The Army's hard sell

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
I would rather have some old tough guys like myself in the service, than a bunch of mamby-pamby whining liberal red diaper doper babies serving. That's what the draft would do.

You wouldn't have to worry about that, Bro. Curtis. They would all be in Canada.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[church mouse guy]

They would all be in Canada.

Do you mean because of the marriage laws?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by carpro:
The strongest opponents of the draft are very likely our military leadership.

I, too, am against the draft. But not categorically. If it becomes necessary in the War on Terror, then let's do it. This is a fight to the finish.

I agree! I'm for whatever it takes to win including a draft if it becomes necessary which, hopefully, won't be the case.

 

[Dragoon68]

The Department of Defense announced its updated recruiting (enlistment) and retention (re-enlistment) numbers today for the month of June 2005.

The Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force active components all met or exceeded their recruiting goals in June with the Army doing best at 109%. All active component services met or exceeded their overall retention goals as well for June and are projected to meet their retention goals for the current fiscal year. Four of the six reserve components - namely the Army Reserve, Air National Guard, Air Force Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve - met or exceeded their June recruiting goals. The Army National Guard and the Navy Reserve did not. The Army National Guard in particular feel short of its goal for new enlistment by 14%. For June, Army National Guard retention was about 106% of the cumulative goal and for the Air National Guard it was about 110%. Losses in all reserve components in May were lower than projected, and that trend is expected to continue into June. The Department of Defense is continuing to monitor the effects of the increased use of our reserve components on retention rates.

So much for the "bleeding heart liberal" theory that people are leaving or avoiding the military in droves!

 

[OCC]

Originally posted by KenH:
Be careful about using the word "slander" when referring to anyone who is bashing President Bush, Joseph. The Bush bashers on this board won't like it and will report you to the moderators.

A great post, Joseph, showing how despicable the Bush bashing side can act.

Ken...who would you be talking about? Weren't you reporting ME to the moderators because I stated some similarities between Bush and Hitler?

 

[OCC]

Originally posted by Hardsheller:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Travelsong:
What a dramatic shift in reasoning.

This was not the argument offered to sell this war.

So tell me. How have we reduced the threat to our country?

NO MAJOR TERROR ATTACKS IN AMERICA SINCE THE INVASION OF IRAQ!

That's zip. Nada. Zero. None.

Any more questions? </font>[/QUOTE]Just one. Why is the terror level very high then? Ok two...why bother fighting a war on terror when there has not been another attack since? hmmmm???

 

[OCC]

For all you Americans who complain about those who are "anti-American":

Your "anti-Canada" rhetoric borders on hypocrisy. Hypocrites...oh wait...the war mongers may "attack" me cuz I called them a nasty name. Hypocrites and war mongers.

Joseph...don't worry about whether you'd run here or not...

 

[carpro]

Originally posted by King James:
For all you Americans who complain about those who are "anti-American":

Your "anti-Canada" rhetoric borders on hypocrisy. Hypocrites...oh wait...the war mongers may "attack" me cuz I called them a nasty name. Hypocrites and war mongers.

Joseph...don't worry about whether you'd run here or not...

If you want to start another ropic, it's a safe bet no one will mind.

 

[OCC]

LOL I'm referring to the posts just a few before mine. At the bottom of page 15.

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by King James:
LOL I'm referring to the posts just a few before mine. At the bottom of page 15.

My post is at the bottom of page 15 and I'm still okay with what I wrote. I don't see the connection between what I wrote and your comments.

 

[OCC]

Dragoon...I didn't say you specifically did I? I said the few posts...you know...the ones where people are taking potshots at Canada.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Actually,

We were taking shots at the liberal anti-war cowards who ran like chickens to Canada during Vietnam. Don't take everything so personally.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[OCC]

Hey Joseph, I don't really care if anyone insults my country. It is the product of ignorance and I love my country so it really doesn't matter. I was just pointing out that people such as cmg, talk about gays, etc. in Canada and complain about Canada and then turn around and say that many of us are "anti-American".

It is rather ironic. That's really all I was talking about.

Now...could you explain to me why someone who is anit-war is a liberal and a coward? I have a huge problem with what you just said and I would like you to clarify that statement. You don't mean to imply that NO Democrats (not liberals, but Democrats) would ever, ever serve in the military and die for their country do you???

I would think some of the people who were "anti-war" and ran to Canada were CONSERVATIVES...maybe Menonites or something. They are anti-war are they not? I just get very weary of the "liberal, anti-war" spiel. If you don't like people making generalizations about conservatives...don't do it to liberals. capiche?

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by King James:
You don't mean to imply that NO Democrats (not liberals, but Democrats) would ever, ever serve in the military and die for their country do you???

Did I say that? I don't generally imply anything. My general way is to go ahead and say exactly what I am thinking so as there is no confusion. Of course Democrats have fought and died for our country. There was a time when even a Democrat president was willing to stand up against tyranny and terror. His name was FDR. Interesting point to make is that there wasn't much objection to it from France, or Europe in general as it was their keisters on the line in that war. Too bad the Democrat Party as a whole is not the same party as FDR. It is also interesting to note that it was the Republicans who were anti-war isolationists during WW2, and now the roles have been reversed.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[OCC]

Joseph, I am glad you don't generally imply anything. I don't know you from Adam so there was no way for me to know that. I myself don't always say exactly what I am thinking because people may think I'm mean.

There wasn't much objection from France or Europe because they already had other countries helping them. It would be rude to turn down the help of one country while being helped by others for a few years already.

It is interesting to learn that the roles are reversed during WW2. Still, I don't think you can make a blanket statement that EVERY Republican then or EVERY Democrat now was/is an anti-war isolationist.

Oh yeah, why is someone who is "anti-war" a coward? I myself have an idea why you and many others think so but I wasn't asked the question.

 

[NiteShift]

-------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by King James:

There wasn't much objection from France or Europe because they already had other countries helping them. It would be rude to turn down the help of one country while being helped by others for a few years already.

It is interesting to learn that the roles are reversed during WW2. Still, I don't think you can make a blanket statement that EVERY Republican then or EVERY Democrat now was/is an anti-war isolationist.
-------------------------------------------------
You're saying that France only accepted US help out of courtesy? Please be serious KJ. The war could not have been won without US help.
And I don't think anyone said that EVERY Democrat is an anti-war isolationist. Actually they only oppose military action carried out by Republican leaders.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Actually,

We were taking shots at the liberal anti-war cowards who ran like chickens to Canada during Vietnam. Don't take everything so personally.

Joseph Botwinick

So where in Vietnam did you serve, Joseph? If you were not drafted, surely you ran down and joined so that you could participate in the war.

 

[KenH]

Hey, MP, not everyone posting on this board was old enough to fight in Vietnam, or maybe even born yet.

For the record, my brother and brother-in-law both serve in Vietnam. The war ended when I was a junior in high school.