The W
Views: 101530246
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
22.12.07 0148
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - On politicians and wars
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
(1736 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (5 total)
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 89

Posts: 1197/2114
EXP: 6686390
For next: 229538

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 2 days
#1 Posted on 2.4.03 1347.35
Reposted on: 2.4.10 1349.36
Click Here (cnn.com)
Promote this thread!
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 1218/4700
EXP: 21726885
For next: 109777

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1329 days
Last activity: 1126 days
#2 Posted on 2.4.03 1415.49
Reposted on: 2.4.10 1417.14
I read this yesterday and found it intersting. I'm kinda surprised though because it lends credence to the "they're better than you are" argument. Still better than Mark Sanford in So.Carolina just plain old trying to get himself out of it before he goes.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 89

Posts: 1198/2114
EXP: 6686390
For next: 229538

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 2 days
#3 Posted on 2.4.03 1440.35
Reposted on: 2.4.10 1442.51
I don't know. On one hand, it does stink of elitism, and it's going to definitely lend itself to more politicians to joining the reserves to look tough to the voters, all the while knowing they'll never actually have to go to war.

On the other hand, this country has always excempted people needed at home from military service. Farm deferments, Teaching deferments, etc. Maybe all this is saying is that lawmakers are also integral to the homefront during times of war.

I don't really buy this though. It's tough to find teachers, farmers, etc. to take the place of the ones sent off to war. It's not tough to find politicians.
Corajudo
Frankfurter
Level: 58

Posts: 106/810
EXP: 1533908
For next: 43647

Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 166 days
Last activity: 6 days
#4 Posted on 2.4.03 1456.03
Reposted on: 2.4.10 1459.01

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    I don't know. On one hand, it does stink of elitism, and it's going to definitely lend itself to more politicians to joining the reserves to look tough to the voters, all the while knowing they'll never actually have to go to war.

    On the other hand, this country has always excempted people needed at home from military service. Farm deferments, Teaching deferments, etc. Maybe all this is saying is that lawmakers are also integral to the homefront during times of war.

    I don't really buy this though. It's tough to find teachers, farmers, etc. to take the place of the ones sent off to war. It's not tough to find politicians.



One potential problem would be a Senator or Representative who was captured and became a POW. It's bad enough for anyone to become a POW, but it would be especially bad for a highly visible politician. Also, depending on what committees the politician served on, s/he also could possibly know some privileged information (even if it's not war plans) that could put them in greater danger. It's not tough to find politicians, but if this would put them in greater danger (I can't believe I'm typing this) then it would be better to send someone else. We're talking about a handful of reserves that would be exempt from serving. I don't see that as too big a deal. Sure it stinks of elitism and there is the possibility of an increased opportunity to grandstand, but it's hardly the most egregious example of these in national politics.

Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1147/1759
EXP: 4962785
For next: 30085

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1375 days
Last activity: 141 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#5 Posted on 5.4.03 1811.53
Reposted on: 5.4.10 1811.57
This is a tough one- but I think I agree with the policy. It is tough to say why- and I do admire his desire to go and fight for his country, but unless he is REALLY needed on the battlefield, it is best to leave him behind. We have more than enough soldiers, so exposing a member of our government to battle is really an unecessary risk. No one can deny that the logistics of shipping out a Congressman, replacing him, potentially holding a special election for the seat, the loss of a voter in congress for any amount of time- it is just too much cost for the gain of one soldier. The sentiment is admirable, but his place is in Washington.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: What can't leftists be more like this Iraqi
Next thread: A funny quote, and a question about Iran
Previous thread: I think this is what I think
(1736 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - On politicians and warsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.246 seconds.