.

For a non-participant, you are quick with the moral judgements.
--
John H

I disagree, John. I think that if an elected official votes in favor
of
the
war, whether to signify agreement or to provide funding, that
person's
kids
should be the first to enlist. They should have 7 days to do this,
or
be
arrested. People who voted for a candidate who declared the war -
same
thing. Off with their children, or the voters themselves, if they're
otherwise eligible for service (age & health). A little over half
the
country voted for Nookular Boy. Take away those who are too old to
serve
or
have no kids and I'd imagine we could still come up with
what.....maybe
10-20 million new soldiers? End of recruiting problem.

If there's a good reason not to think this way, I haven't heard it
yet.


That post displays one of the reasons the Democrats lost the last
election.

Would your proposal have worked for WW II?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but two countries declared war on us, and we
knew
which countries they were. Right?


Again, you failed to answer a simple question.

If my proposals were in place during WWII, I believe people would've
enlisted more readily whether they were required to or not because the
enemy
was clearly visible. That is NOT the case now. The 9/11 perps - where
were
they from? IIRC, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and ??? Florida? We invaded
Iraq.
Oops. Wrong country. Rumor had it Saddam might have let OBL sleep there
for
a couple of nights. Bzzzzzzzzzzt! Next contestant!


No one said anything about voluntary enlistments. That is what is
happening now
that your post would make mandatory (which is not enlisting, but being
drafted).
If your 'proposal' had been law, would it have worked for WW II?
--
John H

By would it have worked, if you mean "Would Congress have authorized
war"?,
I think YES, it would have worked.


And only Democrats would have been forced to fight.

OK. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Great! It would've separated the chicken hawks from the real people, same as
now.