Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Michael Banaird
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:10:00 -
[1]
I have just heard from a source within military intelligence that after the election this year there will be a draft of 18 to 26 year olds for the army and navy. If they do not get enough people with that age range, they will be going to 18 to 30 year olds. Talk to your representative, senator or official being elected about this.
P.S. - I am not against the military, just the draft and how the government is hiding this information until after the election.
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:13:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 18:14:43 PROTIP: At this point, the election is almost already decided in favor of Obama, since there are no viable Republican candidates. If what you state happened, there would be riots in the streets. Obama, unlike some of his opponents, would not be enough of a fascist to order the United States put under military rule.
Your statement would only be believable if the Republicans had a ghost of a chance this election.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Wendat Huron
Stellar Solutions
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:14:00 -
[3]
I hear Iran is beautiful in the spring.
These forums are FUBAR, upgrade this decade! |

Tarminic
Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:16:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 18:14:43 PROTIP: At this point, the election is almost already decided in favor of Obama, since there are no viable Republican candidates. If what you state happened, there would be riots in the streets. Obama, unlike some of his opponents, would not be enough of a fascist to order the United States put under military rule.
Your statement would only be believable if the Republicans had a ghost of a chance this election.
STOP IT. You're making me want to be less cynical about politics than I usually am. ---------------- Tarminic - 31 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.78.2 |

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:19:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 18:14:43 PROTIP: At this point, the election is almost already decided in favor of Obama, since there are no viable Republican candidates. If what you state happened, there would be riots in the streets. Obama, unlike some of his opponents, would not be enough of a fascist to order the United States put under military rule.
Your statement would only be believable if the Republicans had a ghost of a chance this election.
I find you oracular powers both astounding and somewhat unbelievable. How much money have you put your prophesised outcome o' Oracle? And if not why not?
Not that I find an Obama win shocking, I just don't think Clinton is out of the race yet.
Bah, I've just notice the almost you have in there... oh well.
|

Battleclash
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:45:00 -
[6]
Really they could kill 2 birds with one stone here.
I keep hearing about overcrowded prisons and jails along with people sitting on death row for years on out. I say give them basic military training and attach a small bomb and tracking device in them.
Each mission their given a certain amount of time to complete at which point the bomb is set. Completely the mission and returning to base allows deactivation of the bomb until the next mission. Completion of the tour may comune your sentence. Escape attempt while on a mission will eventually result in death as the bomb goes off.
Or they could just go collect gangbangers in all the major cities. They come fully equip and like shooting things and since the military is well known for recruiting low intellegence crowds they'll fit right in.
Originally by: Vladimir Ilych Stupidity is universal.
|

Arvald
Caldari Devilish Intentinos
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:01:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Arvald on 01/02/2008 19:05:04 welp good thing for me that being born with only one working (and not too well at that) kidney im not elegeble for any armed service, though i cant join the airforce like prety much every other male in my family 
|

Tal Nok
Amarr DEATH'S LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:02:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Tal Nok on 01/02/2008 19:06:13 Few things here.
1) lol
2) lawl
3) rofl
4) roflmfao
Currently we have the military's Stop Loss program which does not allow a soldier to seperate or retire until the end of thier deployment orders. This keeps our Military Strength of numbers up.
Second, the process of even initiated a draft, in which the past 4 years has almost had a unified vote 400 somthing to 2 or 3 against the draft, I highly doubt it will come about.
Next, the draft has to go through congress, which as above I stated, no one really likes. If it doesn't pass there, then it can't get to the presidents desk for the final veto/ok.
Last, those who have just recently seperated are more than likely in the reserves as the minimum term is 8 years. If you do 6 active, you still have 2 in reserves. During this time, they will bring reservists back into Active Duty with a possible 36-48 month deployment which, with Stop Loss, prevents them from seperating until deployment is complete.
If a Draft is ever put back into place, it's because there is a war on American soil, not because some political mojo who's never been in a War wants one.
Every year people get freaked out because a new draft legislation gets introduced...which is nothing new in the past 15 or so years, just some people find out about it for the first time.
Just to clear some things up.
P.S. If your "friend" really is in Mil. Intel (who should be stripped of rank and given a dishonorable discharge for providing information no matter what it is)....he should already know above info, as with anyone who has ever been in the military, or has access to the internet.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal Forum gods ANGRY.
Need sacrifice.
Originally by: hellsknights It's always nice to kill something you can't afford
|

Kirjava
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:03:00 -
[9]
Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Aaron Ravenwood
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:03:00 -
[10]
Actually ... a draft is a form of community service. The presence of a draft indicates the willingness of the individuals of a nation to give something from their own lives to serve their fellow citizens.
People who do not care enough about their fellow citizens to want to give them anything tend to see such view points as fascist - when what it really shows - is how selfish the individuals are who make up the society.
But then - most human beings are selfish.
You have the eternal struggle between the haves and the have not's.
Neither are better human beings than the others.
The have not's want the government to take money from the haves and give it to them.
The haves want the government to leave their money alone.
The have not's are generally considered to be represented by liberals while the have's are represented by the conservatives.
Most people do not vote FOR a candidate - they vote AGAINST his opponent.
The essence of democracy is - that every so often the populace gets sick of the excentricities of whoever happens to be in power and throws the bum's out. After a few years - the populace is sick of the excentricities of the bum's they put in power the last time - and throws those guys out.
Now Michael ... as to their being a draft ... and the government hiding this information ... you're sources are not credible.
. . . |

Micheal Dietrich
Caldari The Delta Source Dread Sovereign
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:06:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Kirjava Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
I like the swiss for this very reason. Everyone does service for a couple years, Everyone seems to be armed. They also have one of the lowest crime rates ever. Plus as the age old joke goes they always claim neutral! How can you not love the swiss  Unsuitable signature removed. Navgator
Do you realize how long it took me to size that right to use!?!?!?! |

Gyfrex
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:07:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Kirjava Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
Qft. Every chav I know who joined my cadet corp is no longer a chav, military style seems to put stuff into perspective for them. ---
|

Tal Nok
Amarr DEATH'S LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:09:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Kirjava Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
Mandatory service is not what the public wants. Majority of votes rule....unless they are rigged. You would have to lobby mandatory service for years but, with my above post would purely state, no one in congress wants.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal Forum gods ANGRY.
Need sacrifice.
Originally by: hellsknights It's always nice to kill something you can't afford
|

