Which of the following countries did the United States invade during WWI?
a. Germany
b. Japan
c. Italy
d. Russia
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
How Obama can earn his Peace Prize: Part 1 of 3
The draft is obsolete. It has as much military value as a smoothbore cannon or a Sopwith Camel. Like an antique musket it is maintained more to preserve the past than to prepare for the future. Ending Selective Service could be an important symbolic and cost saving gesture.
Curiously, over this past decade many hawks and doves alike have pushed for a revival of the draft. Pro-draft hawks believe that the draft will improve combat effectiveness. Pro-draft doves believe that it will make Congress and ordinary citizens alike think twice before supporting a war. I’ll address the hawk argument first.
Our modern military has become increasingly specialized. Current doctrine stresses quality over quantity. This is why the Army turned down many applicants even when it wasn’t meeting recruiting goals. (It’s meeting those goals now, though that may be due to the recession.) There are many qualifications for being in the military, and I would argue that the most important one is that the recruit has to believe in what he is fighting for. Forcing people who are opposed to the war into the military creates a huge security risk. It would be like putting a PETA member to work in a laboratory that tests medicine on animals.
Some people think that a peacetime draft would deter members of Congress from voting in favor of the next war or global contingency operation. But any politician cynical enough to send your kid but not his own can simply pull the strings to keep his offspring in the rear.
I’ve even heard people say that everyone has an obligation to serve in the military. National defense may be an important field, but so is agriculture and healthcare. I’ve never heard anyone insist that I am obligated to work as a farmer or a nurse.
If President Obama gets rid of Selective Service, it would set an example. If other nations follow this example, it will significantly reduce future conflicts.
Curiously, over this past decade many hawks and doves alike have pushed for a revival of the draft. Pro-draft hawks believe that the draft will improve combat effectiveness. Pro-draft doves believe that it will make Congress and ordinary citizens alike think twice before supporting a war. I’ll address the hawk argument first.
Our modern military has become increasingly specialized. Current doctrine stresses quality over quantity. This is why the Army turned down many applicants even when it wasn’t meeting recruiting goals. (It’s meeting those goals now, though that may be due to the recession.) There are many qualifications for being in the military, and I would argue that the most important one is that the recruit has to believe in what he is fighting for. Forcing people who are opposed to the war into the military creates a huge security risk. It would be like putting a PETA member to work in a laboratory that tests medicine on animals.
Some people think that a peacetime draft would deter members of Congress from voting in favor of the next war or global contingency operation. But any politician cynical enough to send your kid but not his own can simply pull the strings to keep his offspring in the rear.
I’ve even heard people say that everyone has an obligation to serve in the military. National defense may be an important field, but so is agriculture and healthcare. I’ve never heard anyone insist that I am obligated to work as a farmer or a nurse.
If President Obama gets rid of Selective Service, it would set an example. If other nations follow this example, it will significantly reduce future conflicts.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
The future of monarchy
"The Mote in God's Eye"
"Dune"
"Star Wars"
The first two are science fiction books that take place in the future. The third is a movie that take place in a distant galaxy in the past. All three feature emperors ruling over vast regions of outer space.
A reoccurring theme in sci-fi is technology moving forward while society moves backwards. So you'll have post apocalyptic movies where everyone rides around in hovercrafts but nobody exhibits any manners or personal hygiene. In the examples I've cited above, it is taken to its logical extreme: People can fly faster than the speed of light but can't choose their own leaders. It's as if while all the smart people were working on faster than light travel, the dumb people banded together and made one of themselves king.
I would think that, no matter how evil or powerful you are, referring to oneself as "emperor" is a bad PR move. It pretty much spells out your intentions in advance, which is what most successful politicians try to avoid. I could imagine someone like Palpatine becoming neighborhood association president, but he simply wouldn't be able to influence more than a 1000 followers in real life. And most of them would be trying to rub him out so they could take his place, so you could see how that model breaks down rather quickly.
"Dune" "TMIGE" and "Star Wars" are classics. The writers were likely trying to imagine a society different from that with what the audience would be familiar. I hope that future writers try to imagine something that has not existed yet, rather than something obsolete.
