A Promise To All Americans.

[ZenSilk]

If a candidate gets elected for the presidency and they are for War on Iran, and there is a draft, i will personally go to every single person's house who i can discover voted for that person and execute them.



My pomise. I am not going to fight your petty little battles in the sand. I would rather fight you.

[gaia.plateau]

If a candidate gets elected for the presidency and they are for War on Iran, and there is a draft, i will personally go to every single person's house who i can discover voted for that person and execute them.



My pomise. I am not going to fight your petty little battles in the sand. I would rather fight you.

Would you prefer a candidate who is for pulling out of Iraq? (By which I mean, at any rate through any period of time in the next five years).

[garykainz]

Do you honestly think that they would ever reinstate the draft? I don't think it's a viable possibility, and certainly not anything to freak out over. I just don't think they could ever do that again.

[nicayotte]

i highly doubt they can reinact it like stated before......

[ZenSilk]

Well good. cause my boss is freaking me out.

[btuner]

If they ever do, Canada here I come

[dude3516]

They could easily re-activate it if they wanted to. The motivation required for the politicians though is entirely different. My bet though, is that if there were another attack on the Continental U.S. of some size, something similar to 9/11, the draft would be re-institued within a week. Personally if we do go to war with Iran, wich by default would put us at war with Russia due to their territorial alliance agreement, then I'd join up pretty quickly. Either way though I doubt we'd actually end up at war with Iran, mostly because they've been rattling their Sabers ever since the 40's, secondly because Israel has quite the track record with tactically striking anyone near them who starts stirring up trouble.

[netstorm]

We should pull out of Iraq, and stay out of Iran. We need to be non interventionists, otherwise we will always be hated, and always be attacked.

[NoPeace]

If a candidate gets elected for the presidency and they are for War on Iran, and there is a draft, i will personally go to every single person's house who i can discover voted for that person and execute them.



My pomise. I am not going to fight your petty little battles in the sand. I would rather fight you.

Yea i live in america and if that happens again i will kill everyone. First off there will never be a draft, trust me on that. there is one congressman pushing for a draft and he gets like death threats every day and everyone hates him. Im assuming ur not from the US but you have to realize. The majority of americans now HATE him. However, im from a strong logical liberal background so i cant speak for everyone. All i have to say is. When Bush and Cheney die they better turn it into a national holiday because they are so evil

[gaia.plateau]

We should pull out of Iraq, and stay out of Iran... otherwise we will always be hated

If you guys pull out of Iraq, any hope of restoring even a semblance of US legitimacy and/or respect in the international community will be gone... there is a huge disconnect from reality in the issue of Iraq exiting in US political discourse, particularly in the democratic camp.

The most optimistic assessments done by academics and by NGOs predict that if the US leaves Iraq in the near future, there will be a minimum of one million civilian deaths. More pessimistic assessments range up to 10 million.

This is an article published this summer by the President of the International Crisis Group, definitely worth a read for anyone interested in understanding the kind of Middle Eastern future that's ahead of us. Only 4 pages long.

I'll quote the important part for you... ("R2P" stands for Responsibility to Protect).

"Iraq in 2003 was not an R2P situation, because although there were clearly major human rights violations continuing to occur (which justified international concern and response, eg, by way of censure and sanctions), and although mass atrocity crimes had clearly occurred in the past (against the Kurds in the late 80s and the southern Shiites in the early 90s) such crimes were neither actually occurring nor apprehended when the coalition invaded the country in early 2003. By contrast, it would be proper to characterise the situation in Iraq now, in July 2007, as an R2P one, because there is every reason to fear that – particularly in the context of a precipitate withdrawal of foreign forces from the centre of the country – that the present situation, bad as it is, will rapidly deteriorate into massive outbreak of communal and sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing beyond the capacity of the Iraqi government to control, and from which it would be unconscionable for the wider world to stand aloof."

Among others, Jennifer Hazen and David M. Law have written extensively on the subject.