Kirjava
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:18:00 -
[14]
I have been wanting mandatory in Britain for a long time to sort out the chav population. I am putting my money where my mouth is - I am of the age for conscription so this isn't a case of me just saying it should be done because I no longer need to.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Jessamine
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:21:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Kirjava Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
Because your countries seem to adhere to their own laws on wars, not go gallivanting across the world because some cowboy wants to 'git sum'
/sigh
Can't complain about the emos getting put in place, never understood what a chav is though...
inEvE Stats |

Irish Whiskey
Caldari The Black Fleet
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:24:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Battleclash I keep hearing about overcrowded prisons and jails along with people sitting on death row for years on out. I say give them basic military training and attach a small bomb and tracking device in them.
that movie rocks!
|

Sakura Nihil
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:30:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Kirjava Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
Except the fact that most of Europe's soldiers wouldn't have to go overseas, and quite possibly risk their lives .
If they do announce a draft, especially this near to the election, expect riots. I know I'll protest my ass off if they do it.
|

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:31:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Jessamine
/sigh
Can't complain about the emos getting put in place, never understood what a chav is though...
Chavs were originally inhabitants of Chatham in the Southeast if England, but the breed has spread. Essentially they are of working class origin, are pig ignorant, anti-work, pro-figting in the steet and drinking dirt cheap alcohol ner-do-wells. Status amoungst chavs is about the only important thing to them and they have adopted certain items of clothing as thier own, specifically the hoody, up market trainers, and much to the companies horror, Burberry. I used to like Burberry, I have mates who own Burberry products. None of us will wear them anymore.
|

Sakura Nihil
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:33:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Joseph 9
Originally by: Jessamine
/sigh
Can't complain about the emos getting put in place, never understood what a chav is though...
Chavs were originally inhabitants of Chatham in the Southeast if England, but the breed has spread. Essentially they are of working class origin, are pig ignorant, anti-work, pro-figting in the steet and drinking dirt cheap alcohol ner-do-wells. Status amoungst chavs is about the only important thing to them and they have adopted certain items of clothing as thier own, specifically the hoody, up market trainers, and much to the companies horror, Burberry. I used to like Burberry, I have mates who own Burberry products. None of us will wear them anymore.
Short answer: Britain's answer to our rednecks .
|

Micheal Dietrich
Caldari The Delta Source Dread Sovereign
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:47:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Micheal Dietrich on 01/02/2008 19:53:50
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
Short answer: Britain's answer to our rednecks .
REDNECKS ARE NOT BAD PEOPLE. How many times do I have to explain this to ya'all. JFC doesn't anybody watch the blue collar tour?
The chav is equal to a ganger.
A redneck is classified as a lack of sophisication. Examples:
Rich people have portfolios. Rednecks have commemorative plates.
You might be a redneck if you mow your lawn and find a car.
If your caught lieing through your Tooth, you might be a redneck.
If your house is on wheels and your 14 vehicles aren't, you might be a redneck.
If your new tv sits on top of your old tv, you might be a redneck.
If you leave your christmas lights up year round, you might be a redneck.
I'm a redneck and I'm damn proud of it. At least learn what it is before bashing it.
Another example Unsuitable signature removed. Navgator
Do you realize how long it took me to size that right to use!?!?!?! |

Kirjava
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:48:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Kirjava on 01/02/2008 19:48:39
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
Originally by: Joseph 9
Originally by: Jessamine Short answer: Britain's answer to our rednecks .
Essentialy yes. That would make awesome TV though - putting 100 chavs and 100 rednecks on an island in the middle of nowhere, and film the results.
I hate reality TV as a rule, but if they made this.....
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:48:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 18:14:43 PROTIP: At this point, the election is almost already decided in favor of Obama, since there are no viable Republican candidates. If what you state happened, there would be riots in the streets. Obama, unlike some of his opponents, would not be enough of a fascist to order the United States put under military rule.
Your statement would only be believable if the Republicans had a ghost of a chance this election.
There's an old saying about counting chickens...
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |

Jessamine
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:51:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Jessamine on 01/02/2008 19:51:22
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
REDNECKS ARE NOT BAD PEOPLE. How many times do I have to explain this to ya'all. JFC doesn't anybody watch the blue collar tour?
Yes I have... hence, he's right... Every time I see 'Larry' I want to bomb a Carharrt store...
inEvE Stats |

Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:58:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Aaron Ravenwood Actually ... a draft is a form of community service. The presence of a draft indicates the willingness of the individuals of a nation to give something from their own lives to serve their fellow citizens.
Nay, volunteer service does that.
Quote: Now Michael ... as to their being a draft ... and the government hiding this information ... you're sources are not credible.
Agreed. Congresscritters voting to institute a draft is a quick way to get themselves kicked out of congress.
|

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:59:00 -
[25]
I've spent some time in the Us and rednecks and chavs don't 'feel' the same to me tbh. I think Rednecks are a far more variable breed, whilst once you've met one chav you've met them all.. and want to murder them.
Anyway some pictures for you
http://www.xymalf.co.uk/images/chavs/chav1.jpg http://www.xymalf.co.uk/images/chavs/chav4.gif
The delightful chappie in the second picture is why no one I know will wear Burberry anymore.
|

Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:59:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Kirjava Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
I like the swiss for this very reason. Everyone does service for a couple years, Everyone seems to be armed. They also have one of the lowest crime rates ever. Plus as the age old joke goes they always claim neutral! How can you not love the swiss 
Huh but they're NRDS so what's the point 
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |

Arvald
Caldari Devilish Intentinos
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:59:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Edited by: Micheal Dietrich on 01/02/2008 19:53:50
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
Short answer: Britain's answer to our rednecks .
REDNECKS ARE NOT BAD PEOPLE. How many times do I have to explain this to ya'all. JFC doesn't anybody watch the blue collar tour?
The chav is equal to a ganger.
A redneck is classified as a lack of sophisication. Examples:
Rich people have portfolios. Rednecks have commemorative plates.
You might be a redneck if you mow your lawn and find a car.
If your caught lieing through your Tooth, you might be a redneck.
If your house is on wheels and your 14 vehicles aren't, you might be a redneck.
If your new tv sits on top of your old tv, you might be a redneck.
If you leave your christmas lights up year round, you might be a redneck.
I'm a redneck and I'm damn proud of it. At least learn what it is before bashing it.
Another example
QFT rednecs are actually prety fun pepole to be around, hell my pa is a redneck and hes the nicesd guy ive ever met.
|

Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:01:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Joseph 9 I've spent some time in the Us and rednecks and chavs don't 'feel' the same to me tbh. I think Rednecks are a far more variable breed, whilst once you've met one chav you've met them all.. and want to murder them.
Anyway some pictures for you
http://www.xymalf.co.uk/images/chavs/chav1.jpg http://www.xymalf.co.uk/images/chavs/chav4.gif
The delightful chappie in the second picture is why no one I know will wear Burberry anymore.
Exactly the type we used to send out to conquer places with good beaches in the name of the Crown (or in the name of the East India Company... whichever)
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |

Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:04:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Jessamine Edited by: Jessamine on 01/02/2008 19:51:22
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
REDNECKS ARE NOT BAD PEOPLE. How many times do I have to explain this to ya'all. JFC doesn't anybody watch the blue collar tour?
Yes I have... hence, he's right... Every time I see 'Larry' I want to bomb a Carharrt store...
Larry himself is actually a satirical stage character. Just look at some of his older stuff.
|

Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:07:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
Originally by: Kirjava Whats wrong with Mandatory service? Many European countries do a few years in some form of service and to be honest I think are better for it, chavs and emos get everthing put into perspective and actualy do something.
Except the fact that most of Europe's soldiers wouldn't have to go overseas, and quite possibly risk their lives .
If they do announce a draft, especially this near to the election, expect riots. I know I'll protest my ass off if they do it.
I think you might be surprised at how many servicemen some European countries maintain abroad, particularly the UK.
Of course, the point is moot. Military drafts are good for raising large cannon-fodder type armies. Most western armies are very highly trained and very technical. Ill-educated, ignorant louts don't make very good professional soldiers.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |

Jessamine
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:08:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Joseph 9 I've spent some time in the Us and rednecks and chavs don't 'feel' the same to me tbh. I think Rednecks are a far more variable breed, whilst once you've met one chav you've met them all.. and want to murder them.
Anyway some pictures for you
http://www.xymalf.co.uk/images/chavs/chav1.jpg http://www.xymalf.co.uk/images/chavs/chav4.gif
The delightful chappie in the second picture is why no one I know will wear Burberry anymore.
Holy crap... those are US 'Wiggers' If you can't figure out what that means, I don't need the temp ban.
And an additional holy crap at the real 'Larry' more respect to him, still think he's obnoxious as are his fans... ah well.
inEvE Stats |

Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:11:00 -
[32]
Jassamine, that's exactly that a chav is... they want to live in a ghetto so bad but have no clue what it's really like 
Plus that second pic there... is he going to go play chav golf? 
Originally by: Sharupak When you go to vote, you are voting on whether you want to bend over or get on your knees.
|

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:13:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Joseph 9 on 01/02/2008 20:13:15 Ah yes wiggers. I used to work with a lass who was, shall we say, that way inclined despite being whiter than pure driven snow. What made her particularly funny/pathetic was she went around accusing other people of her own sins, i.e. she's a wigger, he's a chav..
I was thankful my desk faced the opposite way to her so she couldn't see me crying with laughter at her pronouncements.
|

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:15:00 -
[34]
The Swedish equivalent of the chav is the fjortis, and there's a lot of them in the city where I live :(
Though the good thing about fjortisar is that they are actually intelligent enough to do abortions (well, most of them), and thus we don't have a "problem" of teen pregnancy.
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:16:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Battleclash since the military is well known for recruiting low intellegence crowds they'll fit right in.
While I cannot speak to the military in whatever country you are from, I am proud to say that this is not at all true in America.
This type of discussion happened here in the US in 2006, when Senator Charles Rangel (Democrat) sponsored a bill to re-introduce the draft. His stated reasoning was "Since the military is only made up of poor and uneducated people, if we reinstitute the draft, the Iraq war will become unpopular and we can stop it."
Of course, the bill went down in flames, but it sparked a lively debate over just how educated, affluent, and from what class of citizens DO our recruits come from? So The Heritage Foundation did a study on it, using data collected from the Armed Forces internal database through FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act)
You can find a full report on the study HERE. Be forewarned, this is not for the intellectually lazy. It's a LONG report, with quite a bit of scientific linguistics in it. But stick with it, it's a good read.
For the lazy, I will summarize:
The study found that the majority of service people overall were well-educated (College degree), Middle Class, and White. This was even MORE pronounced AFTER 9/11 among new recruits.
The study also found that the voluntary military was generally healthier (higher readiness levels, better discipline, better morale) than the pre-1970's Draft military. So keeping the voluntary military is what is preferred by the Pentagon.
So not only is this old liberal saw about the military completely WRONG (as most liberal saws are) but it flies in the face of the facts.
I hope I have been able to enlighten you today. Semper Fi, carry on.
|

Jessamine
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:23:00 -
[36]
Damnit and here I was hoping other countries missed out on that particular experience..
****
inEvE Stats |

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:25:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Lord MuffloN on 01/02/2008 20:26:40
Originally by: Bish Ounen
Originally by: Battleclash since the military is well known for recruiting low intellegence crowds they'll fit right in.
While I cannot speak to the military in whatever country you are from, I am proud to say that this is not at all true in America.
This type of discussion happened here in the US in 2006, when Senator Charles Rangel (Democrat) sponsored a bill to re-introduce the draft. His stated reasoning was "Since the military is only made up of poor and uneducated people, if we reinstitute the draft, the Iraq war will become unpopular and we can stop it."
Of course, the bill went down in flames, but it sparked a lively debate over just how educated, affluent, and from what class of citizens DO our recruits come from? So The Heritage Foundation did a study on it, using data collected from the Armed Forces internal database through FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act)
You can find a full report on the study HERE. Be forewarned, this is not for the intellectually lazy. It's a LONG report, with quite a bit of scientific linguistics in it. But stick with it, it's a good read.
For the lazy, I will summarize:
The study found that the majority of service people overall were well-educated (College degree), Middle Class, and White. This was even MORE pronounced AFTER 9/11 among new recruits.
The study also found that the voluntary military was generally healthier (higher readiness levels, better discipline, better morale) than the pre-1970's Draft military. So keeping the voluntary military is what is preferred by the Pentagon.
So not only is this old liberal saw about the military completely WRONG (as most liberal saws are) but it flies in the face of the facts.
I hope I have been able to enlighten you today. Semper Fi, carry on.
Not wanting to start a flamewar, but do note this, a American view on what a liberal is, is far far from the view of what a liberal is in Europe and the view that a liberal society is a "hippie world" is also US exclusive (and we'll take a fact, Sweden/Norway/Finland, all per definition are Liberal, still rate over the US in the Human Development Index)
Originally by: Jessamine Damnit and here I was hoping other countries missed out on that particular experience..
****
Don't know where you are from, but most of Scandinavia got "fjortisar" and Finland have another specie that is way more aggressive and way more annoying then a chav or fjortis combined (yes, there is such a thing).
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:35:00 -
[38]
God knows what a liberal SAW is but I would add to what the last poster said. By US standards virtually the whole of Europe is left wing-liberal, and the whole of Europe with a few exceptions have professional fighting forces and have no intention of implementing conscription ever again.
|

