Alright to start this off I want to state that I don't have a personal opinion on US government because I'm not a US citizen. Even if I did I wouldn't voice it here because there is no relevance.

I watched the movie Farienhit(sp) 9/11 tonight and I found it interesting. I took to as just what it was just a diffrent opinion on the situation. I'm sure a Bush supporter would say diffrent so I'm not on some crusade agenst Bush, he isn't some evil Hitler reborn or something but one thing in the movie really stuck with me.

Why does everyone elses children have to go fight this war while his stay home? I would have alot more respect for his enthusiasm for this war in Iraq if his daughters where in Marine uniforms overseas with every other son, every other daughter... instead of back in the US trying to sneak into bars and getting plastered. I guess my question is, why do the biggest supporters of the war never make personal sacrifice for the war?

Maybe you guys can answer that question or just give an opinion on it. I don't want wild arguements to start cause there is nothing very much to argue about it's just curriousity really.

They aren't enlisted, and there's no draft.

Its a volunteer army. They aren't over there because they didn't join the army.

It's their choice, if they knew how much their dad would gain from it, they Might join. Military isn't a required position, and they don't want to do it.

But I dunno from what I saw in the movie alot of the recruting targets people with nothing else to do but... I mean if it's a choice between the army or living on the street, does it still count as volunteering?

If anyone's that bad off, they would probably quality for welfare. They would receive federal aid until they can find a job and get back on their feet.

...Or for 6 months, till the welfare cheques stopped.

From what I've heard, the US welfare system sucks.

6 months? I thought it was 5 years.

I agree that 6 months isn't long enough, you need at least a year, especially when the job market sucks like it does now.

Also, if you are going to lose your house and end up on the street, you could also declare bankruptcy. It reduces your credit rating to s***, but at least you don't lose everything, if I heard correctly.

I wasn't aware that anyone was forced to go. I thought it was just people who were in the army, you know?
If his children were members of the army, then sure, they should go.
Otherwise it's not up to him wether the kids go or not, it's their choice as individuals, not their dads.

Yeah, the military is the military. They would get shipped overseas (most likely) if they were in the military. However, what's the point when you can have pretty much anything you want (except privacy)?

The sons of members of congress and the Bush administration I could understand posing this question for. But the Bush daughters? Come on! They would be more danger to our own troops than any Iraqi enemies. They would cry all the way through basic training (assuming they make it through) and once they get in country, then what? What job are they qualified to do? Army fashion police? If I were there I sure as Hell wouldn't put my life in their hands.

Two words:

Target. Practice.

lmao!

A soldier being someone else's child is irrelevant. They are an adult and, presumably, able to make their own decisions, seperate of their parents. It's their choice to go into the military, and active duty, reserve, and national guard all know that they could go to war. They don't join as someone else's child. They join as their own adult person.
A classical liberal would say yes, as they still have the freedom to join or not join. A classical socialist would say no becauase there is no real freedom of choice there.

That's exactly why we have basic training. Only those who are both physically and mentally fit are allowed in the military. (btw, most girls do cry at least once in basic training. At least from what I've heard from my female cadet friends).

Farrenheit 911 makes the point that military recruiters target youths living in low income households in areas of high unemployment. Basically it's useless trying to recruit young rich and inevitably successful people, they're after kids who have a choice between a paid job in the US Army, or collecting unemployment cheques.

So what you end up with is an Army full of young people who dont want to be there, dont beleive their reason for being there, and things like this happen.

Then there's the whole thing about them fighting the war for the corporations who will benefit from mass-military action and the rebuilding or Iraq, but that's a topic for another thread.

Every one else’s? Maybe 1% of every one else’s! The people who are over there, are over there because they want to be. The media goes over there and finds the one guy in a hundred who doesn’t support the war, and they only interview them. I was reading these account of the soldiers who they said they would actually have their interviews cut off if they supported the war. Apparently almost all of the people over there support it, but our "objective" media seems to want to make it look otherwise. As for Michael Moore, he's a democrat, he made this movie purely for politics. And he of course exaggerated and stretched the truth in some places. I think there were a few blatant lies or places he didn't research the subject properly is some cases. It's just politics. If a democratic president had done the same thing, the situation would be exactly the opposite. Dems for, Republicans against. Just politics.

As for being "forced to go into the military" you really don't have to go in. There is no draft. Poor kids can get a job just a well as any one else. They could work their way through collage just like any one else. They could study and get a good SAT score if they wanted. Education is free. Even middle class parents can't afford to send their kids to collage now days. If they are in the Army for a free education and are too lazy to do it the other way that’s their problem. They know the risks when they join up. Only the really rich (or really high SAT scores) get free collage. Don't give me any of this "poor lower class kids forced into the military." It's nonsense. BTW most of the people in the military are there because they want to be in the military. Not for the free education.

Well the idea is that a modern day democrat... ie clinton... would NOT have done that.

He might have. Clinton bombed Hussein when he thought Hussein was making WMDs. After 9/11 he would have the backing of the liberals and probably would have gone in there. The whole controversy has just been stirred up by politicians for their own use. It would be the exact opposite if Clinton had done it.

No he would have gone into Afghanistan... not Iraq... remember how Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11... there you go... it's all starting to make a little more sense.

