What would you fight for?

I know that I do not wish to be part of the armed forces if there isn't a war going on, but if need be I would certainly be ready to sign up and give my life for my planet. Certainly being in a real Wing Commander universe would be a ultimate blast just as much as it would be terrifying. I don't know if I would be able to handle going face to face with the Cats. The cats from the movie were just as scary as the ones from the games. Also the big chance of death in a war is just something that would hang over my head more than anything else.
 
I can't tell you what i'd do it for. I don't really know. I breifly considered enlisting after 9/11, but that was more out of sheer anger. Living just a bit outside NYC and having a father who may or may not have been working in the WTC, not to mention my one day I spent there (i'm a firefighter, and a few us decided to take an engine and go up there on 9/12. I didn't get very far in, and stood by the truck and handed out water and stuff. We left that same day, because we really weren't supposed to be up there at all.)

Basically, I would fight for whatever they wanted me too. It wouldn't be my first choice of things to do, but if I were drafted or something i'd go do my part with no fuss. The fighting isn't the thing that turns me away abit, it's the military lifestyle. I'll gladly fight for my country...but I REALLY don't want to join the military.
 
Originally posted by Ladiesman^
I can't tell you what i'd do it for. I don't really know. I breifly considered enlisting after 9/11, but that was more out of sheer anger. Living just a bit outside NYC and having a father who may or may not have been working in the WTC, not to mention my one day I spent there (i'm a firefighter, and a few us decided to take an engine and go up there on 9/12. I didn't get very far in, and stood by the truck and handed out water and stuff. We left that same day, because we really weren't supposed to be up there at all.)

Basically, I would fight for whatever they wanted me too. It wouldn't be my first choice of things to do, but if I were drafted or something i'd go do my part with no fuss. The fighting isn't the thing that turns me away abit, it's the military lifestyle. I'll gladly fight for my country...but I REALLY don't want to join the military.
Click to expand...


I was in the navy during the Gulf WAr and Somalia. Trust me there is nothing nice about fighting. Military life isn't so bad once you get used to it. It's the fighting I didn't like. I'ld do it again if it were necessary to defend my family, my country or my planet but there's nothing to enjoy about it.
 
Remember, your own govornment can be as great a threat to frrdom as any foreign power. What Thomas Jefferson meant when he said that, is that the people must be vigilant against the govornment overstepping its bounds.

Which is more important "security" or liberty?
 
Originally posted by Ender

Which is more important "security" or liberty?
Click to expand...

That's the question, isn't it? Liberty means nothing if your dead, and life means nothing without liberty....there needs to be a balance between the two.
 
Liberty will always be the most important thing to fight for. There's no such thing as "security" where there is no liberty. A dictator can do whatever he/she wants, including have you executed. Not much security in that.
 
Originally posted by Knitewing



I was in the navy during the Gulf WAr and Somalia. Trust me there is nothing nice about fighting. Military life isn't so bad once you get used to it. It's the fighting I didn't like. I'ld do it again if it were necessary to defend my family, my country or my planet but there's nothing to enjoy about it.
Click to expand...

When I was in Bahrain during the Gulf War, we didnt do much "fighting". And unless they were a Corpsman with the Marines or aircrew in offensive aircraft, the Navy didnt do a whole lot more than launch cruise missiles.
 
Originally posted by Skyfire


Do we have another Liberatarian around? :D
Click to expand...

Well skyfire, i believe there is another libertarian around here. Security is nice, but not at the expense of liberty. I'm all for feeling safe and secure but AFTER my liberties are guaranteed. And if I cannot have security without sacrificing my liberty, than I'll just have to get a gun (guaranteed by the second amendment of the Constitution to any pro gun control liberals reading this). My right to live my life as i see fit, is more important than your desire to feel safe.
 
Oh, come on-you know I included you in the "ready category" of Liberatarians. But I completely agree, if I need to feel safer, I'll provide my own protection-not the mandate of a government in an effort to provide the illusion of security to others.
 
Originally posted by Zarathustra
Well skyfire, i believe there is another libertarian around here. Security is nice, but not at the expense of liberty. I'm all for feeling safe and secure but AFTER my liberties are guaranteed. And if I cannot have security without sacrificing my liberty, than I'll just have to get a gun (guaranteed by the second amendment of the Constitution to any pro gun control liberals reading this). My right to live my life as i see fit, is more important than your desire to feel safe.
Click to expand...
I always find people like you highly amusing. You would actually feel safe in a society where anyone can pull out a gun and shoot you? Guns are not nuclear weapons - they make lousy deterrents, because there is no mutually-assured destruction involved.
 
Originally posted by Quarto

I always find people like you highly amusing. You would actually feel safe in a society where anyone can pull out a gun and shoot you? Guns are not nuclear weapons - they make lousy deterrents, because there is no mutually-assured destruction involved.
Click to expand...

I think that this is a sign of a person who is more afraid of being attacked/exploited by the government (or other large, powerful organization including corporations or organized crime groups) than of being shot by a random drunk off the street.
 
Once upon a time, not too long ago, in a city not too far away, Baltimore, I think, an interesting thing happened. Three women were home one evening, when armed bad guys broke in and began what would be thirteen hours of rape and terror for the three women. Early on, one of them was able to get away long enough to call the police, before being rounded up for more abuse. The police responded, but since no one answered the door when they got there, they left.

After the bad guys went on their merry way, the three women sued the police, saying they had not protected them. The state supreme court ruled that the women had no right to be protected.

So the moral of the story is: You are responsible for your protection. Unless you have your very own Personal Police Officer. And since none of us have our very own PPPs, except the President and others like that, it is up to each of us to decide how to best protect ourselves.

If you wish to rely solely on the police, that is your right and none of my business to tell you if you are doing the right thing or not.

If I wish to obtain a concealed carry permit to protect myself, that is my business and no one elses.

If I think a bottle of pepper spray is all I need, so be it.

Martial arts, sure. If that's what you want.

There are two things shown by FBI crime statistics that apply:

1. Crimes against persons in states that have adopted Right to Carry laws have decreased.

2. The more passive the victim, the more likely serious injury or death will occour. The more force the victim uses to resist the attacker, up to killing him, the less likely serious injury or death will occour.


I choose the path and means of most resistance, and the greatest liklihood of coming out of it O.K.
 
Eh, I've heard such stories before, and they don't make an impression on me. No story of police blunders is enough to excuse the idea of relaxing gun laws. You are wrong when you say that buying a gun for your own protection is your business and nobody else should care, because the fact that you can buy a gun also means that anybody else can, too. So, because you have protection, other people die (not necessarily because they didn't have the same protection). And sure, go ahead and tell me how criminals can always get guns illegally anyway, but that will also be missing the point - allowing people to get guns legally makes the fight against illegal weapons utterly impossible.

Oh, and you can't use statistics as proof that liberal gun policies reduce crime without first examining other aspects of such statistics. Crime is far too complex a phenomenon to be assigned to a single factor.
 
Ahhh, the closed mind. Oh well. Its too bad you consider the teeth to the Constitution expendable. If I came to your house and told you I was going to be quartered there, you wouldnt think the third ammendment was outdated. I kinda like the tenth one myself. But they are all valuable, and, like it or not, they are all in effect.

If you want to change my rights, amend the Constitution.

If you want to change yours, just dont exercise the ones you dont like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top