Actually the "draft" in the Civil War was totally corrupt with the ability to hire poor folk to take one's place among other shenanigans. The draft in WW1 prohibited that stuff and therefore was deemed "fair" in comparison and thus was not evaded much. As to WW2, true there was a draft but they had so many volunteers that Executive Order 9279 was passed ending voluntary enlistment in order to keep enough manpower for labor needs at home, thus the draft was a way of limiting the number of soldiers. As to Korea about half of the military volunteered, the reason the draft was used was because the demographic of men born during the Great Depression (who were coming of soldiering age during Korea) was an especially small cohort. After the unusual Vietnam War draft experience the US moved to an all volunteer military which it has kept through the Serbian, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. Thus Vietnam remains the outlier.Ecurb wrote: ↑March 11th, 2022, 3:17 pmWW1, WW2, and the Korean war also involved drafting soldiers. So Viet Nam (unpopular though it might have been) was not "unusual". The three most recent U.S. wars had drafted soldiers, as had the Civil War.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 11th, 2022, 3:22 am
Well, the Vietnam War was unusual in that it required a draft to obtain enough soldiers to go to war. In a war with broad popular support, say the Ukrainian War, there is no need for a draft. Professional tennis players, living the cushy life overseas have stopped playing and picked up arms against the Russians. Therefore the Vietnam War was suspect from the get go. As it turns out, Ali was correct and the government was wrong. Things would have turned out better for the US if they would have engaged the Communist government and not gone to war. Thus Ali ended up being a True Patriot, though it can be argued that he performed this patriotic act for purely selfish reasons, ie he lucked into it.
Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
Actually the "draft" in the Civil War was totally corrupt with the ability to hire poor folk to take one's place among other shenanigans. The draft in WW1 prohibited that stuff and therefore was deemed "fair" in comparison and thus was not evaded much. As to WW2, true there was a draft but they had so many volunteers that Executive Order 9279 was passed ending voluntary enlistment in order to keep enough manpower for labor needs at home, thus the draft was a way of limiting the number of soldiers. As to Korea about half of the military volunteered, the reason the draft was used was because the demographic of men born during the Great Depression (who were coming of soldiering age during Korea) was an especially small cohort. After the unusual Vietnam War draft experience the US moved to an all volunteer military which it has kept through the Serbian, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. Thus Vietnam remains the outlier.
[/quote]
70% of the U.S. soldiers killed in Viet Nam enlisted. Only 30% were draftees. So it was not much different from previous wars in terms of the impact of the draft.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
True, yet misleading. A contributor to that stat is the fact that draftees were sent to support positions preferentially, whereas volunteers were shuttled to combat duty preferentially. In addition, many likely draftees volunteered if they had a low draft number, so they could have a say in their assignment (which draftees had none).Ecurb wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 10:37 am70% of the U.S. soldiers killed in Viet Nam enlisted. Only 30% were draftees. So it was not much different from previous wars in terms of the impact of the draft.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 3:55 am Actually the "draft" in the Civil War was totally corrupt with the ability to hire poor folk to take one's place among other shenanigans. The draft in WW1 prohibited that stuff and therefore was deemed "fair" in comparison and thus was not evaded much. As to WW2, true there was a draft but they had so many volunteers that Executive Order 9279 was passed ending voluntary enlistment in order to keep enough manpower for labor needs at home, thus the draft was a way of limiting the number of soldiers. As to Korea about half of the military volunteered, the reason the draft was used was because the demographic of men born during the Great Depression (who were coming of soldiering age during Korea) was an especially small cohort. After the unusual Vietnam War draft experience the US moved to an all volunteer military which it has kept through the Serbian, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. Thus Vietnam remains the outlier.
