Quantcast
Oh my god, the selective service system sent me a registration letter

Forums - General Discussion - Oh my god, the selective service system sent me a registration letter

NotStan said:

I think the only incident where you're likely to get drafted is if there is an attack on the US soil, not sure about if there is a conflict between US allies and an enemy of the state. But with your heart condition I doubt you'll be held liable for your registration unless in the worst of circumstances. E.g Homeland game.

Oh, shit. They're going to draft us and make us play Homeland?



Around the Network

That's all I have to say dude. You are kind of overreacting.



 

 

 

 

 

badgenome said:
NotStan said:

I think the only incident where you're likely to get drafted is if there is an attack on the US soil, not sure about if there is a conflict between US allies and an enemy of the state. But with your heart condition I doubt you'll be held liable for your registration unless in the worst of circumstances. E.g Homeland game.

Oh, shit. They're going to draft us and make us play Homeland?


YES TO DEFEND THE AMERICAN CITIZENS FROM THE PIXELATED KOREANS.

Your sarcastic and patronizing responses on almost every thread do make me L-O-L irl. x)



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

nightsurge said:
mrstickball said:
PhoenixKing said:

YOU are living in a childhood fantasy crafted by movies and patriotic ramblings.

Military fighting isn't 'good vs bad'- light vs dark star wars BS.

It's going into peoples homes, forcing information from them, bombing innocent civilian areas because of enemy bases nearby or because that's how they get their food, it's killing children should you be ordered to do so, and it's sick and wrong.

These aren't 'over-dramatized isolated incidents'. They're fact. They happen all the time in wars. Civilians are the FIRST objective to be attacked so they don't join the opposing army or provide food for them.

Nazi's taking over the world? Nazi's had no chance of doing that because they were fighting a 2 front war and Russia was on our side.

Honor in dying? No such thing. Your wife would grieve for your death, no? Wouldn't she feel guilty about it?

Look at Abraham Lincoln, when he was killed, his wife went crazy and was sent to a mental institution because she thought anyone emotionally close to her would die (Her husband died after she lost 3 sons in the war).

Want to know why schools don't tell you this? Because NO ONE wants fresh and able-bodied military resources to be anything but happy about partaking in war.

Also, to put it in the most simplest terms, since I'm sure most of you don't believe me.

War's definition: Organized Murder.

That's it. That's all. It's no different than gangs killing people. You just wear an honorary uniform to do it.

Just curious, but do you think war against Hitler was justified? What about Pol Pot, or Imperial Japan?

Give it up, mrstickball.  This kid is delusional as they come.  I love how he preaches to us more mature and older individuals about living in a fantasy created by movies when he himself is the one seemingly living in a fantasy and not fully understanding many of these complex topics.

I know I have kept out of commenting on the actual war topics, but I must say his comment about "killing civilians is the first thing to do so they won't join up" is the absolute worst logic ever and completely false.  Sure some idiotic crazy war pirates and terrorists will do this, but if your goal is actually to win a war you want the citizens to like you as an invading force or to at least tolerate you, not hate you.  If you go off killing civilians left and right the only thing that will do is inspire civilians further to stand against you.

Now please, you are obviously only 18 and being overrun with information from many sources that are not always credible.  Take the advice of all of us on here and chill out.

I mean, I can understand his distain of what war is. War is hell. War is vile. The worst atrocities of humanity are usually in and around wars. Yet at the same time, some wars have purged us from evils that did their deeds in the shadows, only finding out the horrors once war was ended.

Atrocities are atrocities, but to say that all war is bad, to me, begs to justify regimes and perpetrators of the worst kinds of crimes - the ones that go unpunished. Americans have done some bastardly things in wars, but they pale in comparison to the things done by others in wars, and before wars were perpetrated.

If you read a lot of stuff about war, you have a healthy respect for what it does, and what it accomplishes in the face of pure evil. If it were not for intervention in some of the worst conflicts of humanity, they would of continued unchecked, and lay hidden in the dark, for us to never know the evils that were perpetrated behind 'peace'.