"Dune"
"Star Wars"
The first two are science fiction books that take place in the future. The third is a movie that take place in a distant galaxy in the past. All three feature emperors ruling over vast regions of outer space.
A reoccurring theme in sci-fi is technology moving forward while society moves backwards. So you'll have post apocalyptic movies where everyone rides around in hovercrafts but nobody exhibits any manners or personal hygiene. In the examples I've cited above, it is taken to its logical extreme: People can fly faster than the speed of light but can't choose their own leaders. It's as if while all the smart people were working on faster than light travel, the dumb people banded together and made one of themselves king.
I would think that, no matter how evil or powerful you are, referring to oneself as "emperor" is a bad PR move. It pretty much spells out your intentions in advance, which is what most successful politicians try to avoid. I could imagine someone like Palpatine becoming neighborhood association president, but he simply wouldn't be able to influence more than a 1000 followers in real life. And most of them would be trying to rub him out so they could take his place, so you could see how that model breaks down rather quickly.
"Dune" "TMIGE" and "Star Wars" are classics. The writers were likely trying to imagine a society different from that with what the audience would be familiar. I hope that future writers try to imagine something that has not existed yet, rather than something obsolete.
Monday, September 07, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Another Modern Modest Proposal: Outlaw Sex!
(For the original "Modest Proposal", click here.)
The government cares about Americans so much that it is stepping up its role in providing healthcare. But many of the irrational concerns about "death panels" stem from very real concerns about how the government intends to reduce healthcare costs. A comprehensive plan needs to be put forth so that conservatives are forced to stop spreading wild rumors.
Now is the time for a federal ban on all sexual intercourse. Sex no longer has any redeeming social value, since responsible adults now have access to in vitro fertilization. We all know the hazards of sex: STD's, rectal trauma, and unauthorized pregnancy. So why do otherwise sane adults persist in this behavior? Because it produces a euphoria that can only be compared to a drug induced high.
The government has rightly outlawed drugs because of all the havoc that they cause in the mind of the user and society at large. Why should sex get a free pass? Prohibition is progress!
This ban must be absolute; not even married couples should be allowed to have sex. Especially if your spouse is a politician who travels to countries where sex is legal.
Some argue that responsible adults should be allowed to make their own personal decisions. But when an adult makes the wrong decision, that's proof of his incompetence. This is why we have an enlightened Congress: to tell us all what to do. Just as responsible parents forbid their children from playing in the streets, responsible governments prevent their citizens from engaging in dangerous or unhealthy behavior. The best way for the government to lower healthcare costs is to make safer, healthier, and celibate.
The government cares about Americans so much that it is stepping up its role in providing healthcare. But many of the irrational concerns about "death panels" stem from very real concerns about how the government intends to reduce healthcare costs. A comprehensive plan needs to be put forth so that conservatives are forced to stop spreading wild rumors.
Now is the time for a federal ban on all sexual intercourse. Sex no longer has any redeeming social value, since responsible adults now have access to in vitro fertilization. We all know the hazards of sex: STD's, rectal trauma, and unauthorized pregnancy. So why do otherwise sane adults persist in this behavior? Because it produces a euphoria that can only be compared to a drug induced high.
The government has rightly outlawed drugs because of all the havoc that they cause in the mind of the user and society at large. Why should sex get a free pass? Prohibition is progress!
This ban must be absolute; not even married couples should be allowed to have sex. Especially if your spouse is a politician who travels to countries where sex is legal.
Some argue that responsible adults should be allowed to make their own personal decisions. But when an adult makes the wrong decision, that's proof of his incompetence. This is why we have an enlightened Congress: to tell us all what to do. Just as responsible parents forbid their children from playing in the streets, responsible governments prevent their citizens from engaging in dangerous or unhealthy behavior. The best way for the government to lower healthcare costs is to make safer, healthier, and celibate.
Monday, August 03, 2009
Fact of the day
According to the Census Bureau:
How does an organization that does not recognize gay marriage count up more married men than married women?
Male, Now married, except separated (population 15 years and over)
61,030,689
Female, Now married, except separated (population 15 years and over)
59,165,050
How does an organization that does not recognize gay marriage count up more married men than married women?
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Question of the day
Is it ok for German-American comedians to use words like "hun", "Jerry", or "kraut"?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