Yea, Iraq only supported torturing it's own people, killing those who opposed it's leader, and funding terrorists. No problems there, mere differences in what peoples agree on. Some of us like ice cream, some of us enjoy blowing things up or harming others. It's personal preference....we shouldn't have gone into Iraq, totally against all Democratic ideal it was, let them have their ideals and goals of destruction.

They're too stupid, drunk, and bad at standup comedy to get in to the army.

Obi: I've heard of valedictorians in inner-city schools getting 18 on the ACTs. The same student who could get a 35 in a suburban school can't even get an average score because of the suckiness of his district. An 18 won't get you into a decent college, so scholarships are completely out of the question. I've heard it's difficult to succeed in college if your highest math is Algebra I and your high school was having you read books written for middle schoolers.

So the disadvantaged youth who still has some ambition despite getting screwed by the system is probably going to join the army as a last out. It's not a bad deal, assuming you don't get shipped off and killed.

The enlisted military is overwhelming poor for a reason. Arguing over whether "forced to go into the military" is the right terminology is semantics.

That's impossible to prove either way.

Nobody is forced to join the military. I was in for eight years (4 active) and sure, there are plenty of people there from low or middle-class families. However, the vast majority of them (us) went that direction because we had two goals:

1) make a difference, try to do something good with our lives for once
2) we are fundamentally lazy, and serving four years in the military is the easiest way to get money for college, which the vast majority of people don't use.

People are told exactly what they are getting into, exactly what to expect, exactly what could happen. There are NUMEROUS opportunities to drop out if you decide during training that the military isn't for you. Even once you're in, you have many opportunities to get out early. The reason people don't is because they want the benefits and they feel they are doing something good.

Sure, there are a few that feel like they were forced into it or they have no other choice, or maybe they're too weak to even go to their seargent and quit, but the vast majority would gladly die for their country.

I don't think most kids here on Massassi understand how it is. You go from being a nobody, absolutely poor, daddy in jail, mommy into drugs. Your best friend from high school was just shot down in a drive by and you have nothing going for you. You get an opportunity to turn it around, to make a difference. Not only that, you get an opportunity to finally be in a family - and that's what the military is to the people who stay in. It's a bunch of brothers and sisters you would gladly give your life for. You belong, and not only that, you can prosper. You can buy a new car straight out of basic training. You can leave your job and go have fun, not worrying about whether you're going to get shot or beat down. You can have parties, you can buy a playstation, you can afford food and you get a nice place to live, clothes, and friends.

The point is, they don't just offer you a dangerous "job" in exchange for some pay and college money, they give you a complete change of lifestyle and a complete change in your entire standing in life.

Yeah. Most people who join the military probably don't want to go to war and get shot at

Not really. It's all volunteer so pretty much all of us wanted to come in. I would say that most of us can't wait (figuratively speaking) to get out! All for our own reasons. Me because I'm tired of getting up before the sun! Only 4 years, 10 month, and 6 days left! Woohoo! Then I'll have a paycheck for the rest of my life.

I didn't say every one would get a high SAT score. Only those who were highly motivated and intelligent. Just like it's supposed to be. The rest have to work through collage. Any one can do it. I however, want to go into the Marines ROTC program, and fly jets. Well, we'll see. Marines > *

Well, if you are going to watch Fahrenhiet 911, you might as well watch the other side's point of view and take a look at Fahrenhype 911.

It could have done with a few* fat jokes, but I guess pointing out some of the things Moore left out will have to do.

*a large amount of, because, you know, he's fat lol

Yes, nothing makes people take your argument more seriously then a plethora of fat jokes

Very true. I could not help but notice that of all of my fellow college students that I could find that happened to be enlisted/were going to enlist, not a single one of them came from the upper class, or even the upper half of the middle class. I do Agree with Brian on this:

"The point is, they don't just offer you a dangerous "job" in exchange for some pay and college money, they give you a complete change of lifestyle and a complete change in your entire standing in life.".

Most people don't join the army because they want it as a job. They join because it's the only chance they have at changing their life for the better.

This was the primary reason for the bill to re-instate the draft, which was introduced before the invasion of Iraq. Many members of congress knew the most accurate polls showed that, the higher one's Social/Economic class, the more likely one was to support the war. Also, the higher one's Social/Economic class, the less likely one would be to have a friend or loved on in the military. Guessing that having a friend of family member in the military was part of the reason for general opposition to the war beforehand (any reliable poll will show that support for the war was less than 50%, as well as less than the level of opposition in the public), many members of Congress decided that re-instating the draft might be the best way to prevent the costly (insert "liberation" or "mistake" here) in Iraq. It might have worked, but it was stalled, and only now is reaching any degree of spread.

It really annoys me when people with zero millitary experience think they have it all figured out. Besides, I'm guessing that Brian would say you at least partially misunderstood his point.

Actually, no he isn't.

Now why would you say "no he isn't" without telling us what he actually is?

Why?
Just because some guy stood at a checkpoint for a few hours every day, or even if he actually had to shoot someone!, that doesn't somehow magically make him an expert into the social and economic factors that affect Iraq.

He's stated numerous times that he's not a democrat. He's an independant and hasn't endorsed kerry in any way.

The subject wasn't Iraq. Go back and re-read what I was responding to then ask me again if you want.