When you look at some of the war atrocities - the Rape of Nanking, Katyn Forest, the Soviet Occupation of post-war Germany, Pol Pot's post-war Cambodian regime, and dozens of others, you understand that, in very rare instances, war and the atrocities thereof are the lesser of two evils. I could not imagine a world to where we did not fight the Nazis, the or the North Koreans and Chinese. Instances like that are why I cannot always stomach pacificsm, because it seeks a world that does not exist - a world where no one is abused or hurt. Sadly, that is not the reality in a lot of places. God forgive us when North Korea collapses, and we find out what really went on while we were sitting in our warm houses, playing on the internet, and watching TV instead of engaging such a vile regime.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Around the Network
Rath said:
mrstickball said:
 

And how often have there been drafts to send people on foreign soils that were not directly defending an ally of America, if not America herself?

That was why I put in the 'defending America' jab. There is NO way that the US institutes a draft for a stupid action like Iraq or Afghanistan. The only way it happens is if missles are raining down on Los Angeles, or a major capital of an ally. At that point, I think we'd be concerned a bit more than if its some stupid excursion like Iraq.

Heck, the Koreas could go to war tomorrow, and we wouldn't bat an eyelash at a draft. Of course, that'd change if China or Russia decided to pare up with Kimmy, and try to annex Japan or another ally.

Honestly, by the next time a draft may need to be needed, we'll probably have Terminators and other mechanized participants fighting, as opposed to grunts. At that point, it may be moot, because the human behind the machine is more likely to be fighting in Las Vegas than they would be in Pyongyang.

Vietnam war is the simple answer to this post.

I certainly understand that one. Vietnam was a useless, bad idea for a war. However, Vietnam was on the tail end of compulsory military service. I certainly do not support what we did in Nam (there were 20 better ways to of dealt with it). It should serve as a reminder as to why we shouldn't have a draft. Yet at the same time, without the draft in WW2, we may not of taken Europe as quickly as *we* (meaning the western allies) did....Which was a very, very beneficial thing for the progress of humanity in Europe.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

voty2000 said:

You're not gonna get drafted for an Iraq War situation.  You'll be drafted for a WW 3.  If you're unfit for duty, you won't be allowed in the military anyway.  If WW 3 occurs and you refuse to fight, then I'll call you a coward, because if the country is at risk of being overrun, all men have a duty to fight. 

And why should women have to fight?  Be a man, if a women wants to fight so be it and if women are needed then maybe a draft, but if the men of the country can handle the war then women should not be forced to fight.  That's a real bitch thing to say.

There is honor in death.  You take a bullet for your wife, you die with honor.  The men who died in WW I and WW II died with honor because without their death, Nazi forces will have taken over the world.  I can see your point about the Iraq War but those people chose to fight and whether you agree with the war or not, they died with honor, doing what they thought was right. 

If you're talking about reading books about the US military, these things happen and suck and are dealt with, but they are few and far between.  Shitty things happen when you gather masses of people.  People die on Black Friday at Wal-mart when the doors open.  That happened once and isn't the norm but people over-dramatize it and act like it occurs everywhere.  Rape, innocent people dying, and children being murdered occur stateside, so do you honestly think a few idiots in the military won't do the same thing in countries they are fighting?  The military can't weed out all psychos no matter how hard it tries, but these occurrences aren't the norm. 

LOL, someone's been watching too much silly war movies (and is a misogynist too).



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Rath said:
mrstickball said:
 

And how often have there been drafts to send people on foreign soils that were not directly defending an ally of America, if not America herself?

That was why I put in the 'defending America' jab. There is NO way that the US institutes a draft for a stupid action like Iraq or Afghanistan. The only way it happens is if missles are raining down on Los Angeles, or a major capital of an ally. At that point, I think we'd be concerned a bit more than if its some stupid excursion like Iraq.

Heck, the Koreas could go to war tomorrow, and we wouldn't bat an eyelash at a draft. Of course, that'd change if China or Russia decided to pare up with Kimmy, and try to annex Japan or another ally.

Honestly, by the next time a draft may need to be needed, we'll probably have Terminators and other mechanized participants fighting, as opposed to grunts. At that point, it may be moot, because the human behind the machine is more likely to be fighting in Las Vegas than they would be in Pyongyang.

Vietnam war is the simple answer to this post.

On the upside, Vietnam ensured that there will not be another draft until the world and USA are in the most dire of circumstances.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

J.a.M said:

Im 19 and have never registered. In high school every year they would try to get you to register. I always threw that shit out.