JetJon
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:41:00 -
[39]
there is practicaly no chance a draft will be instituted in the near future, as to only the dumb kids going into the armed forces, i ship out in april, and asvab scores are important to getting in, less than a 35 means you cant get into any branch. and to go infantry you need a 45. which means average. to get the good jobs you need abit higher, but about half of the ppl in are above average.
again, not going to happen. only real chance for a republican prez is mccane and he wouldnt do that. obama couldnt do it. and hillary might, but i really dont see her making prez.
|

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:45:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Joseph 9 God knows what a liberal SAW is but I would add to what the last poster said. By US standards virtually the whole of Europe is left wing-liberal, and the whole of Europe with a few exceptions have professional fighting forces and have no intention of implementing conscription ever again.
If I don't got it all wrong I recall a liberal saw being a "liberal sawmill of whine" or something along those lines
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Smith
Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:51:00 -
[41]
You(USA) are going to Iran. Its already a done deal.
|

JetJon
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:00:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Smith You(USA) are going to Iran. Its already a done deal.
actualy, i am quite looking forward to it. the ayatollah should have been taken out in 1979... there are a lot of bad ppl in the world, but only a few have the resources and the madness to threten me and mine. so i support doing unto them first.
|

Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:01:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Joseph 9 God knows what a liberal SAW is but I would add to what the last poster said. By US standards virtually the whole of Europe is left wing-liberal, and the whole of Europe with a few exceptions have professional fighting forces and have no intention of implementing conscription ever again.
A proverb, idiom or maxim.
saw Function: noun Etymology: Middle English sawe, from Old English "sagu" discourse; akin to Old High German & Old Norse "saga" tale, Old English "secgan" to say Date: before 12th century.
A liberal saw would be an idiom developed and used primarily by those on the leftward end of the political spectrum.
And yes, most of us conservatives in America do view most of Europe as hopelessly mired in Liberalism. We don't have anything against you, we just don't want to follow down the same political paths you have gone. We choose to forge our own path. It's worked quite well for us for the last 200 years or so, we'll keep going our own way, blazing a trail. Feel free to follow along if you like. We like company!
|

Tarminic
Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:07:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Smith You(USA) are going to Iran. Its already a done deal.
With who? The majority of our forces are deployed in Iraq and Afganistan, we can't remove any of them without causing even greater instability in the area. Hell, we even have many (arguably insufficiently trained) National Guard troops in Iraq.
I really don't believe an invasion of Iran is feasible at this time. ---------------- Tarminic - 31 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.78.2 |

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:14:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Lord MuffloN on 01/02/2008 21:17:40 Okay, ******** post is ********, nm that one, anyway, I for one support any thermonuclear devices being detonated in Iran, and I'm one of those "left wing hippie loving liberals".
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Kirjava
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:27:00 -
[46]
Long story short, we can win against Iran, just depends how low we want to make ourselves, nuking, mass conscription and total bombardment are the only real options.
We will not go to war any time soon.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:30:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Bish Ounen And yes, most of us conservatives in America do view most of Europe as hopelessly mired in Liberalism. We don't have anything against you, we just don't want to follow down the same political paths you have gone. We choose to forge our own path. It's worked quite well for us for the last 200 years or so, we'll keep going our own way, blazing a trail. Feel free to follow along if you like. We like company!
By definition, conservatives do not "blaze a trail". They want to keep things as they are/used to be.
|

Dalen III
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:34:00 -
[48]
Nope won't be a draft for alot of reasons. One is most people enlisting are doing the 4 years active, 4 years inactive. I don't think your stupid enuff to believe your one source of military intelligence, so yap I've been trolled . Don't blame me, blame the main I'm supporting. |

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:44:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 21:46:22
The irony of the term "liberal" as used in American politics is that we do not have liberals in American politics. Hillary Clinton is called a "communist" by detractors, but in reality, she is a conservative corporatist. We have a few liberals in Congress, sure, but none of them have much impact. The hilarious irony is when one looks at a list of "the most liberal Republicans" as compiled by interest group statistics:
Ron Paul is the second most liberal Republican in Congress, economically and socially.
Don't you just find that hilarious? An extreme states'-rights conservative, a strict Constitutionalist, extremely anti-gun-control and fiscally conservative almost to the point of absurdity--and he's considered the second most liberal! 
Oh how twisted our vision of the word "liberal" is.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:52:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Lord MuffloN on 01/02/2008 21:53:56
Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 21:46:22
The irony of the term "liberal" as used in American politics is that we do not have liberals in American politics. Hillary Clinton is called a "communist" by detractors, but in reality, she is a conservative corporatist. We have a few liberals in Congress, sure, but none of them have much impact. The hilarious irony is when one looks at a list of "the most liberal Republicans" as compiled by interest group statistics:
Ron Paul is the second most liberal Republican in Congress, economically and socially.
Don't you just find that hilarious? An extreme states'-rights conservative, a strict Constitutionalist, extremely anti-gun-control and fiscally conservative almost to the point of absurdity--and he's considered the second most liberal! 
Oh how twisted our vision of the word "liberal" is.
Tell me a single liberal (by European standards) in the congress, I've never heard of such a thing 
Oh and another thing I find funny about the US, It's the land of the free but they all seem to hate liberals... Ironically liberal means free, as in really free, not Patriot Act/Guantanamo Bay free.
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:53:00 -
[51]
UK politics are rather strange at the moment, the 3 parties have historically been (simplifying grotesequely) Conservative (right wing, low tax, free market believers), Labour (left wing, tax and spend, pro state-management of critical industry) and Liberals (generally in the middle).
As of now the Liberal's are the left most party, conservatives have moved slightly left in general I feel and Labour have gone screaming off to the right and now sit slightly to the right of the coservatives. It's very odd.
And thats without mentioning devolution.
|

Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:56:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Frezik By definition, conservatives do not "blaze a trail". They want to keep things as they are/used to be.
Wrong definition. Seriously. That is an incorrect definition of the conservative political movement. It's not your fault, unfortunately we chose a confusing name for our movement. I would prefer we were called Federalists (Ala Thomas Jefferson), as that is more closely in line with Conservative principles. That, and the term "conservative" means totally different things depending on the country you are from.
Suffice to say, an American Conservative generally believes in the principles of Federalism. IE: a weaker central government with more power decentralized to the individual states, low taxation, low regulation, high focus on individual liberties, freedoms, and property rights, and a strong, volunteer military. American Conservatives believe that the American Constitution exists to LIMIT the powers of the central government, and to expand the rights of citizens. I could go on, but you get the general idea.
As you can see, that concept, when compared against history, is a radical, forward-looking one that places power and trust in individuals, rather than in a slow, cumbersome central government bureaucracy. In terms of Human history, THAT is blazing a path.
|