I realize that the US is overdrawn and strained from Iraq, especially politically... and that an exit in the next decade is inevitable. From my perspective, the only viable solution I can imagine is a very humble apology by the US government in the UN forum, requesting multilateral peacekeeping and peacebuilding aid in Iraq over the next 60 years or so. Naturally, this apology would probably need to be accompanied by an extremely large aid donation, somewhere to the tune of 15 trillion over the next 60 years. I'm not optimistic. Edited November 30, 2007 by gaia.plateau

[Ace of Hearts]

My pomise. I am not going to fight your petty little battles in the sand. I would rather fight you.

That's not very Zen of you Silk...

[Akkbar]

Canada doesn't want any more draft dodgers.

[james]

Chance of war in Iran is non-existent. Just because pundits are banging the war drums doesn't mean that the public is ready to jump in to another war.

People are sick of the war we're in now. Jesus himself couldn't talk them in to moving next door for another 5+ years of fighting. Plus, Iran would be a harder fight, and I think Iran could gather allies against us.

A draft is political suicide, btw.

That being said, if a conflict arises between Israel and Iran, I'd bet we become involved. But we won't initiate anything with Iran. No way.

[gaia.plateau]

I think Iran could gather allies against us.

Unquestionably.

Definitely Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Venezuela
Probably Russia
Possibly China, India, North Korea, Cuba, Nicaragua

[TheScotsman]

If a candidate gets elected for the presidency and they are for War on Iran, and there is a draft, i will personally go to every single person's house who i can discover voted for that person and execute them.



My pomise. I am not going to fight your petty little battles in the sand. I would rather fight you.

That's almost worth voting for just to see if you could find my house, my hounds are hungry!



Any war in Iran is undoubtedly going to turn into a tactical nuke strike. I think the Russian allied states, and China would (at this point, anyway) stay out of it from a military standpoint. N. Korea would follow China's lead after a bit of their own posturing. At this point, China's economy depends too heavily on the USA. Pakistan would ally with Iran - although without the USA's $150,000,000 PER MONTH the nation would collapse nearly overnight, and I would expect India (another economy reliant on the USA) to oppose any Paki point (likely turning to a low-yield atomic exchange with India ending well on top.). Israel would use it as an excuse to put an end to Syria. Lebanon would make allot of noise, but realize the only thing that prevented an Israeli attack is the likelihood of fallout, and do nothing but make noise. Nicaragua, who cares? Venezuela would side with Iran, Their noise would insure we finally get that border with Mexico walled off, and proper security in place.

In a conventional war, we have demonstrated the US military's ability to resoundingly dominate ex-com block junk, both on the ground, and in air superiority. Edited November 30, 2007 by TheScotsman

[PirateNinja415]

We should pull out of Iraq, and stay out of Iran... otherwise we will always be hated

If you guys pull out of Iraq, any hope of restoring even a semblance of US legitimacy and/or respect in the international community will be gone... there is a huge disconnect from reality in the issue of Iraq exiting in US political discourse, particularly in the democratic camp.

The most optimistic assessments done by academics and by NGOs predict that if the US leaves Iraq in the near future, there will be a minimum of one million civilian deaths. More pessimistic assessments range up to 10 million.

This is an article published this summer by the President of the International Crisis Group, definitely worth a read for anyone interested in understanding the kind of Middle Eastern future that's ahead of us. Only 4 pages long.

I'll quote the important part for you... ("R2P" stands for Responsibility to Protect).

"Iraq in 2003 was not an R2P situation, because although there were clearly major human rights violations continuing to occur (which justified international concern and response, eg, by way of censure and sanctions), and although mass atrocity crimes had clearly occurred in the past (against the Kurds in the late 80s and the southern Shiites in the early 90s) such crimes were neither actually occurring nor apprehended when the coalition invaded the country in early 2003. By contrast, it would be proper to characterise the situation in Iraq now, in July 2007, as an R2P one, because there is every reason to fear that – particularly in the context of a precipitate withdrawal of foreign forces from the centre of the country – that the present situation, bad as it is, will rapidly deteriorate into massive outbreak of communal and sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing beyond the capacity of the Iraqi government to control, and from which it would be unconscionable for the wider world to stand aloof."

