It's double-old.

Democratic House leadership has already made public announcements that they have absolutely no intention whatsoever of seeking a draft.

This is just an old pet project of one particular fellow.

Kristofer wrote: Last thing I want to do is fight alongside a draftee.

You mean... like Oldsoldier?

And draftdodgers.. if you would dodge the draft. then just leave now you arent wanted.

Not big on the whole "freedom" thing, now are we?

Marine? Big on Freedom?  

For after all what's man in nature? A central point in between nothing & all, infinitely far from understanding either.

Hades wrote: ...I say Thanks to those by paying taxes, getting good grades and being smart, having a job, and not burdening society through criminal behavior. Just because one does not want to pony up and serve in the armed forces, doesnt mean one doesnt or wont contribute to society.

Pop quiz:  Who has done more for America, the American way, the world as a whole, all of our lives and lifestyle, and so forth:

(A)  Bill Gates

(B)  A Division of US Marines

(hint - it isn't B)

Shortly I won't be able to wear my burka in Amsterdam.  I'm not sure that's where I want to be either.

Evil Elvis wrote:   Well said. You dont need to pick up a rifle to be a patriot. After all with out tax money how are we to armor up our hummers? How are we to get the best equipment for our service persons. All indications of future "soldier" concepts rely less and less in troop numbers and more into maximizing the training and equipment of the warfigther. From UAV's to Networked Combat Theaters. It's going away from the Old thinking off sending waves after waves of US servive men to sending in Machines and Men. In a Combined Arms level that not even todays Marines and Soldiers have seen. To stay in top of the world we dont need twenty million Marines. What we need is billions of Productive Americans. I studing is as noble a calling as is the way of the rifle.

Well said indeed.

Kristofer wrote:   i dont think you could fairly compare the two.

Hard to disagree with that.

*Stealth* wrote: Bill Gates would have never had the oppurtunity to even start that business had it not been for the efforts of "Those marines". All depends on how you look at it.

It does all depend on how you look at it.  Clearly.

But it is certainly not clear that a division or Marines more or less would have affected Gates' contribution to mankind.  This is the logic that makes me cringe - the "thank a soldier if you are speaking in English" crap.  Hyper-simplistic jingoistic nonsense.

One step further - those Marines would have been fighting with their fists without the industrial machine behind them, led by men like Gates, Rockefeller, and Carnegie, and worked by every bluecollar guy and gal in history.  Those Marines would have been eating dirt without the agricultural industry behind them, making food to eat.  Those Marines would have been fighting with sticks without a bunch of geeks inventing cool new weapons. 

And those Marines wouldn't even have a country to fight for without a bunch of egghead hippies (named Jefferson, Hamilton, Franklin, Thoreau, Locke, Hume, etc.) sitting around contemplating the meaning of "freedom".

Yes, we need Marines.  But those Marines are no more important than anybody else.  All of society is important.  Without a full and complete society, soldiers are meaningless.  The idea that soldiers are somehow better or more important than other folks is a nifty idea to help recruiters, but that doesn't make it any less wrong.

I never said they were nice people - I hear John Adams was also quite an ass.  Stanford U was founded by another ass.

But they were all invaluable to the country as we know it.  They were invaluable then, and their legacies live on to be invaluable now.

Kristofer wrote: just going to point out. that bill gates' life isnt on the line in his job. nor is a lot of soceity. i'm not saying being a Marine or in the military makes me better. i am saying our lives are on the line. just like a police officers or firefighters. and other jobs. obviously anyone could die from a freakaccident at work. but in my line of work its more of an IED threat or some trash like that.

I'll bet you Bill Gates has bodyguards.  Do you have bodyguards?  People want to kidnap his kids.  Do people want to kidnap your kids?

And unless you are on frontline grunt duty in the middle of a shootin'-war, soldiering is not particularly dangerous, relatively speaking.  Not nearly as dangerous as, say, coal mining.  And unlike coal miners, Marines have groupies.  And unlike coal miners, you have great job security, great benefits, and potentially a great resume builder.

So, to summarize:  Coal miner - less glamorous, fewer benefits, fewer groupies, fewer future prospects, greater harm to health, greater chance of job-related death, and provides crucial service to society.