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:59:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Lord MuffloN on 01/02/2008 22:03:43
Originally by: Bish Ounen
Originally by: Frezik By definition, conservatives do not "blaze a trail". They want to keep things as they are/used to be.
Wrong definition. Seriously. That is an incorrect definition of the conservative political movement. It's not your fault, unfortunately we chose a confusing name for our movement. I would prefer we were called Federalists (Ala Thomas Jefferson), as that is more closely in line with Conservative principles. That, and the term "conservative" means totally different things depending on the country you are from.
Suffice to say, an American Conservative generally believes in the principles of Federalism. IE: a weaker central government with more power decentralized to the individual states, low taxation, low regulation, high focus on individual liberties, freedoms, and property rights, and a strong, volunteer military. American Conservatives believe that the American Constitution exists to LIMIT the powers of the central government, and to expand the rights of citizens. I could go on, but you get the general idea.
As you can see, that concept, when compared against history, is a radical, forward-looking one that places power and trust in individuals, rather than in a slow, cumbersome central government bureaucracy. In terms of Human history, THAT is blazing a path.
, Hey look, all liberal thoughts (of the more "mainstream" liberal ideas), then I ask, why do Americans hate liberals? Because, the kind of conservative you try to explain, shares a lot of thoughts with the liberalism I'm common too (Of course there is the part whey stretch to two different ways, so I'm not saying there aren't big differences). (I'm trying to make a point here, but if people can't get it soon, I'll just spill it out)
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:59:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 21:59:37
Originally by: Bish Ounen Suffice to say, an American Conservative generally believes in the principles of Federalism. IE: a weaker central government with more power decentralized to the individual states, low taxation, low regulation, high focus on individual liberties, freedoms, and property rights, and a strong, volunteer military. American Conservatives believe that the American Constitution exists to LIMIT the powers of the central government, and to expand the rights of citizens. I could go on, but you get the general idea.
I think this species of "conservative" you described is critically endangered. The naturalists have little hope that there exists any sufficient numbers to repopulate; complete extinction is likely inevitable.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:04:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Bish Ounen
Suffice to say, an American Conservative generally believes in the principles of Federalism. IE: a weaker central government with more power decentralized to the individual states, low taxation, low regulation, high focus on individual liberties, freedoms, and property rights, and a strong, volunteer military. American Conservatives believe that the American Constitution exists to LIMIT the powers of the central government, and to expand the rights of citizens. I could go on, but you get the general idea.
As you can see, that concept, when compared against history, is a radical, forward-looking one that places power and trust in individuals, rather than in a slow, cumbersome central government bureaucracy. In terms of Human history, THAT is blazing a path.
erm. I'd describe the three points I've bolded as fairly central to the brand of liberal government as practiced in Scandinavia.
|

Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:13:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Bish Ounen on 01/02/2008 22:14:47
Originally by: Lord MuffloN
Hey look, all liberal thoughts (of the more "mainstream" liberal ideas), then I ask, why do Americans hate liberals? Because, the kind of conservative you try to explain, shares a lot of thoughts with the liberalism I'm common too (Of course there is the part whey stretch to two different ways, so I'm not saying there aren't big differences). (I'm trying to make a point here, but if people can't get it soon, I'll just spill it out)
It would appear that you are attempting to make the point that all my conservative ideas are actually liberal. If that is the point you are making, you would be wrong. At least in terms of American politics, Liberalism is more closely attuned to Socialism and Fascism than Federalism.
Now, CLASSICAL Liberalism (IE: Pre-Marx, Pre-National Socialist Party of Germany liberalism) yes. Classical Liberalism is simply another form of Federalism. But again, that's an archaic definition now. Liberalism means something entirely different now than it did at the turn of the last century. THEN it was Federalism and limited government. NOW it is socialism and big government. Times change, and political definitions change too. Such is the way of the world I guess.
|

