plustaticman
Scout
My issue concerning a large or small Army is the general principle of "When it doesn't affect you or someone you know it becomes easier to do". Things for example like reducing benefits. When you don't know someone who has lived the life, with all its sacrifices (or for that matter, lived it yourself) it does become easy to send them to war. Why? Though you may have read alot of books, and seen alot of movies, you just can't understand what it is like.
1.1million Army in uniform (ARNG, Reserve, and AD total) out of 340,000,000 people. Less than 1/3 of one percent bear the burden of war. Maybe I am sounding a little self-righteous and I am sorry if I do, but people are arguing about the size of the defense budget at a time when units who are refitting for re-deployment to a real shooting war, don't have enough money to buy computer paper, let alone parts for their weapons and vehicles. Every day I hear people talk about how they would fight the war, but many of them have never been in uniform, let alone fired a shot in anger.
I guess I would consider that abuse. It's tragic, an army should be a reflection of the society it defends. Instead, it is comprised largely of persons who have had family in the miltary previously. It is becoming an insular society with little or no connection to the public it defends. That is when an Army becomes dangerous.
I do NOT, under any circumstance think that EVERYONE should serve. That would be ridiculous not to mention impractical. I do however think that when we do go to war, there needs to be some, for lack of a better word, discomfort. That is, if taxes were raised to fund the war, or some people were drafted to meet mission requirements, then I think people would take a greater interest in things that change policy, like voting.
Just my opinion. Sorry if I sound a bit self-righteous.
1.1million Army in uniform (ARNG, Reserve, and AD total) out of 340,000,000 people. Less than 1/3 of one percent bear the burden of war. Maybe I am sounding a little self-righteous and I am sorry if I do, but people are arguing about the size of the defense budget at a time when units who are refitting for re-deployment to a real shooting war, don't have enough money to buy computer paper, let alone parts for their weapons and vehicles. Every day I hear people talk about how they would fight the war, but many of them have never been in uniform, let alone fired a shot in anger.
I guess I would consider that abuse. It's tragic, an army should be a reflection of the society it defends. Instead, it is comprised largely of persons who have had family in the miltary previously. It is becoming an insular society with little or no connection to the public it defends. That is when an Army becomes dangerous.
I do NOT, under any circumstance think that EVERYONE should serve. That would be ridiculous not to mention impractical. I do however think that when we do go to war, there needs to be some, for lack of a better word, discomfort. That is, if taxes were raised to fund the war, or some people were drafted to meet mission requirements, then I think people would take a greater interest in things that change policy, like voting.
Just my opinion. Sorry if I sound a bit self-righteous.
