How does the National Guard compare to Obama's idea for a "civilian national security force"?
Even the phrase "civilian national security force" seems kind of like an oxymoron.
fuck, late;;;
this? http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-...versal-service
Heh. Jew likes Israel's policies a little too much. Also, sky is blue.
We function just fine without compulsory government service, thank you very much. I enjoy the idea of it being available for scholarships/etc, but mandatory programs, or programs whose membership is tied to federal funding of local/state education would piss me off.
Yeah, it sounds like a stupid waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
srsly, we should just let FEMA handle that, it's what we pay them for amirite
Yep. Well, FEMA, the National Guard, the U.S. military, etc. etc. etc.
Can you imagine how worthless the classes or training or whatever will be when it features the orgasmic combo of 1) No strict discipline (i.e. military) and 2) Forced attendance of the general uninterested population?
The more I read about Obama's civilian thingy, the more it reminds me of this.
YouTube - Thomas Barnett: The Pentagon's new map for war and peace
I don't think it's a bad idea, but it should NOT be compulsory.
Btw, anyone know if this is real?
White Supremacists for obama
the entire point of it is that it's compulsory though. it's garbage
Obama will inspire people to want to take more time away from their families and learn about stopping those terrorists.
You love America don't you? Well then you better get to your classes.
Why is it such a bad thing to require people to become capable of being helpful in worst case scenarios?
Just because you don't want to be able to help your neighbor doesn't mean you shouldn't be willing to learn how to help yourself, if you want to be anti-welfare and anti-common good, making people have at least some idea how to help themselves should really be a top priority, you would think.
Sometimes I wonder if you actually pay any attention whatsoever to what you're saying or the content you spew, I always appreciate the reminders that you have no kind of grasp whatsoever over what the people/ideas you talk about are actually saying.
It's a far broader meaning of national security that he's talking about iirc, but anyways, it's not that such a plan shouldn't be scrutinized and criticized, though we should probably wait until we know what the details actually are. The problem is this public figure, with real power, just fucking godwin'd. Invoking a Hitler comparison is not the fucking way to argue something. Period.
It's ok to call Bush a fascist and compare him to Stalin but it's not ok to call Obama a Marxist and compare him to Hitler.
Neither is ok because I think you've mixed dictator with their ideology of choice and also i've never seen anybody call Bush stalin. lol
I don't know who you're directing this at but MY point is that people should have a choice. It shouldn't be compulsory.
No matter who you're writing that too, the stuff in bold is bullshit. I think most people agree, this is about choice. We care about people and we would like to learn about protecting ourselves/others (whatever that means at any given time/situation), but it should be a choice. I think that's not too much to ask.
People would still sign up for this, I'm sure. I see no need to make it an obligation. So the criticism is not the content but the execution.
These labels are empty. Everyone is Hitler. Everyone is Stalin. How often in the past 25 years have we justified this or that act of violence because so and so was the next Hitler? And now the current next Hitler is the President of Iran.
Anyways, I know in the context of calling Obama, Hitler, it probably does not pertain to potential violent/genocidal tendencies. I'd say it's a more compelling comparison to Bush than anything but still, our leaders aren't so overtly insane. They do so w/ a smile and a wink and a nice suit. It's democide.
In any case, the labels mean nothing. It's easy to just say that and not have to explain yourself. I voted for Obama but I don't buy into the messiah-like cult of personality around him and I have no illusions about what he will do in office.
At current time since he's done nothing yet ... I can't call him anything but president elect, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until he puts anything into place. The funny thing is, if he's a major screw up in office and fucks things up left and right, I seriously doubt he'll get anywhere close to the criticism of past presidents. I mean hell journalists such as Chris Matthews even stated its no longer his job to report news (like we needed him to actually say that) "My Job Is To Make Obama Presidency a Success"
Matthews: My Job Is To Make Obama Presidency a Success | NewsBusters.org
I thought it was a reporters job to you know ... report the news.