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:22:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Lord MuffloN on 01/02/2008 22:22:41
Originally by: Bish Ounen Edited by: Bish Ounen on 01/02/2008 22:14:47
Originally by: Lord MuffloN
Hey look, all liberal thoughts (of the more "mainstream" liberal ideas), then I ask, why do Americans hate liberals? Because, the kind of conservative you try to explain, shares a lot of thoughts with the liberalism I'm common too (Of course there is the part whey stretch to two different ways, so I'm not saying there aren't big differences). (I'm trying to make a point here, but if people can't get it soon, I'll just spill it out)
It would appear that you are attempting to make the point that all my conservative ideas are actually liberal. If that is the point you are making, you would be wrong. At least in terms of American politics, Liberalism is more closely attuned to Socialism and Fascism than Federalism.
Now, CLASSICAL Liberalism (IE: Pre-Marx, Pre-National Socialist Party of Germany liberalism) yes. Classical Liberalism is simply another form of Federalism. But again, that's an archaic definition now. Liberalism means something entirely different now than it did at the turn of the last century. THEN it was Federalism and limited government. NOW it is socialism and big government. Times change, and political definitions change too. Such is the way of the world I guess.
No, my point is that Americans don't seem to know what liberalism is (Because seriously, American view of liberalism is not liberalism) and should read up on what liberalism is and they might actually see a lot of what most Americans say they want, are infact by todays standards, liberal.
If you want to go further, then YES, many of those points you just pointed out ARE liberal ideas, and by that I mean the European version (the one that counts, because we've been the one to practice it)
And seriously, Liberalism related to facism? Seriously, Liberalism is the EXACT OPPOSITE of facism
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:26:00 -
[58]
Given what you just said Bish the US definition of liberalism is utterly utterly unrelated to European liberalism. European liberalism is entriely to do with the personal freedoms of the populace. And whilst it is often associated with left wing parties and policies this is by no means a requirement of liberalism.
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:32:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Joseph 9 Given what you just said Bish the US definition of liberalism is utterly utterly unrelated to European liberalism. European liberalism is entriely to do with the personal freedoms of the populace. And whilst it is often associated with left wing parties and policies this is by no means a requirement of liberalism.
European liberalism is much more related to the US version of social libertarianism than US "liberalism."
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:39:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Joseph 9 Given what you just said Bish the US definition of liberalism is utterly utterly unrelated to European liberalism. European liberalism is entriely to do with the personal freedoms of the populace. And whilst it is often associated with left wing parties and policies this is by no means a requirement of liberalism.
European liberalism is much more related to the US version of social libertarianism than US "liberalism."
I've read this ten times now, and I don't get what you mean DS Clarification for the social liberalist (European version of course ) being me please?
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:43:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 22:46:55
Originally by: Lord MuffloN
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Joseph 9 Given what you just said Bish the US definition of liberalism is utterly utterly unrelated to European liberalism. European liberalism is entriely to do with the personal freedoms of the populace. And whilst it is often associated with left wing parties and policies this is by no means a requirement of liberalism.
European liberalism is much more related to the US version of social libertarianism than US "liberalism."
I've read this ten times now, and I don't get what you mean DS Clarification for the social liberalist (European version of course ) being me please?
A social libertarian believes that the government has absolutely no business making laws on what people do in their bedrooms. More specifically, they believe that anything should be legal that doesn't affect others--the government should not be able to outlaw marjiuana, oral sex, gay marriage, or anything of that sort--its simply not the government's business to legislate morals. The Netherlands is a good example of a country that is socially libertarian.
Social libertarians tend to split on topics of the legality of actions that affect others indirectly. Examples include smoking in public areas; second-hand smoke is definitely a health issue for others, so it can potentially be outlawed without opposing social libertarian principles. Another example would be the more harmful drugs, such as crack cocaine--while on the one hand nobody should care if you screw your brain up with drugs, with a public health system, the state (and therefore taxpayers) may have to pay for the consequences of your mistakes.
This is in contrast to an economic libertarian, who believes in unregulated free-market capitalism. Of course, these are not mutually exclusive.
The opposite of a social libertarian is a Dominionist, such as Mike Huckabee; someone who believes that it is the government's job to legislate morals, in particular religious morals.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Lord MuffloN
Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:46:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 22:43:17
Originally by: Lord MuffloN
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Joseph 9 Given what you just said Bish the US definition of liberalism is utterly utterly unrelated to European liberalism. European liberalism is entriely to do with the personal freedoms of the populace. And whilst it is often associated with left wing parties and policies this is by no means a requirement of liberalism.
European liberalism is much more related to the US version of social libertarianism than US "liberalism."
I've read this ten times now, and I don't get what you mean DS Clarification for the social liberalist (European version of course ) being me please?
A social libertarian believes that the government has absolutely no business making laws on what people do in their bedrooms. More specifically, they believe that anything should be legal that doesn't affect others--the government should not be able to outlaw marjiuana, oral sex, gay marriage, or anything of that sort--its simply not the government's business to legislate morals. The Netherlands is a good example of a country that is socially libertarian.
This is in contrast to an economic libertarian, who believes in unregulated free-market capitalism.
Sounds pretty much like me, though I'm still in for the idea to regulate marjiuana in some way, though a scary thing about it is that the last time the UN did a "report" on it it was proven to be less harmful then cigarettes 
Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:49:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Lord MuffloN Sounds pretty much like me, though I'm still in for the idea to regulate marjiuana in some way, though a scary thing about it is that the last time the UN did a "report" on it it was proven to be less harmful then cigarettes 
Social libertarianism is one of those forgotten beliefs in the United States; though there are probably tens of millions of people who believe in it, there are so many more evangelicals who are willing to come out in force against it.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

SoftRevolution
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:53:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Michael Banaird I have just heard from a source within military intelligence that after the election this year there will be a draft of 18 to 26 year olds for the army and navy. If they do not get enough people with that age range, they will be going to 18 to 30 year olds. Talk to your representative, senator or official being elected about this.
P.S. - I am not against the military, just the draft and how the government is hiding this information until after the election.
Bull ****. EVE RELATED CONTENT |

Kalahari Wayrest
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:56:00 -
[65]
Quote: The presence of a draft indicates the willingness of the individuals of a nation to give something from their own lives to serve their fellow citizens.
No, volunteering would indicate that. Given it's mandatory, willingness has little to do with it.
__________________________ Indulge Me Consider Yourself Indulged - Immy ♥ Wow immy scored - Xorus
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:58:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/02/2008 22:58:10
Originally by: Kalahari Wayrest
Quote: The presence of a draft indicates the willingness of the individuals of a nation to give something from their own lives to serve their fellow citizens.
No, volunteering would indicate that. Given it's mandatory, willingness has little to do with it.
If the vast majority of a population opposes it, a draft doesn't work unless you're willing to enforce a police state.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Orion Eridanus
Dark Nova Crisis
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:59:00 -
[67]
OP you are a moron. If there is a need for more troops why is the Marines only calling up 2500 troops at a time, and of that 2500 only 700 only actually being returned to active duty for only 1 year of their 3-4 year mandatory reserve contract. And of that 700 why is only 300 in the infantry, and why is the majority of it Non-commisioned officers?
If there was really a need for us dont you think they would implement stop loss and call back all of us that are in the IRR at the same time? Would make a lot more sense to keep the people that have already been trained in instead of wasting time training people who have no desire to serve anyone but themselves and would be a burden on the rest of us and the system.
Oh btw IBTL
Originally by: Paulo Damarr That is a most Excellent Drake fitting, you are lucky to have survived.
|

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 23:08:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Michael Banaird I have just heard from a source within military intelligence that after the election this year there will be a draft of 18 to 26 year olds for the army and navy. If they do not get enough people with that age range, they will be going to 18 to 30 year olds. Talk to your representative, senator or official being elected about this.
P.S. - I am not against the military, just the draft and how the government is hiding this information until after the election.
There are some *****s in your tinfoil hat. Upgrade to the tech 2 version which is solid aluminum, and get the Tin Man outfit.
The aim of politics is to keep the populace alarmed and clamorous to be saved by menacing it with imaginary hobgoblins. The urge to save humanity is a false front for the urge to rule it. |

Shameless Avenger
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 23:42:00 -
[69]
At least you get drafted by your own country. When you get drafted to fight for a country that's not your own, that's when it REALLY sucks. |

pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 00:00:00 -
[70]
So any of you all-knowing youropeein (sp?) folks mind telling me what kind of beliefs I hold using your "proper" definitions? Govt. should have very little or no control over the market Govt. should have no say on any social matter (including things that might effect others) Govt. should NOT provide medical, housing or any other kind of service along those lines unless set up by a lower govt. (like the state govt.) 2. Since this looks to be locked soon by due to being political Id like to point you guys to a forum a friend of mine has started up just for stuff like this. http://debate.pro-forums.com/index.php
Originally by: Crumplecorn These is a forum for this.
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 00:04:00 -
[71]
Originally by: pwnedgato Govt. should have very little or no control over the market
Economic libertarianism.
Originally by: pwnedgato Govt. should have no say on any social matter (including things that might effect others)
Social libertarianism.
Originally by: pwnedgato Govt. should NOT provide medical, housing or any other kind of service along those lines unless set up by a lower govt. (like the state govt.)
Extreme federalism.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Shameless Avenger
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 00:24:00 -
[72]
I thought the last one was just pain republican... |