COME GET ME BITCHES

 

Good for you, but good luck getting federal aid for college.



mrstickball said:
nightsurge said:
mrstickball said:
PhoenixKing said:

YOU are living in a childhood fantasy crafted by movies and patriotic ramblings.

Military fighting isn't 'good vs bad'- light vs dark star wars BS.

It's going into peoples homes, forcing information from them, bombing innocent civilian areas because of enemy bases nearby or because that's how they get their food, it's killing children should you be ordered to do so, and it's sick and wrong.

These aren't 'over-dramatized isolated incidents'. They're fact. They happen all the time in wars. Civilians are the FIRST objective to be attacked so they don't join the opposing army or provide food for them.

Nazi's taking over the world? Nazi's had no chance of doing that because they were fighting a 2 front war and Russia was on our side.

Honor in dying? No such thing. Your wife would grieve for your death, no? Wouldn't she feel guilty about it?

Look at Abraham Lincoln, when he was killed, his wife went crazy and was sent to a mental institution because she thought anyone emotionally close to her would die (Her husband died after she lost 3 sons in the war).

Want to know why schools don't tell you this? Because NO ONE wants fresh and able-bodied military resources to be anything but happy about partaking in war.

Also, to put it in the most simplest terms, since I'm sure most of you don't believe me.

War's definition: Organized Murder.

That's it. That's all. It's no different than gangs killing people. You just wear an honorary uniform to do it.

Just curious, but do you think war against Hitler was justified? What about Pol Pot, or Imperial Japan?

Give it up, mrstickball.  This kid is delusional as they come.  I love how he preaches to us more mature and older individuals about living in a fantasy created by movies when he himself is the one seemingly living in a fantasy and not fully understanding many of these complex topics.

I know I have kept out of commenting on the actual war topics, but I must say his comment about "killing civilians is the first thing to do so they won't join up" is the absolute worst logic ever and completely false.  Sure some idiotic crazy war pirates and terrorists will do this, but if your goal is actually to win a war you want the citizens to like you as an invading force or to at least tolerate you, not hate you.  If you go off killing civilians left and right the only thing that will do is inspire civilians further to stand against you.

Now please, you are obviously only 18 and being overrun with information from many sources that are not always credible.  Take the advice of all of us on here and chill out.

I mean, I can understand his distain of what war is. War is hell. War is vile. The worst atrocities of humanity are usually in and around wars. Yet at the same time, some wars have purged us from evils that did their deeds in the shadows, only finding out the horrors once war was ended.

Atrocities are atrocities, but to say that all war is bad, to me, begs to justify regimes and perpetrators of the worst kinds of crimes - the ones that go unpunished. Americans have done some bastardly things in wars, but they pale in comparison to the things done by others in wars, and before wars were perpetrated.

If you read a lot of stuff about war, you have a healthy respect for what it does, and what it accomplishes in the face of pure evil. If it were not for intervention in some of the worst conflicts of humanity, they would of continued unchecked, and lay hidden in the dark, for us to never know the evils that were perpetrated behind 'peace'.

When you look at some of the war atrocities - the Rape of Nanking, Katyn Forest, the Soviet Occupation of post-war Germany, Pol Pot's post-war Cambodian regime, and dozens of others, you understand that, in very rare instances, war and the atrocities thereof are the lesser of two evils. I could not imagine a world to where we did not fight the Nazis, the or the North Koreans and Chinese. Instances like that are why I cannot always stomach pacificsm, because it seeks a world that does not exist - a world where no one is abused or hurt. Sadly, that is not the reality in a lot of places. God forgive us when North Korea collapses, and we find out what really went on while we were sitting in our warm houses, playing on the internet, and watching TV instead of engaging such a vile regime.

Why did Nazi Germany come to surface? Because of war reparations forced upon Germany after World war 1 compounded with the Great Depression.

Why did Pol Pot eradicate 2 million Cambodians who were on the Pro-American side? Because America's bomb campaign in Cambodia hit the wrong towns and killed millions of innocent civilians during the war.

Why did the war against Korea end in a neutrality with it being divded in the middle? Because America kept going further up and China had warned us that it felt threatened during the time we were winning the war.

War creates more war and genocides. These events WERE impacted because of American military action, though in the case of WW2, it was due to French and British politics of desiring to embarass Germany backed by combined military might.

You think I'm a delusional kid? You both haven't even made an argument against anything I've said. The other dude is just condescending and arrogant so I won't even respond to his childish rants.