Nothing authoritarian about this. We are assured that MAGA is not authoritarian.
This Is Sure To Go Over Well
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
Relax, Dan-O. I doubt any of your offspring would ever be deemed suitable for anything more dangerous than Pentagon tour guide, or head chef at the officers’ club.
And it’s indisputable that Gen Z, the millennials, and a big chunk of Gen X would have benefitted greatly from military service.
And it’s indisputable that Gen Z, the millennials, and a big chunk of Gen X would have benefitted greatly from military service.
Last edited:
Right. A little Billy Badass approved MAGA authoritarianism is just what this country needs.
Again, I’m not Billy Badass. I’m just not a flaccid limp-dick like you. It really is unfortunate that you and your offspring didn’t have parents like I had. I truly pity you.
Could you be any more easily manipulated?
Crucial Quote“The Fake News Washington Post came up with the ridiculous idea that Donald J. Trump will call for Mandatory Military Service,” Trump posted to Truth Social. “This is only a continuation of their EIGHT YEAR failed attempt to damage me with the Voters. The Story is completely untrue.
My boot camp was at Lackland AFB, TX begining in September. It was hot. I'd like to go through again with Dan along side me.
I've done Her Majesty's MI-6 training. A candidate must live in a chamber for 30 days without a chamber maid ever knowing. I can still do it. My spouse tells me it's the Indian in me.
If your boot camp at Lackland was in September of 1969 we were there at the same time. It was hot as hell but I was young and very fit and breezed through without giving it much thought.
Republicans for Forced Military Service - LewRockwell
Writes Michael Johnson: Mr. Rockwell, Whether it is forced military service for teenagers/young adults, a military draft OR whatever other enslavement the State dreams up for its citizens (and non-citizens), these efforts should always and appropriately include the “involuntary servitude”...
www.lewrockwell.com
“Where is it written in the Constitution, in what section or clause is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battle in any war in which the folly or the wickedness of government may engage it?” — Daniel WebsterRepublicans for Forced Military Service - LewRockwell
Writes Michael Johnson: Mr. Rockwell, Whether it is forced military service for teenagers/young adults, a military draft OR whatever other enslavement the State dreams up for its citizens (and non-citizens), these efforts should always and appropriately include the “involuntary servitude”...
To answer the question:
- Article I, Section 8
The Constitution grants Congress the power to "raise and support armies". Chief Justice Edward White wrote in the Selective Draft Law Cases that this power, along with other war and military powers, gives Congress the authority to enact a national draft.
[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; . . .
The constitutions adopted during the Revolutionary War by at least nine of the states sanctioned compulsory military service.1 Towards the end of the War of 1812, conscription of men for the army was proposed by James Monroe, then Secretary of War, but opposition developed and peace came before the bill could be enacted.2 In 1863, a compulsory draft law was adopted and put into operation without being challenged in the federal courts.3 Yet this was not so with the Selective Service Act of 1917.4 This measure was attacked on the grounds that it tended to deprive the States of the right to a well-regulated militia, that the only power of Congress to exact compulsory service was the power to provide for calling forth the militia for the three purposes specified in the Constitution, which did not comprehend service abroad, and finally that the compulsory draft imposed involuntary servitude in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court rejected all of these contentions. It held that the powers of the States with respect to the militia were exercised in subordination to the paramount power of the National Government to raise and support armies, and that the power of Congress to mobilize an army was distinct from its authority to provide for calling the militia and was not qualified or in any wise limited thereby.5
Before the United States entered World War I, the Court had anticipated the objection that compulsory military service would violate the Thirteenth Amendment and had answered it in the following words: It introduced no novel doctrine with respect of services always treated as exceptional, and certainly was not intended to interdict enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the State, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc. The great purpose in view was liberty under the protection of effective government, not the destruction of the latter by depriving it of essential powers.6 Accordingly, in the Selective Draft Law Cases,7 it dismissed the objection under that Amendment as a contention that was refuted by its mere statement.8
Although the Supreme Court has so far formally declined to pass on the question of the peacetime draft,9 its opinions leave no doubt of the constitutional validity of the act. In United States v. O’Brien,10 upholding a statute prohibiting the destruction of selective service registration certificates, the Court, speaking through Chief Justice Earl Warren, thought [t]he power of Congress to classify and conscript manpower for military service is ‘beyond question.’11 In noting Congress’s broad constitutional power to raise and regulate armies and navies,12 the Court has specifically observed that the conscription act was passed pursuant to the grant of authority to Congress in clauses 12–14.13
