Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
IMHO - the country should NOT be using civilians in our Imperial Wars. Civilians are not subject to military discipline and are not protected under the Geneva Convention. They are mercenaries and are subject to domestic law. If we need more troops than can be provided by a volunteer force we need to use a draft.
What American would refuse to serve in our army of economic, religious and imperial conquest?
I just checked out Xe. One of the jobs they have is as a "Role Player". I found it quite hilarious that the advertisement contains a warning that says role players are frequently shot with paintball guns. I wonder if role players also have to wear dishdashas and kaffiyehs.
I saw the interview on Bill Maher with Jeremy Scahill. Its pretty enlightening, and makes me wonder:
1) Should our country be fighting wars with private armies?
2) Are casualties involving civilian troops being taken into account in the official statistics?
I find Jeremy Scahill very intersesting. My answers are
1) NO, either we have enough voluntary troops OR we reinstate the draft. These contracters are not held to the same standards that are troops are and being paid 6X the average enlisted man or woman.
2) per Jeremy, these casualties are NOT taken into account
I find Jeremy Scahill very intersesting. My answers are
1) NO, either we have enough voluntary troops OR we reinstate the draft. These contracters are not held to the same standards that are troops are and being paid 6X the average enlisted man or woman.
2) per Jeremy, these casualties are NOT taken into account
That is an interesting answer. I have been finding parallels to our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan to our efforts in Vietnam. The difference I am finding is that 1) the media is not exposing the violence and death like they did in Vietnam, and hence we are not yet experiencing a massive public backlash, and 2) there is no draft, so middle-class boys and girls are not being sent there in large numbers, like they were in Vietnam, and hence no large amount of public backlash. Perhaps as long as we can pay these mercenaries $100K or so to stay in the middle east after our military trains them under the auspices of Blackwater and such, there will not be a public backlash. My problem is with the media....what the heck are they doing to stop this?
That is an interesting answer. I have been finding parallels to our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan to our efforts in Vietnam. The difference I am finding is that 1) the media is not exposing the violence and death like they did in Vietnam, and hence we are not yet experiencing a massive public backlash, and 2) there is no draft, so middle-class boys and girls are not being sent there in large numbers, like they were in Vietnam, and hence no large amount of public backlash. Perhaps as long as we can pay these mercenaries $100K or so to stay in the middle east after our military trains them under the auspices of Blackwater and such, there will not be a public backlash. My problem is with the media....what the heck are they doing to stop this?
This MAY BE an unpopular thought but until there is a draft again, many people will NOT be aware of what is happening in the world. Until THEY may have to go fight a war they don't believe in what is the incentive for some to pay attention to what is happening? Why are people JUST NOW learning about Blackwater? The book has been out for awhile, Jeremy has been very vocal.
I have no idea why the media isn't showing more and exposing more. Too many news sources trying to win likeminded viewers and sell more ad space? Back in the day, there were a couple of news sources and it was just the news. No commentary. Then there are the people that think any violence on tv might hurt their sensibilities and scar their children. If one watches news NOT FROM THIS country, you get more of an idea what is going on.
This MAY BE an unpopular thought but until there is a draft again, many people will NOT be aware of what is happening in the world. Until THEY may have to go fight a war they don't believe in what is the incentive for some to pay attention to what is happening? Why are people JUST NOW learning about Blackwater? The book has been out for awhile, Jeremy has been very vocal.
I have no idea why the media isn't showing more and exposing more. Too many news sources trying to win likeminded viewers and sell more ad space? Back in the day, there were a couple of news sources and it was just the news. No commentary. Then there are the people that think any violence on tv might hurt their sensibilities and scar their children. If one watches news NOT FROM THIS country, you get more of an idea what is going on.
Why are people just now learning about Blackwater? I don't think many people do know about it. I think the general populace wants to hear about the new I-Pod or details on how Michael Jackson died.
"I have no idea why the media isn't showing more and exposing more".
Huh!! Where have you been? The media was all over this when Bush was in office. Remember the daily body counts? Now that Obama is in and he declared during the campaign that he was going to bring the troops home, and hasn't the media has more important things to cover.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