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 00:29:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Shameless Avenger I thought the last one was just pain republican...
That hasn't been true since the 70s.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 00:32:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: pwnedgato Govt. should NOT provide medical, housing or any other kind of service along those lines unless set up by a lower govt. (like the state govt.)
Extreme federalism.
Well on that one I only say it because of the very high level of diversity of the US. What works in one area probably wouldn't work elsewhere or could at least be much better.
Originally by: Crumplecorn These is a forum for this.
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:16:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 02/02/2008 01:16:21
Originally by: pwnedgato
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: pwnedgato Govt. should NOT provide medical, housing or any other kind of service along those lines unless set up by a lower govt. (like the state govt.)
Extreme federalism.
Well on that one I only say it because of the very high level of diversity of the US. What works in one area probably wouldn't work elsewhere or could at least be much better.
In most cases, I'd probably agree with you.
There are, however, some things that make more sense on a national level. One example would be veteran's health care; my stepfather is quite high up in the VA and from what I know from him, there's a reason its one of the most effective health care services in the US; they have a unified medical information system that allows doctors to instantly know everything they need to know about their patients, wherever they are. The vast population of "snowbird" veterans that live in the South in the winter and the North in the summer would completely screw up any state-run medical system.
(The other reason the VA is good is they negotiate with health care providers; Medicare has been legally barred from doing this.)
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:19:00 -
[76]
I'd think that the VA would take supremacy over any state level healthcare system (you know that whole supremacy clause thingy)
Originally by: Crumplecorn These is a forum for this.
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:21:00 -
[77]
Originally by: pwnedgato I'd think that the VA would take supremacy over any state level healthcare system (you know that whole supremacy clause thingy)
Of course. My point being that the state governments can't take over everything the national government does.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:25:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: pwnedgato I'd think that the VA would take supremacy over any state level healthcare system (you know that whole supremacy clause thingy)
Of course. My point being that the state governments can't take over everything the national government does.
No of course not. Personally I'd like to see education moved up the federal level (damn department of education doesn't do anything as is)
Originally by: Crumplecorn These is a forum for this.
|

pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:26:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: pwnedgato I'd think that the VA would take supremacy over any state level healthcare system (you know that whole supremacy clause thingy)
Of course. My point being that the state governments can't take over everything the national government does.
No of course not. Personally I'd like to see education moved up to the federal level (damn department of education doesn't do anything as is)
Originally by: Crumplecorn These is a forum for this.
|

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:26:00 -
[80]
Originally by: pwnedgato
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: pwnedgato I'd think that the VA would take supremacy over any state level healthcare system (you know that whole supremacy clause thingy)
Of course. My point being that the state governments can't take over everything the national government does.
No of course not. Personally I'd like to see education moved up the federal level (damn department of education doesn't do anything as is)
They tried that. The result was "no child left behind," also known as "gigantic megafail."
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Shameless Avenger
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:59:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Dark Shikari ... The result was "no child left behind," also known as "gigantic megafail." ...
Really? I was under the impression that the "no chid left behind" was a great success, at least here in FL. |

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 02:30:00 -
[82]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 02/02/2008 02:30:05
Originally by: Shameless Avenger
Originally by: Dark Shikari ... The result was "no child left behind," also known as "gigantic megafail." ...
Really? I was under the impression that the "no chid left behind" was a great success, at least here in FL.
Are you kidding me? Its one of the worst educational policies in national history--it intentionally kept behind all the high-performing kids in a desperate attempt to help the idiots. The result was a complete crippling of many schools as they funneled the vast majority of their money to help the couple kids who were "left behind" (since it was an unfunded mandate) as they gutted their programs for high-performing students.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 02:36:00 -
[83]
Well when I say moved up to the National level I'd like to see all the standardized testing (FCAT, MCAT etc.) nationalized, and I think that the curriculums should be standardized as well.
Originally by: Crumplecorn These is a forum for this.
|

Shameless Avenger
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 03:37:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 02/02/2008 02:30:05
Originally by: Shameless Avenger
Originally by: Dark Shikari ... The result was "no child left behind," also known as "gigantic megafail." ...
Really? I was under the impression that the "no chid left behind" was a great success, at least here in FL.
Are you kidding me? Its one of the worst educational policies in national history--it intentionally kept behind all the high-performing kids in a desperate attempt to help the idiots. The result was a complete crippling of many schools as they funneled the vast majority of their money to help the couple kids who were "left behind" (since it was an unfunded mandate) as they gutted their programs for high-performing students.
I'm sorry that you see it that way DS. You see, there are many conditions that can make a child fell behind. Autism for example. Those kids might need more specialized educators to deal with their conditions. That cost more money. I don't think normal kids are gonna get dumber because the govt took the money for their football uniforms to pay for a speech terapist.
I do hope you never get an autistic son. By the looks of it, you seem to favor the old method of chaining them in the basement. |

Dark Shikari
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 03:40:00 -
[85]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 02/02/2008 03:44:08
Originally by: Shameless Avenger I'm sorry that you see it that way DS. You see, there are many conditions that can make a child fell behind. Autism for example. Those kids might need more specialized educators to deal with their conditions. That cost more money. I don't think normal kids are gonna get dumber because the govt took the money for their football uniforms to pay for a speech terapist.
I do hope you never get an autistic son. By the looks of it, you seem to favor the old method of chaining them in the basement.
Learning-disabled kids already got more money than smart ones before No Child Left Behind.
They don't need a national government policy that tells them "you must spend more money getting this one kid to pass tests that he will never pass even if it means taking money away from 1000 other kids."
I know exactly what you're talking about, because I was brought up with the schools telling me I was "autistic" (I'm not, by any stretch of the term, or any test) and the entire thing is a massive feel-good waste of money for nothing. You don't need to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for a single kid to go to school. Not with my taxpayer money. Its perfectly fine to have extra care for the kids who need it--its not fine to pay multiple "specialists" for each single autistic kid in the school in the hopes that it will get the school past No Child Left Behind (while at the same time gutting all the other school programs in order to serve the four kids that don't need it anyways).
If you ask anyone in the educational system, they will tell you that No Child Left Behind was a mistake--it was an attempt for the national government to change school policy without any thought beforehand and without giving them any money to make the changes.
And honestly, if you think it is worth sacrificing the education of hundreds of people in the hope you can help the education of one--you're nuts.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. |