Among others, Jennifer Hazen and David M. Law have written extensively on the subject.

I realize that the US is overdrawn and strained from Iraq, especially politically... and that an exit in the next decade is inevitable. From my perspective, the only viable solution I can imagine is a very humble apology by the US government in the UN forum, requesting multilateral peacekeeping and peacebuilding aid in Iraq over the next 60 years or so. Naturally, this apology would probably need to be accompanied by an extremely large aid donation, somewhere to the tune of 15 trillion over the next 60 years. I'm not optimistic.

while i think that this is a decent solution, i cannot see the UN stepping into Iraq anytime soon. We stepped all over them when we first entered Iraq, and i feel that they are going to help out Darfur before they consider entering Iraq. I feel that we should just pack up and leave before we make things worse. We aren't helping anyone by staying there, and more and more american lives are being lost by our prolonged stay. It would cause a big mess if we leave, and Iraq would be in political turmoil for years to come, but thats just what we have to deal with.

[lemmiwinks]

We should trade Bush for UN intervention in Iraq. And Cheney. And the rest of the Bush administration...

Now I know their lives aren't worth that much, but it would be kind of a symbolic thing. It's like a little kid making his dad a chair for a present. Sure, it's a piece of shit that isn't worth anything except what the raw materials could get you, buit it's the thought that counts.

Hmm, actually that would be one hell of an ebay auction...

[ASUSEAN1]

Canada doesn't want any more draft dodgers.

we'll bring shisha!! lol jus messin

[gaia.plateau]

we'll bring shisha!!

Sold.

[SmokingDjinn]

Yeah pulling out of Iraq would be really irresponsible on the USA's part. The war over there really is not as bad as liberal media makes it out to be. My buddy just got done with his second tour in Iraq. Right now it isn't even really a war, we a just policing an occupied terroritory. My buddy said we are not even fighting that many Iraqi's any more, most of the insurgents are from other countries.

As far as Iran, there is no doubt in my mind that they support the insurgents. I'm not pro war on Iran but they are our enemy. I will end by quoting Machiavelli:

"The distance is so great between how we live and how we ought to live that he who abandons what is done for what ought to be done learns his ruin rather than his preservation; because a man who wants to make a profession of goodness in everything is bound to come to ruin among so many who are not good"
and
"Men have less hesitation about offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared, for love is held together by a chain of obligation which, because men are sadly wicked, is broken at every opportunity to serve their self-interest, but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never abandons you."

Djinn Edited December 1, 2007 by SmokingDjinn

[TheScotsman]

As far as Iran, there is no doubt in my mind that they support the insurgents. I'm not pro war on Iran but they are our enemy. I will end by quoting Machiavelli:


Djinn

The people crossing th border to cause problems in Iraq would never inspire an invasion on their own part, but there is no way at all that Iran is going to get any atomic warhead. If it's not the USA it will be Israel, but someone will stop that.

[gaia.plateau]

The people crossing th border to cause problems in Iraq would never inspire an invasion on their own part, but there is no way at all that Iran is going to get any atomic warhead. If it's not the USA it will be Israel, but someone will stop that.

If Israel attacks Iran, a third world war will break out.

There are some alarming similarities between the international system in 1914 and the international system now.

In 1914 Austria-Hungry was facing a crisis of Serb nationalism that they could not suppress, and they needed a way to crush it - by annexing/defeating Serbia. Germany was holding it back, because it was not ready for war, and Russia was bound to defend Serbia or Nicholas II would be seen as weak and deposed.

