Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[<Patrick>]

Well, the issue here is not clear self-sacrifice to save others, it is to have the courage to save others when you are most probably already lost anyway.  In otherwords, do you trade a 5% chance of personal survival for a 100% chance of group survival, when the most likely outcome is that everyone is either killed or horribly maimed if you choose not to cover the grenade.

BTW, few if any know how they will actually act in such a case.  

RS

     What is this war about? What am I fighting for anyway?

[<Patrick>]

     
     You can bet that if I was drafted to fight in a war I did not agree with, I would take the 5% chance at survival and run like hell to save my own life!

[RhythmStar]

>>draftee running like Hell

One reason that an all-volunteer Army is tactically superior, even if many draftees will serve honorably and even heroically.

I never had to face the dilemma, as I volunteered for the Texas National Guard, although not to avoid the draft per se (it was discontinued the same year anyway, much to the dismay of the draftees I did Basic Training with).  

RS

[Mike Lorrey]

Frankly, I'd prefer having draftees doing all the scut work: slopping out latrines, etc. Using them as cannon fodder is counter productive.

Personally, all I'd do is say that only those who've done voluntary active duty can attain political office and qualify for twice as much unemployment or welfare as regular citizens.

[RhythmStar]

Frankly, I'd prefer having draftees doing all the scut work: slopping out latrines, etc. Using them as cannon fodder is counter productive.

Personally, all I'd do is say that only those who've done voluntary active duty can attain political office and qualify for twice as much unemployment or welfare as regular citizens.

Your Heinlein is showing.

Why not go all the way and simply deny them citizenship unless they opt for military service?  

RS

[<Patrick>]

     Starship Troopers?!

[Mike Lorrey]

Frankly, I'd prefer having draftees doing all the scut work: slopping out latrines, etc. Using them as cannon fodder is counter productive.

Personally, all I'd do is say that only those who've done voluntary active duty can attain political office and qualify for twice as much unemployment or welfare as regular citizens.

Your Heinlein is showing.

Why not go all the way and simply deny them citizenship unless they opt for military service?  

Optimally, any libertarian society, living in a world still dominated by statist tyranny, would need some mechanism both to plan and provide for, and be capable of, rapidly flipping from a highly decentralized libertarian society to a highly centralized military one when it is needed. A major problem is that those who never experience the horrors to which statist opponents of liberty are willing to go to, tend to go into denial and avoidance to actively prevent such a society from making the necessary flip when it is needed.

Those who have never served a day in the military have, in my opinion, some of the most loony, idiotic, foolish, ill considered, naive opinions of other nations, leaders, and movements. While I can always find some veterans that disagree with me on foreign affairs, I must say they almost always have well informed reasons for their opinions. Finding such well informed individuals among the non-veteran population is a few and far between proposition.

[RhythmStar]

Frankly, I'd prefer having draftees doing all the scut work: slopping out latrines, etc. Using them as cannon fodder is counter productive.

Personally, all I'd do is say that only those who've done voluntary active duty can attain political office and qualify for twice as much unemployment or welfare as regular citizens.

Your Heinlein is showing.

Why not go all the way and simply deny them citizenship unless they opt for military service?  

Optimally, any libertarian society, living in a world still dominated by statist tyranny, would need some mechanism both to plan and provide for, and be capable of, rapidly flipping from a highly decentralized libertarian society to a highly centralized military one when it is needed. A major problem is that those who never experience the horrors to which statist opponents of liberty are willing to go to, tend to go into denial and avoidance to actively prevent such a society from making the necessary flip when it is needed.

Those who have never served a day in the military have, in my opinion, some of the most loony, idiotic, foolish, ill considered, naive opinions of other nations, leaders, and movements. While I can always find some veterans that disagree with me on foreign affairs, I must say they almost always have well informed reasons for their opinions. Finding such well informed individuals among the non-veteran population is a few and far between proposition.

FWIW, I happen to agree with you.  

Military service should not be compulsory, but I think those who avoid it are cheating themselves and weakening their own chances for survival.   The more freedom the society attains, the more critical it will be that well-trained, skilled and physically able citizens are ready to defend that society.  Just owning a gun is not enough -- the military arts have moved way beyond that agrarian ideal!

RS

[nonluddite]

FWIW, I happen to agree with you.  

Military service should not be compulsory, but I think those who avoid it are cheating themselves and weakening their own chances for survival.   The more freedom the society attains, the more critical it will be that well-trained, skilled and physically able citizens are ready to defend that society.  Just owning a gun is not enough -- the military arts have moved way beyond that agrarian ideal!

RS

Israel has compulsory service and a standing army.  Switzerland only has a militia, but is it compulsory?  Regardless, they both seem to arm their citizens to the hilt, which makes them pretty prickly customers on their own turf.

[<Patrick>]

FWIW, I happen to agree with you.  

Military service should not be compulsory, but I think those who avoid it are cheating themselves and weakening their own chances for survival.   The more freedom the society attains, the more critical it will be that well-trained, skilled and physically able citizens are ready to defend that society.  Just owning a gun is not enough -- the military arts have moved way beyond that agrarian ideal!

RS

Israel has compulsory service and a standing army.  Switzerland only has a militia, but is it compulsory?  Regardless, they both seem to arm their citizens to the hilt, which makes them pretty prickly customers on their own turf.

     I think the Swiss do make it compulsory.

[Mike Lorrey]

Actually, Israel has significant limitations on civilians who are not in the military or reserves against carrying concealed weapons or handguns in general. A few years ago there was an experiment done, but I do not recall the results.

[DustinD]

I am surprised so many people are in favor of forcing people to not use something that could save them. That is essentially murder.  Would you ban the use of water by those people if someone claimed it caused egg shells to weaken?

[Mike Lorrey]

What are you talking about?

[RhythmStar]

I am surprised so many people are in favor of forcing people to not use something that could save them. That is essentially murder.  Would you ban the use of water by those people if someone claimed it caused egg shells to weaken?

Hmm... OK, assumptions:

1. You are referring to DDT and various government bans thereof.  True or false?

2. You are assuming someone here is in favor of government bans.  True or false?

Personally, I am not in favor of government bans, but I am in favor of being able to sue (and possibly prosecute) any person or persons who introduces any artificial substance into my body, directly or indirectly, without my consent.   If someone else's life depends on polluting my body with some bioaccumulative crap, then I reserve the right to let them die, or perhaps even take stronger self-defense measures.  That doesn't necessarily mean that I would let them die, but it does mean I do not think I am obligated to carry their chemical refuse in my body so they might live a while longer, regardless of the putative safety thereof.

RS