Okay, you seem to be confusing Vietnam (draft) with Iraq (no draft), but, whatever. You are correct that Reagan and Bush both viewed foreign policy from the realist perspective in which our interests could be secured through pressure, power-play, and basic Kissinger philosophy. I have yet to figure out how neocons reconcile the realism of Reagan and Bush with the neoconservatism of Wolfowitz and Bremer.
In a free society, the people owe absolutely nothing to the government, let alone something as extreme as the draft. What you do is establish local customs (community values) where good behavior is honored and poor behavior is stigmatized. This is how it was done in the past.As a lefty socialist liberal, I support the draft as I feel citizens have a responsibility to the nation that provides them the wherewithal for an excellent life - which I have had partly because of the GI bill. It is duty rather than slavery. I part with the author on the caviler idea that individual freedom (whatever that may be to the person) leads to nirvana, anyone older that 12 knows that is BS.
Look, we all saw your stupid Nutshell threads on FP.com, and to date, no single poster has been as severely or completely demolished in a series of debates as you were by the libertarians. And this says something considering that people like Dixie and toby were supposed to be there helping out your image considerably.As is well known here, I am also opposed to libertarian thought which I see as naive and selfish.
http://www.conservativenannystate.org/
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07232008.html
One thing about libertarians is that their views do not have anything to do with the nanny state, unless you consider liberty a nanny state concept.
Bookmarks