When was the last time you saluted a coal miner?

oldsoldier wrote: ?..........This is your mind on drugs.................

I think I peed...  LMAO!!

oldsoldier wrote: It's all a matter of choice. The coal miner, the Marine, the computer geek, each finds his own path, based on what he/she wants. Sometimes it is necesity, sometimes it is luck, sometimes fate.

DINGDINGDING!

Too many of percieved privledge seem to see those percieved as below them in social status as inferior, and the pride these "inferior" individuals show in whatever thier profession, as misguided, but by whom?

People do have a tendency to view outsiders generally as inferior, not just those of "perceived privilege".  This is exactly the point I am trying to make. 

An example that we see frequently here, including this thread, is the insistence by military personnel that military service is somehow better, more noble, more important, or more whatever, than any other profession.  We see this to the point of complete irrationality, to the point where anybody who fails to acknowledge this is indeed viewed as misguided.

I have nothing against the military.  It is a fine and important profession.  Just like coal mining.

Clark Kent wrote:   An example that we see frequently here, including this thread, is the insistence by military personnel that military service is somehow better, more noble, more important, or more whatever, than any other profession.  We see this to the point of complete irrationality, to the point where anybody who fails to acknowledge this is indeed viewed as misguided. I have nothing against the military.  It is a fine and important profession.  Just like coal mining.

Exactly. This seems to happen quite a bit.

I don't want to die I don't know about the rest of you but I am pretty sure that I want to live.

Thinking....

Yeah I'd like to live for as long as I could.

Also I don't want to be killed by some piece of crap car bomb either. Or a manic strapped to a bomb. If I were to die I'd picked taking a bullet to the head, insta-death.

For after all what's man in nature? A central point in between nothing & all, infinitely far from understanding either.

Justice wrote: Can't Argue fact/statistics Old Soldier.

Sure we can.

OS needs to check his denominator.

Dead in Iraq: 3,000 (more or less) - call it 1,000 per year.

Troops in Iraq:  150,000 (more or less)

Dead/Troops = 1/150 every year.

(and that's not even adjusting for actual combat duty)

Now let's try stateside:

43,000 dead annually on the road (more or less)

Total Americans:  300,000,000

Roadkill/Americans = 1/7000

Not even close, really.

oldsoldier wrote: We lose how many per year to automobile crashes, our highways are more of a threat to the average American than actually serving in a warzone.

This is the statement I was addressing.  War zone vs highway.

As to the general statement of whether military service is more dangerous than non-military service - that's more complicated.

Keep in mind - many of those 43,000 traffic deaths are military personnel.  These are not exclusive populations.

In fact, military personnel are roughly average in all non-job sudden deaths (they are lower, as you might expect, in old-age and severe disability-related deaths, since old people with ALS tend not be in the military).

But military folks still die from random slip and fall, from traffic accidents, murder, drowning, and other semi-random deaths.  And they do so at much the same rate as others of similar age and health.

The relevant difference is job-related deaths.  While coal mining consistently scores the highest on national and international 'danger job" lists, military is certainly higher on the list than most other jobs.  Is the receivables clerk job in E Ring roughly similar in danger to the receivables clerk job in Midwest Office Supply?  Probably.  But once you lump all of the military together (at your suggestion), I have no doubt that the job-related death rate - even during peace time - is significantly above the national average. 

oldsoldier wrote: I still prefered the risks of service life, where I could control my enviornment to a point, than driving a big rig on America's interstate system. Joe Billy Bob 4 wheeler in a hurry was more of a "risk" factor for me there than I found in the combat zones. I do not know how many times I stood my truck on its nose to avoid some idiot soccer mom needing to pull out so she could get in front of the big truck and not stuck behind.

Fair enough - there are many reasons why a person might choose one profession over another, including both actual and perceived danger.

It is all relative, but these kids thinking that military service equates to a death sentence is just plain funny.

Agreed.

And that draftees are of lesser quality than volunteers. Actually the draft provided more of a diverse unit, where Joe Bob barely graduated from high school,from WV, could serve alongside some kid from IN in his second year of college. The exchange of information, culture and comraderee can not be compared to any civilian occupation.

Did I just hear OS argue for the value of diversity in a professional environment?  Can an argument for affirmative action be far behind?

;)