Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Plucketeer

(12,882 posts)
18. Uh-huh
Mon Feb 25, 2013, 09:44 PM
Feb 2013

Last edited Mon Feb 25, 2013, 10:52 PM - Edit history (1)

"When the top brass needs to rely upon volunteers instead of draftees or conscripts, the smart ones adapt to the situation and adopt tactics to not needlessly squander the lives of the troops."

So.... on the advice of our best military minds - we've expended (in Iraq and Afghanistan) way more than we lost to terrorist attacks in the last two decades. These losses against a mere handful of baddies. Here's my slant on this: When you turn things over to generals, generals are gonna do what generals LIVE to do. What general would wanna retire without ever having proved his prowess in his chosen field. Volunteer / draftee / it's not gonna dissuade or encourage a leader trying to leave a legacy he fancies for himself. The ONLY edge the volunteers might afford is that they want to do what they're doing. If they didn't, they wouldn't have joined OR would've quit early on.

Edit to add...... What we've seen in recent years is the sad fact that those we've put in the White House have NO on the front lines experience - while depending on generals for advice as to what to do with our standing forces. So what ARE a general's endeavors??? To keep his horse IN the stable so to speak? That'd equate to me owning a Ferrari and figuring what's best is that it stays in the garage.

Not this dumbass idea. Again bowens43 Feb 2013 #1
It's time we had mandatory service rschallack Feb 2013 #2
Re: "It's time we had mandatory service" mahatmakanejeeves Feb 2013 #30
A great majority of people favor the rule of law under the Constitution: AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #36
Start with Thom Hartmann first. AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #3
Not necessary Plucketeer Feb 2013 #5
What do I think? He's a hypocrite who used to publicly criticize chicken-hawks and who obviously AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #7
So I guess Plucketeer Feb 2013 #8
Yea, well AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #9
So - for WWII for instance... Plucketeer Feb 2013 #10
I can see that you are starting to understand. AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #11
Oh..... I understood with your first reply! Plucketeer Feb 2013 #12
In WW II, 6,332,000 Americans volunteered. AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #13
Uh-huh Plucketeer Feb 2013 #18
Traditionally, sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #21
During Vietnam sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #17
Do you think that we have a "democratic society"? AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #25
No sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #35
A few points... elzenmahn Feb 2013 #28
. AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #29
Every able bodied sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #16
That kind of draft will never happen Art_from_Ark Feb 2013 #27
How would you feel sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #33
All Americans need nineteen50 Feb 2013 #4
Mercenaries! Plucketeer Feb 2013 #6
And a draft would be any better? AverageJoe90 Feb 2013 #15
Yes, sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #19
That's basically how the old draft was. AverageJoe90 Feb 2013 #23
I see your point. sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #32
my thoughts exactly putitinD Feb 2013 #26
Oh dear, no, no, no. Just NO. AverageJoe90 Feb 2013 #14
Yes, sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #20
Don't we already have the National Guard, though? n/t AverageJoe90 Feb 2013 #22
Correct sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #31
You don't stop having illegal wars..... DeSwiss Feb 2013 #24
When you talk about 'drafting the fodder,' be aware of something. PDJane Feb 2013 #34
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Thom Hartmann: It's Time ...»Reply #18