Now today in Israel, the seeds of Palestinian nationalism have already started to grow, and the increasing oppression of Palestinians living in Israel is becoming more and more apparent to the outside world. Like then, the US is holding it back, because it's totally overdrawn politically (and getting there economically), and like then Iran is bound to defend Palestine for promises made by Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah.

In 1914, France allied themselves with Russia out of fear that Germany was expanding too quickly and without regard for other nations. Today, Russia and Venezuela have aligned themselves with Iran for similar reasons regarding the United States.

Finally, the #1 reason for the first world war was the ambiguity of Britain - Emperor Wilhelm geniuinely did not believe that Britain would go to France's aid, and in his defense Britain probably shouldn't have attacked. They had been exercising a policy of isolationism for hundreds of years to their great success, and it appeared to be just another continental European war, the likes of which had been raging for centuries.

Today, India is the wild card, having been cooperative with Western powers but also signing agreements and accords with Russia. It fills the roles of both Britain and Italy in this historical analogy.

To reiterrate...

1914 Austria-Hungary = 2007 Israel
1914 Sebia = 2007 Palestine
1914 Russia = 2007 Iran
1914 Germany = 2007 United States
1914 France = 2007 Russia
1914 Britain/Italy = 2007 India
1914 Ottoman Empire = 2007 European Union

With the exception of Palestine, who like Serbia would be limited to the role of catalyst, every state actor involved is either a full-fledged nuclear power, a clandestine nuclear power (Israel), or an aspiring nuclear power (Iran). If this isn't an imperative for a global consensus against war, there never will be one. Edited December 1, 2007 by gaia.plateau

[guyt]

Canada doesn't want any more draft dodgers.

we'll bring shisha!! lol jus messin

I don't think everyone here can afford their rediculous tobbacco tax.

[lemmiwinks]

Yeah pulling out of Iraq would be really irresponsible on the USA's part. The war over there really is not as bad as liberal media makes it out to be. My buddy just got done with his second tour in Iraq. Right now it isn't even really a war, we a just policing an occupied terroritory. My buddy said we are not even fighting that many Iraqi's any more, most of the insurgents are from other countries.

As far as Iran, there is no doubt in my mind that they support the insurgents. I'm not pro war on Iran but they are our enemy. I will end by quoting Machiavelli:

"The distance is so great between how we live and how we ought to live that he who abandons what is done for what ought to be done learns his ruin rather than his preservation; because a man who wants to make a profession of goodness in everything is bound to come to ruin among so many who are not good"
and
"Men have less hesitation about offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared, for love is held together by a chain of obligation which, because men are sadly wicked, is broken at every opportunity to serve their self-interest, but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never abandons you."

Djinn

Please explain your assertion that our media is liberal to me.

Maybe we need to stop trying to police the world, as it is bad not only for the rest of the world but also for us (example: the civil liberties the Bush administration has taken away from us because of the "war on terror," although according to your post you seem to be a Bush/ruling through fear supporter).

And with your Machiavelli quote, are you saying the best thing to do is to make the rest of the world fear us? That's what we're doing right now, and it doesn't seem to be working out so well. We can try to oppress the rest of the world with fear, but it will only lead to problems and rebellion in the long run.

[SmokingDjinn]

Yes the media does seem to have the full sympathies of the liberal party, and all I ever hear about is the dismal state of Iraq. I had to hear it from the mouth of a marine who has been there to hear of the progress we are making. People seem to want quick answers and solutions, when that simply is not the case. As for the Bush administration, yes the removal of civil liberties is somewhat of a shame, but really, it has not effected me too much. I disagree with them however on the principal. Policing the world is nothing new for the USA whether it be Democrat or Rebuplican. I support our President in his war, because, even if WMA was not the cause for invading, I'm sure there is a good, well informed cause. Also civil liberties have nothing to do with our foreign policy. In regards to Bush I will quote Tony Montana: "You need people like me so you can point your fuckin' fingers, and say "that's the bad guy."" As for Machiavelli, I beleive he is making an assertion on human nature, you can beleive it, or remain ignorant.