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
You read the same website I did! Still, it probably wasn't much different from Korea or WW2 in that respect. I know nothing about this, by the way, except that I googled it in a 2 minute search for our discussion.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 4:29 pmTrue, yet misleading. A contributor to that stat is the fact that draftees were sent to support positions preferentially, whereas volunteers were shuttled to combat duty preferentially. In addition, many likely draftees volunteered if they had a low draft number, so they could have a say in their assignment (which draftees had none).Ecurb wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 10:37 am70% of the U.S. soldiers killed in Viet Nam enlisted. Only 30% were draftees. So it was not much different from previous wars in terms of the impact of the draft.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 3:55 am Actually the "draft" in the Civil War was totally corrupt with the ability to hire poor folk to take one's place among other shenanigans. The draft in WW1 prohibited that stuff and therefore was deemed "fair" in comparison and thus was not evaded much. As to WW2, true there was a draft but they had so many volunteers that Executive Order 9279 was passed ending voluntary enlistment in order to keep enough manpower for labor needs at home, thus the draft was a way of limiting the number of soldiers. As to Korea about half of the military volunteered, the reason the draft was used was because the demographic of men born during the Great Depression (who were coming of soldiering age during Korea) was an especially small cohort. After the unusual Vietnam War draft experience the US moved to an all volunteer military which it has kept through the Serbian, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. Thus Vietnam remains the outlier.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
I was less than a decade from potentially being drafted into going to Vietnam and was in the first 2 years of the "new" Selective Service registration, so while not a practical issue for me, but was definitely on my radar in the moment.Ecurb wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 5:18 pmYou read the same website I did! Still, it probably wasn't much different from Korea or WW2 in that respect. I know nothing about this, by the way, except that I googled it in a 2 minute search for our discussion.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 4:29 pmTrue, yet misleading. A contributor to that stat is the fact that draftees were sent to support positions preferentially, whereas volunteers were shuttled to combat duty preferentially. In addition, many likely draftees volunteered if they had a low draft number, so they could have a say in their assignment (which draftees had none).Ecurb wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 10:37 am70% of the U.S. soldiers killed in Viet Nam enlisted. Only 30% were draftees. So it was not much different from previous wars in terms of the impact of the draft.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 20th, 2022, 3:55 am Actually the "draft" in the Civil War was totally corrupt with the ability to hire poor folk to take one's place among other shenanigans. The draft in WW1 prohibited that stuff and therefore was deemed "fair" in comparison and thus was not evaded much. As to WW2, true there was a draft but they had so many volunteers that Executive Order 9279 was passed ending voluntary enlistment in order to keep enough manpower for labor needs at home, thus the draft was a way of limiting the number of soldiers. As to Korea about half of the military volunteered, the reason the draft was used was because the demographic of men born during the Great Depression (who were coming of soldiering age during Korea) was an especially small cohort. After the unusual Vietnam War draft experience the US moved to an all volunteer military which it has kept through the Serbian, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. Thus Vietnam remains the outlier.
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
So your knowledge goes way beyond Google.
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
-
- Posts: 502
- Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
If Nixon ended the war earlier than Johnson would have, should he have run for office and been elected, then the protests would have fulfilled their stated purpose, which was to end the war.
It’s speculation, but I believe that war-weary Johnson would have removed troops from Southeast Asia sooner than Nixon, once he recognized the quagmire he was in, aside from whatever political forces were in effect at the time.
- Sushan
- Book of the Month Discussion Leader
- Posts: 2221
- Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
- Contact:
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
I am not much into this particular political picture. But from what I have seen from the politics in my country as well as world politics, we can only be sure about what has already happened. Though we can assume that a certain politician will do this and that, they have a very good potential to surprise us when it comes to actual practice.AverageBozo wrote: ↑March 21st, 2022, 12:46 pm I’ve read that the protests disheartened Johnson such that he chose not to participate in one more election, to which he was entitled.
If Nixon ended the war earlier than Johnson would have, should he have run for office and been elected, then the protests would have fulfilled their stated purpose, which was to end the war.
It’s speculation, but I believe that war-weary Johnson would have removed troops from Southeast Asia sooner than Nixon, once he recognized the quagmire he was in, aside from whatever political forces were in effect at the time.
– William James
-
- Posts: 502
- Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
I think you are very right.Sushan wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2022, 6:06 amI am not much into this particular political picture. But from what I have seen from the politics in my country as well as world politics, we can only be sure about what has already happened. Though we can assume that a certain politician will do this and that, they have a very good potential to surprise us when it comes to actual practice.AverageBozo wrote: ↑March 21st, 2022, 12:46 pm I’ve read that the protests disheartened Johnson such that he chose not to participate in one more election, to which he was entitled.
If Nixon ended the war earlier than Johnson would have, should he have run for office and been elected, then the protests would have fulfilled their stated purpose, which was to end the war.
It’s speculation, but I believe that war-weary Johnson would have removed troops from Southeast Asia sooner than Nixon, once he recognized the quagmire he was in, aside from whatever political forces were in effect at the time.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
Called being the operative and only meaningful word in that sentence.
No, they're not. 99.9% of the people are excluded from making national decisions.Everyone are involved in decision making.
Hardly ever. Less than 70% of the people are eligible to vote. Only 50-60% of eligible voters actually vote, and 51% of that (or +/-20% of the actual population) decides which party will lead the country. Once a government is elected, it doesn't take direction or advice from the voters, and all the legislations proposed are debated, voted on and amended by both parties in both houses. By the time a law is actually passed, maybe 10 of the people involved understand it, and the voters get a version from the masse media or their own partisan echo-chambers.To make it practical we have elections and choose a set of people out of the population to think and decide for the whole nation. And in democracy the majority wins.
Anyone can say the system is wrong. And they'd be right.So no one can say the system is wrong.
Yes, they can.And after you vote can you say I am against their decisions and I have nothing to do with that? I don't think so.
There already is.It is true that people always have free will and freedom to have their own opinions. But a state should be lead by someone and otherwise there will only be chaos but nothing else.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7092
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
M Ali was betrayed by the USA. His entire life and the life of his race has been betrayed for 100s of years.
Moreover, every man or boy conscripted to Vietnam was also betrayed by the USA and the bunch of morons who were more interested in making money from selling arms than they were protecting the manhood of the US.
I can think if no more absurd a thread title than this one.
-
- Posts: 1110
- Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
- Location: canada
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
America has been a superpower since World War Two, and with the fall of the Soviet Union it became the only superpower unchallenged in its military and economic power. America's propaganda both at home and abroad has been that it was America that won the Second World War, this propaganda was more affective at home than abroad. The rest of the world knew, along with any credible historian, that Russia won that war, certain it did not do it entirely alone. It was the Russians who broke the back of the monster Nazi war machine, and then chased it across Europe back to Berlin, losing a hundred thousand Russian just taking the city Berlin. America's losses in that war were about half a million souls, Russian losses were twenty-seven million and a devasted burned-out country. My point is America is a master of propaganda, and its own population are its most naive subjects, the soldier that does his patriotic duty is generally ignorant and misinformed about the people the government labels enemies. Muhammad Ali was not ignorant about the nature of the America Empire and its quest for world domination, it has been a cruel master, and the world knows this only too well.Sushan wrote: ↑March 10th, 2022, 4:02 am This topic is about the March 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, My Enemy in Vietnam by Billy Springer[/url]
In the second Indochina war US decided to take the side of South Vietnam and engage into war. So many Americans, willingly or not, joined the forces and fought with the Vietcong. But many had thoughts against this decision and many even criticized the decision openly. The famous boxing player, late Muhammad Ali also refused to go to war saying,
The author of this book too seemingly had second thoughts about the decision of his country.I ain’t got no quarrel with them Vietcong.
Did these two betray their country by going against the decision of the state? What should a true patriot do in such a situation; take side with the state or be true to your own beliefs?
Soldiers are not supposed to think for themselves, and very few indeed do, it is their ignorance that leads them to fight unjust wars for the Industrial military complex. This complex needs feeding, needs war profits, and young men ignorantly and willing die to feed it, maybe even get a place on the memorial wall. Those who were not politically ignorant, did not go to Vietnam, Vietnam the world knows was an American war crime, a crime against humanity, America's crime too was putting all those young men in harm's way. Today the world is reacting to its cruel aggression, and moving towards a bi-polar world. Muhammed Ali was a hero, and sacrificed much for his principles, his popularity is global, because globally America is known for what it is.
- Sushan
- Book of the Month Discussion Leader
- Posts: 2221
- Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
- Contact:
Re: Did Muhammad Ali betray his country??
I appreciate your perspective. Indeed, democracy is founded on the principle of representation, and while the mechanics of this representation may sometimes seem distant from the populace, it's still the chosen few making decisions on behalf of the majority. We elect these representatives with the trust that they will make informed decisions in the best interests of the country.Alias wrote: ↑April 12th, 2022, 12:42 amCalled being the operative and only meaningful word in that sentence.No, they're not. 99.9% of the people are excluded from making national decisions.Everyone are involved in decision making.Hardly ever. Less than 70% of the people are eligible to vote. Only 50-60% of eligible voters actually vote, and 51% of that (or +/-20% of the actual population) decides which party will lead the country. Once a government is elected, it doesn't take direction or advice from the voters, and all the legislations proposed are debated, voted on and amended by both parties in both houses. By the time a law is actually passed, maybe 10 of the people involved understand it, and the voters get a version from the masse media or their own partisan echo-chambers.To make it practical we have elections and choose a set of people out of the population to think and decide for the whole nation. And in democracy the majority wins.Anyone can say the system is wrong. And they'd be right.So no one can say the system is wrong.Yes, they can.And after you vote can you say I am against their decisions and I have nothing to do with that? I don't think so.There already is.It is true that people always have free will and freedom to have their own opinions. But a state should be lead by someone and otherwise there will only be chaos but nothing else.
When Muhammad Ali made his statement, it was based on his personal convictions. But, as you rightly pointed out, in a democratic system, we collectively put our faith in representatives to make decisions on our behalf. And while individual expression is vital for a thriving democracy, there's a collective responsibility we all share once a decision is made, especially in matters as significant as war.
Furthermore, the notion that a minority makes decisions in a democracy is integral to its functioning. If every single decision were to be made with the direct input of every citizen, the system would be overwhelmed and slow to act. It's a necessary trade-off for a functioning state.
So, to answer your question: While individuals have the right to their opinions and can voice dissent, once a democratic decision has been made, there's an inherent responsibility to support the state. It's about finding a balance between personal beliefs and collective responsibility. What are your thoughts on how this balance can be best achieved in a democracy?
– William James
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023