Vanthen
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 04:10:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Dark Shikari fascist ... only be believable if the Republicans had a ghost of a chance this election.
Charles Rangel is a fascist republican? old news
And DS is pretty much spot on with No Child Left Behind crap.
|

Shameless Avenger
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 04:21:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Learning-disabled kids already got more money than smart ones before No Child Left Behind.
Not everywhere... on many places they used to tell parents "we don't have the personell to deal with your kid therefore we can't accept him in this school".
Originally by: Dark Shikari
They don't need a national government policy that tells them "you must spend more money getting this one kid to pass tests that he will never pass even if it means taking money away from 1000 other kids."
You don't know that he will never pass. He probably will.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
I know exactly what you're talking about, because I was brought up with the schools telling me I was "autistic" (I'm not, by any stretch of the term, or any test)
Good for you.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
and the entire thing is a massive feel-good waste of money for nothing.
Again, is not for nothing, some of these kids are showing great results.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
You don't need to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for a single kid to go to school.
I don't think those numbers are correct. My kid's teacher drives a toyota, not a mercedes.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Not with my taxpayer money.
And who else's? cuz I'm broke 
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Its perfectly fine to have extra care for the kids who need it
There we agree.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
--its not fine to pay multiple "specialists" for each single autistic kid
That depends how you do it. Here for example, the specialists are actually state/county employees that travel to all the schools to provide the tests and stuff.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
...in the school in the hopes that it will get the school past No Child Left Behind (while at the same time gutting all the other school programs in order to serve the four kids that don't need it anyways).
Examples of those other programs please?
Originally by: Dark Shikari
If you ask anyone in the educational system, they will tell you that No Child Left Behind was a mistake
I have asked, they don't say that.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
--it was an attempt for the national government to change school policy without any thought beforehand and without giving them any money to make the changes.
Govt never thinks beforehand, we all know that one.
Originally by: Dark Shikari
And honestly, if you think it is worth sacrificing the education of hundreds of people in the hope you can help the education of one--you're nuts.
Please don't be vague on a statements like that: "sacrificing the education of hundreds". Come on. You make it sound like if a hundred teachers just got laid off just to accept my kid in school. Drama queen! 
|

Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:33:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 02/02/2008 02:30:05
Originally by: Shameless Avenger
Originally by: Dark Shikari ... The result was "no child left behind," also known as "gigantic megafail." ...
Really? I was under the impression that the "no chid left behind" was a great success, at least here in FL.
Are you kidding me? Its one of the worst educational policies in national history--it intentionally kept behind all the high-performing kids in a desperate attempt to help the idiots. The result was a complete crippling of many schools as they funneled the vast majority of their money to help the couple kids who were "left behind" (since it was an unfunded mandate) as they gutted their programs for high-performing students.
Let's also not forget that it moves education in the US even further away from children actually learning by putting emphasis not on teaching, but on passing tests. Or that by emphasizing quantifiables, it moves even more funding away from intangibles like psychology, sociology, philosophy, the arts, physical education, vocational education, etc. Or that it practices collective punishment, penalizing the entire school for a specific subset possessing an unwillingness or inability to learn. Or that it leads to teaching to the baseline, not only due to lack of funding but in order to artificially inflate grades.
NCLB is in the process of creating an entire generation of children who will never have art past elementary school, never be taught critical thinking skills, never make or do anything worthwhile during their education, and never truly be challenged. Math, English, standardized test. Repeat ad nauseum. Then they're going to hit college, and with the exception of children in private schools, home schooling, magnet schools, or private tutoring, they will be woefully unprepared.
Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
|

Rawr Cristina
Caldari Cult of Rawr
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 09:30:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Amarria Black
Let's also not forget that it moves education in the US even further away from children actually learning by putting emphasis not on teaching, but on passing tests. Math, English, standardized test. Repeat ad nauseum.
...
Then they're going to hit college, and with the exception of children in private schools, home schooling, magnet schools, or private tutoring, they will be woefully unprepared.
Sounds depressingly like how education is run here in the UK. I learnt next to nothing in College since the stuff we were taught was pretty irrelevant to the subject and we were only taught it because it was a topic that would appear in an exam. It always seemed to me like the exam boards (particually OCR, curses ) completely missed the point of education 
It's all theory, theory, theory and no practical. What's the point of being bombarded with the science if you've nothing to actually relate it to? Wonderful, I'm taught the science behind the CPU and how it processes data - was I taught how to set a PC up? or install hardware? configure networks? Nope, not once in a 2-year A-level Computing course.
|

Big Al
The Aftermath
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 09:36:00 -
[90]
Too old and already served.
The draft would do this country some good as long as we could stay out of conflicts we have no business in.
|

SoftRevolution
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 10:00:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Rawr Cristina
Originally by: Amarria Black
Let's also not forget that it moves education in the US even further away from children actually learning by putting emphasis not on teaching, but on passing tests. Math, English, standardized test. Repeat ad nauseum.
...
Then they're going to hit college, and with the exception of children in private schools, home schooling, magnet schools, or private tutoring, they will be woefully unprepared.
Sounds depressingly like how education is run here in the UK. I learnt next to nothing in College since the stuff we were taught was pretty irrelevant to the subject and we were only taught it because it was a topic that would appear in an exam. It always seemed to me like the exam boards (particually OCR, curses ) completely missed the point of education 
It's all theory, theory, theory and no practical. What's the point of being bombarded with the science if you've nothing to actually relate it to? Wonderful, I'm taught the science behind the CPU and how it processes data - was I taught how to set a PC up? or install hardware? configure networks? Nope, not once in a 2-year A-level Computing course.
Have to agree here. "Teaching the test" so to speak always seemed to take up a reasonable chunk of exam year. The more tests there are the worse this gets :/ EVE RELATED CONTENT |

Joseph 9
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 11:13:00 -
[92]
Originally by: SoftRevolution Have to agree here. "Teaching the test" so to speak always seemed to take up a reasonable chunk of exam year. The more tests there are the worse this gets :/
This comes out of those lovely league tables governments are so fond of producing. OH NOES my school is below average, my poor little babies will be permanently scarred and unable to ever get a decent job and will end up as a ***** dealing hooker murdering peado pimp...
Anyway it is a fairly unavoidable that 50% of schools will always be below average, unless your maths is really really bad. These league tables would be more useful if they added stuff like variance to them. But then how many parents have the eduction to understand variance/deviation.
And as a final point I went to a below average state run comprehensive school here in the UK, I have multiple degrees, work as a research scientist and earn well above the national average. So going to a below average school really ruined my life...
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |