Personally speaking, I'd join up first in order to prevent the fighthing from ever getting near my home/relatives.  That'd be especially true if I were in your position, seeing as how if anyone ever made it to Central Minnesota the shit must have long ago hit the fan, so the odds that you're doing anything particularly effective by then are much, much smaller.

I blame insomnia. After 5 days with 2 or less hours of sleep you start to read things that aren't really there. I'm deeply and honestly sorry for my previous douchebaggery and or ineptitude to read.

Now for a serious non-insomnia-induced reply. Those things would've existed anyway. War is never the cause for human ignorance or intolerance. If the Civil War hadn't happened, they'd still have been slaves. Although I'm a firm supporter of the CSA, I doubt you'll think that slavery is a good idea. I'd rather be descriminated against than be a slave.

This will be my last post in the thread, because I don't think what I say will do any good but..

The central problem with his line of thought "War is evil. We should never participate in it as Americans. All external wars would of been solved without our intervention" throws away the idea that greater evils would of taken place had we not intervened - in fact, on levels that make things like Abu Ghraib and other American atrocities look like an episode of Sesame Street.

For example, had we not of intervened in World War 2, the following would of happened:

The Soviet Union would of taken the entirety of Europe, leading them into poverty and destruction for many decades. Furthermore, many human rights would of been utterly destroyed. As far as we know, the Russians raped over 2 million German women during and after the war. A number that is multiples higher than any claimed number by the Western allies in the Brits, Americans, and Canadians. And that was with us taking half of Germany before the war ended. Furthermore, the Soviets would of done things unimaginable to the Japanese had they of been the only ones to solve that side of the war. I would imagine that the Soviets would of ended up invading Japan, along with the Chinese, and killing/raping every last Japanese citizen to the last child, for their atrocities in China. Far worse outcomes than what we experienced, having intervened in the war.

Oh, lets not forget the nuclear war that would of occurred in the 1960's that would of resulted in the death of approximately 1 billion Asians and Russians, had we not intervened (I wonder how many know of that one?).

According to Phoenix, such atrocities would be 'ok' because they aren't our atrocities. According to his line of logic, its better if a billion people die, and millions raped, tortured and beaten as long as it isn't you, or your country. That is why I have a problem with his logic. By his logic, we should not have police either, or desire to defend our family or property if ever assaulted by another individual.

I should have written Germany, my bad.  Your saying the World Wars were pointless, yes they were and I won't disagree, but Germany had to be stopped and that's what the allied forces did.  What you are saying is that we should have let Germany take over because war is bad.  That's ridiculous.  We were forced into the war so the allied forces that died had to die to stop Germany.  If they had to die to protect the world, they died with honor.  If you can't see that, your somebody I don't care to ever speak to again. 

It saddens me about your view on women.  I never said that women couldn't do anything, and I clearly explained myself.  All I'm saying is that I do what I can women so they don't have to do things they don't have to.  It's called respect.  If a women tells me not to hold a door for her, I won't.  I will never make my future  wife mow the lawn, not because she can't, but because she doesn't have to.  Again, it's about respect and what you say is very telling of your character.  Your somebody I never want to meet.  You'll probably spout more crap about being old fashioned and call me misogynistic again and that's cool.  For one, you apparently don't know what being misogynistic means and two, you've clearly shown your somebody whose words mean nothing to me.  I get to finally add my first 2 people to my ignore user list.  I've had it for a while and never used it. 

Every male over 18 in US gets this, so calm down. If you do have a medical condition like you say then you don't have to worry since you would be labeled a risk for combat, if the draft would come back you would be placed in a non-combat job. Thankfully I'm in the same boat.

Couple of things.

a) I'm a Kiwi, not an American.

b) I never called the foreign policy stupid (though both Iraq and Vietnam were  when it comes to it)

I have several friends and family that have been through a draft. One of them hurt his knees in high school playing football and it kept from being shipped off as he failed his health examination after he was drafted. My grandfather spent Vietnam in Canada on various Air Force bases.

Also, I imagine that with our largely obese youth, most will probably be used for IT or administration positions in the army (paperwork, evalutors, etc). There is very little reason to worry, imo.

I can certainly understand that you're clearly not a misogynist, but I'm a bit confused about why you do specific things. Sorry for butting in, and do feel free to ignore the post if you wish; my intent isn't to criticize.

You say your wife will never mow the lawn simply because she doesn't have to. Well, she wouldn't technically have to pick up groceries, or drive or cook either (insert pretty much any chore/responsibility); would you always do those things for her as well? In case you may say no: What makes mowing the lawn for her more respectful than, say, always cooking for her?

While I think he's far too out of line in calling you a misogynist, I think his views on women, from what I can gather in his post, are far from saddening or disrespectful.

I'm all for helping people out and making their lives easier, namely my girlfriend, not because they may be a woman, but simply because I care for them.

@Phoenix: Here you go. The thread about starcraft's travels through SE Asia.

@topic: Though Canadian, I'm quite surprised that I had no idea american males had to do this.

I cook all the time and go grocery shopping with girlfriends.  Different girls enjoy doing different things and if she enjoys cooking, she can cook.  I'll cook for her as well.  I was just naming examples of stuff I do for women.  Call me old fashioned but the man is supposed to put his wife on a pedestal and do everything he can for her, no matter what it is.  It's simply a sign of respect.  I can't do everything for a woman, there's not enough time and we have to share responsibilities.  Take my parents for example, my mom hates dusting and cleaning the bathroom, so my dad does that for her.  She does the rest of the house work and he does all the yard work, because she doesn't have to mow the lawn.  She never worked so she cooked every night, and she enjoyed it for the most part and my dad never cooked, ever.  I view that a man should put his lady above himself and do what he can to make her life as easy as possible.

I don't know if I'm getting my view across in the correct way because it's hard to have the conversion by typing, and not talking.  I simply believe that a man must take care of his wife, and different couples require different things.  I think the man must put his wife above himself.  I don't think women are incapable of anything, I just think we should take care of them, however that my be.

I say what sapphire said saddens me because what he said about women and the draft.  He wrote

"Why should women have to be protected by men? If they're not inferior to men and they can fight, then that means they can protect themselves."

I'm sorry but to me that is just pure crap.  Women should not be forced to fight in any military conflict.  If they sign up and want to, great.  But forcing women into battle just shows a lack of respect and a terrible view of women. 

If you disagree with what I've said let me know, it's hard to explain my views without a direct conversation.

I agree with you half way. I think it's perfectly normal and ideal for either partner to try and make each other's lives easier. I don't necessarily think it should be the case that a man is expected to place his partner on a pedestal, as you say, any more than what a woman should.

As for that particular quote of sapphire, I do agree with him, though I likely would have worded it differently. If it is required of men, and one views women as capable as men, why shouldn't they required? I don't ask this out of resentment or jealousy, I actually ask it because of a mutual respect.

When I think of my girlfriend of nine years, I would protect her from what ever harm I could. Not because she is a woman but because I care for her. The same reason why I would protect my brother. I view her as an empowered woman who would expect to be treated like anybody else. I don't think I could show her any higher form of respect.

You have done a good job stating what you believe, but you really should qualify why it shows a lack of respect and a terrible view of women because it's quite unclear why you think so.

If you'd prefer, we could just continue this through our walls/pms. Tomorrow that is, it's pretty damn late where I am. Good night!