Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 19 to 24 of 24

Thread: Treasonous Berkley city council.

  1. #19

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Here's the local flavor, if you're interested.

    http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-02-12

  2. #20
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by ccbig View Post
    I like the idea of the USA having some kind of mandated national service for a 2 to 3 year period.

    That service would include choosing from groups like the Peace Corps, the AmeriCorps, the military, etc. I would also like to see partial or full tuition forgiveness for nurses and doctors who agree to serve/practice in inner cities or rural areas where there are a shortage of health care professionals.
    That's an interesting concept, that I see occasionally floated. Do you think it could gain widespread support?

    It seems to me we've had this ideological war against anything that smacks of "the public", including service to the public, for a couple of decades now. Would it profit anyone other than the public? (not that I can see). It seems most policy initiatives these days have a strong profit motive behind them (NAFTA, financial modernization act, war, credit card co protection act--just to name a few).

  3. #21
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,935

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Thanks for posting that flop.

    What would the people of Berkley have the military do. Not recruit and hope people just join or better yet re institute a draft. I will withdraw some of my statements. I do not hope they fall into a state of emergency, I don't want anyone to get hurt unjustly.

    I do think that the Berkley city council are wackos and to protest the military as if they have any say on whether we are at war or not is absurd.

  4. #22

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    Why would I need a source to refute yours? I'm not disputing the general facts of the story, I'm challenging their bullshit rhetoric about Berkeley committing treason. On that basis, I can make arguments on my own two feet without anyone's help.

    You now tell us what the council wants: keep out the Marines, and on this basis you are going to condemn them? The fact does not escape me that many college campuses are opposed to the recruiters, as are numerous parents of high school students who have to sign a paper to keep recruiters from contacting their children. Are they all traitors too? You make a mockery of the concept by reprinting freerepublic's crap.

    Given a choice, I'd say credit card cos. are clearly the biggest threat on campus. I'd say it's a lot easier to avoid or say no to recruiters--especially on college campuses--they're not going to pursue you if you're not interested. The credit card cos. though, they're in your mailbox, and offering money ostensibly free or to be covered by another day or maybe your parents.

    As for the recruiters, there is this idea that we should not be subject to sales pitches against our will.
    Let's be reasonable for a minute, here. Asking recruiters not to contact your children or asking them to recruit in a specific manner on campus is not the same as an elected city council declaring the Marine recruiting station "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders." The US Marines are unwelcome intruders in the United States?? Does that sound reasonable to you??

    But, since you can't argue the facts of the article and attack it as crap from freerepublic, does that mean that it didn't happen? The article may or may not have some bias, but the line about the council's resolution is fact, regardless of any bias the rest of the article may have. Even at that, the article is balanced -- it displays argument from all sides and does not take sides itself.

    As for your "sales pitches against our will," there is no law or provision, save for the No-Call list, that says that people can't try to sell you something. You don't have to listen to what the recruiteers say, but they have jsut as much right to attempt to gain recruits as you and I haveto speak our minds. Remember that the first amendment protects the government as well as the people.

  5. #23

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    That's an interesting concept, that I see occasionally floated. Do you think it could gain widespread support?

    It seems to me we've had this ideological war against anything that smacks of "the public", including service to the public, for a couple of decades now. Would it profit anyone other than the public? (not that I can see). It seems most policy initiatives these days have a strong profit motive behind them (NAFTA, financial modernization act, war, credit card co protection act--just to name a few).
    I think the ideology behind resisting compulsory service is freedom. The military draft was unpopular when it was last in use and I imagine that compulsory service would be just as unpopular if it were enacted today.

    You are correct that profits motivate -- profits are an excellent motivator. I think that is the case because people almost universally (I can't speak for everyone, but ALMOST universally) like making money. Money pays the bills and puts food on the table.

    Also, not everyone has the same values, so we can't assume that in a perfect world everyone would want to help out in some sort of service. But, we see that if people are allowed to freely give, they end up giving more than if they are forced to give via compulsory means (we had a thread about this some 2 or 3 months ago in which the US gave more non-government money and aid world-wide than any other country). I wouldn't want to force you to give something that is not based on your values any more than you would want someone else's values forced on you.

  6. #24
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY View Post
    Thanks for posting that flop.

    What would the people of Berkley have the military do. Not recruit and hope people just join or better yet re institute a draft. I will withdraw some of my statements. I do not hope they fall into a state of emergency, I don't want anyone to get hurt unjustly.

    I do think that the Berkley city council are wackos and to protest the military as if they have any say on whether we are at war or not is absurd.
    The nature of protest is not necessarily to provide answers to the world's problems, but to illustrate (bring some attention to) some form of injustice. The Council's action is obviously a form of protest. In that sense, I doubt the members of the Council who voted for the resolution (6 for, 3 against), thought through what they would do about fulfilling the recruitment needs of the the armed forces. They probably think reduction in force is a good idea.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •