| Welcome to CCRPG Community. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Israeli Youths Reject Army Call-Up | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 13 Oct 2009, 11:40 AM (688 Views) | |
| KamikazeCow | 14 Oct 2009, 11:34 PM Post #16 |
![]()
Don't Feed The Animals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Okay, for peace; the same reason in this situation (Israeli vs Palestinian nationalism), it is the same scenario as the Northern Irish situation. (Irish Catholics + Irish nationalists vs British Protestants + Irish UK-supporters). It is the same conflict, with some variation. @Reian: absolutelty, the state is the most... ...hypocritical construction of human government ever. Especially the UK state, which I will explain tomorrow when I',m not so...inebriated.
|
![]() |
|
| Benthamus | 15 Oct 2009, 04:14 AM Post #17 |
|
Freedom lover
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
1. Peace is not just desireable it is the ultimate aim, however we must be realistic war will continue as long as two or more groups of people have objectives that are mutually exculsive. You can have one or the other, not both. As long as a group of people want the State of Israel to exist and another don't there is the possibility of war and violence. How does one protect yourself against war? By ensuring you have a strong military and alliances that guarentee help in the event of war. The most fundamental question to ask regarding those two chicks refusing conscription is: If the state of Israel abandoned all alliances tomorrow whilst disbanding its military, how long would it last? Perhaps no one will attack, but would you take the risk? 2. Ryan I hate the State as much as anyone but lets be realistic, if the state disappeared tomorrow there would be anarhcy. Not the anarchist utopia everyone speaks of but rather a violent anarchy with a dog eat dog world. I would say in the Industrial world millions would die. Perhaps after those many millions of death an anarchist utopia would arrive, however I would put bets on the creation of more nations some with ultra nationalistic goals that would only cause more war and death. 3. Kamikazecow why is the fact they are Israeli good? Please explain in more elaborate detail your position on this issue. |
![]() |
|
| KamikazeCow | 15 Oct 2009, 08:55 AM Post #18 |
![]()
Don't Feed The Animals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Because there's been fighting there for fucking ever. Isn't that obvious from all the other threads I make on the subject? :lol: |
![]() |
|
| Ryan | 15 Oct 2009, 12:38 PM Post #19 |
|
Imperator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes, I can turn any topic into state-elimination because the State is the root of all human problems. An excerpt from an article I've written may help:
Without the State, there can be no war. At least not on the scale that we imagine it. Now, I am not saying that there would be no crime, or murders - that cannot be eradicated because it's a part of human nature. Only utopian fools believe it can be gotten rid of. There will be small pockets of crime, but the free market would provide court, police, and arbitration services to curtail it. But without the State to aggrandize itself and provide incentive for crime, it will be reduced to a negligible amount - hence, I say, tens die. Without the State there is no need for a standing army (they only protect against other States). Granted, if ONE state, like the US were to disappear with all the rest of the world remaining the same, - we'd have some major problems. But if all States were to disappear, or if we could reasonably be assured that a stateless US would not be invaded and partitioned, there's no need for an army. The free market can provide defense services or mutual insurance companies or dispute resolution organizations more efficiently, cheaply, and morally than any State service.
No, Ben, I'm not so sure that you do. An argument saying that "well if the State were to disappear tomorrow it would be the war of all against all" is not a valid argument against anarchism. It is a straw man argument equivalent to thus: Say I build a ship, and it has a central column in it. It sails fine, and you build one without the central column in it and it also sails equally well. Then you forcefully tear out my central column and my ship happens to sink - then you say "Oh, you don't know how to build a ship." - - - - Now, you want to know how it's relevant to the discussion? Well because these people are resisting the State's compulsion for them to "serve" their country. They are standing up with the moral high ground that they ought to make a voluntary choice as to whether or not they want to "serve" their country through the military. Again, the military is simply a legally sanctioned instrument of mass-murder. This would never exist without the State - otherwise any act of killing in any degree would be considered immoral, illegal, and would be punished to the fullest extent of the law. But nope, we let the State run the military. I'll leave you with the words of Voltaire: "It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." Anyone who says otherwise is a hypocrite, regardless of whether or not you consider it more "practical." |
|
George Mason University '15 Ph.D Economics Sporder.net - Complex Problems, Emergent Solutions COUNTRIES: 2012: The Q'ylerian Freehold Version 5: The Most Serene Republic of Crælia Version 4.2: The Ellic Kingdom/Ellic (Etremian) Empire Version 4: The Ellic Tribes/Kingdom/Republic Version 3: The United States of Rezelia; The only use of nuclear weapons in CCRPG; The only use of nerve gas | |
![]() |
|
| KamikazeCow | 15 Oct 2009, 03:05 PM Post #20 |
![]()
Don't Feed The Animals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yup, it's called the state monopoly on violence.
|
![]() |
|
| Ryan | 15 Oct 2009, 07:28 PM Post #21 |
|
Imperator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Exactly. Maybe I went overboard, but then again, I'd prefer to go out with a bang. Because I will no longer be posting here in this board. A forthcoming announcement will explain everything soon enough. |
|
George Mason University '15 Ph.D Economics Sporder.net - Complex Problems, Emergent Solutions COUNTRIES: 2012: The Q'ylerian Freehold Version 5: The Most Serene Republic of Crælia Version 4.2: The Ellic Kingdom/Ellic (Etremian) Empire Version 4: The Ellic Tribes/Kingdom/Republic Version 3: The United States of Rezelia; The only use of nuclear weapons in CCRPG; The only use of nerve gas | |
![]() |
|
| Lundymaphone | 15 Oct 2009, 07:30 PM Post #22 |
![]()
Premier
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You can't seriously believe what you just said (I am NOT trying to insult you I honestly cannot believe someone could think that). I mean a private armed group not accountable to anyone? At least with the government they have to be subtle about their bullshit and have a fear of being overthrown. In all seriousness and taking ideological bullshit aside, a democratic state government is corrupt, but largely it gets things done in a barely acceptable manner, but it is acceptable none the less. The system with absolutely no order or moral compass you describe is disturbing beyond all compare, it would just be one large Lord of the Flies with guns novel. All you have done is exchange a few large wars for millions of small ones. |
|
in pace, ut sapiens, aptarit idonea bello In peace, like a wise man, he appropriately prepares for war | |
![]() |
|
| Ryan | 15 Oct 2009, 08:19 PM Post #23 |
|
Imperator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you understand how economics works, there is absolutely no problem with the private production of defense. The free market fully regulates it. It's not a single private army, that's ridiculous! It would be an entire market of courts, arbitration services, defense agencies, dispute resolution organizations. It would be like an extended insurance market. There would be MANY firms, hundreds, probably thousands. It would not be armed biker gangs. They would all be subject to the law of the nonaggression axiom. Only someone who doesn't understand the free market (aka how reality is supposed to) works can object - which is reasonable, as only a handful of people do. But please, don't chide me at prima facie unless you've actually looked into the issue. Entire books have been written just over this issue. Authors, off the top of my head: Gustav de Molinari Hans Hermann Hoppe Murray Rothbard** Ludwig von Mises |
|
George Mason University '15 Ph.D Economics Sporder.net - Complex Problems, Emergent Solutions COUNTRIES: 2012: The Q'ylerian Freehold Version 5: The Most Serene Republic of Crælia Version 4.2: The Ellic Kingdom/Ellic (Etremian) Empire Version 4: The Ellic Tribes/Kingdom/Republic Version 3: The United States of Rezelia; The only use of nuclear weapons in CCRPG; The only use of nerve gas | |
![]() |
|
| Benthamus | 16 Oct 2009, 01:05 AM Post #24 |
|
Freedom lover
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Oxford Dictionary defines the state as " nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government". It then defines government as "the action or manner of governing a state, organisation, or people". Now first let me state I have used definitions that work towards my argeument but nonetheless they are still legitamte definitions of these words. Should "the State" disappear what will occur? The most likely result will be groups of people combining together for their own common security and welfare. They will require a method to govern themselves as a group and thus a set of rules to work out disputes. Lets say they all hypothetically agree to the concept of democracy and, using the power of referendum, agree on a set of rules, a constitution if you will. Now this constituion rules over a set of territory and has thus become the State. We are back to the beginning. However lets look at other hypotheticals regarding your example Ryan. The free market will provide court, police and arbitration services to curtail crime. What if I refuse to recognise one court and accept another? What if my opponent does likewise? In this hypothetical we are stuck at a standstill. Which one will prevail? What if the arbitration services engage in extreme brutality. If it were the police there might be an enquiry, with a private service the only oversight might be the contract they signed. If they are the ones who are supposed to enforce contracts and they break them, how is going to stop them except another arbitration service which will in many cases result in "war". Now if this set of courts, police and arbitration are sold on a communal basis rather than individuals than as shown above they are selling themselves to a State. Thus negating the entire arguement. The argument "if the State were to disappear tomorrow it would be the war of all against" is a valid argument except among idealist who believe in a utopia. You're attempted anolgy is quite incorrect. The following would be better. You and me both own ships. They are both similar in design and features and the crew is paid in advance. On my ship I have a group of Marines who represent the State. If my crew run off after being paid the Marines will hunt them and arrest them. On your ship there are no Marines. The crew can get paid in advance and go "screw this, I'm out of here". Now many might not, but there will eventually be a group that will. In the end in theory your ideas work perfectly but it's much like International Law. This nice system as long as everybody plays by the rules. Oh wait I forgot first there are no rules, and second there is no way to enforce people from following it. ----- Now regarding services. The Commonwealth of Australia has invested alot into me since I was born. They have ensured collective security whilst providing an economic atmosphere that has allowed me to grow up with all the benefits of Industrialised Civilisation. I know that if I sign a contract and the other party breaks it the State will intervene and force them using its monopoly on force. As payment I pay my taxes, but we must remember Israel is essentially surrounded by enemies. This girls got to grow up in a safer enviroment because the Israeli military is on vigilant guard all the time. Yes the military is simply legally sanctioned instrument of mass-murder, but I bet you were glad the US Army was around during the Second World War. I'll remember next time I talk to a Second World War veteran to ask the police to charge them with murder. You may attempt to talk your way around this but in my eyes you have essentially made that claim. You've also done one the things in the world I hate the most. Blaming the soldiers instead of the government. Soldiers do as their told if they don't they are charged and punished. Yes many armies are all-volunteer like that of my own nations, but those rules have to be there. Without discipline the army collapses and imagine if it collapsed at the moment it was most direly needed just because a bunch of people didn't want to fight. You're statement that I probably don't has made me realise it's true. I don't like the State but I love my country. By State I mean the actual governing mechanisms, but the country meaning the people and institutions, I do love with all my heart which is why I am proud to serve. KamikazeCow: Yes I don't know why the would fight and maintain an army after 1948, 1967, 1973 and all the constant mortor and bombing attacks against them, There is a large group of people who hate Israeli's because of Israel. They are stuck in the position of no comprimise. |
![]() |
|
| Lundymaphone | 16 Oct 2009, 03:29 AM Post #25 |
![]()
Premier
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't know why we haven't brought this up (or more accurately kept on the topic). Palestinian-Israeli conflict aside, is is morally right for Israel, or any country not in immediate danger to demand that it's citizens serve? I am tempted to say yes if the need is dire but at the same time, Israel from a military standpoint is vastly superior to all potential threats, it really could make do with less troops (although a troop reduction may invite a test). I would say a form of voluntary conscription would be preferable should the volunteer numbers be solid. Essentially ask and encourage service but if such requests are denied offer lifetime (or 25 year) community service as an alternative, I think many would trade 1-2 years of their life in exchange for not having 1 weekend a month taken away for the rest of their life. Plus I think the will to serve is still largely there in Israeli youth. Also I would like to direct attention to this http://z8.invisionfree.com/CCRPG/index.php?showtopic=9576 There should be no more Pro/Con anarcho-capitalism talk in this topic as I believe it directed the conversation too far off course. |
|
in pace, ut sapiens, aptarit idonea bello In peace, like a wise man, he appropriately prepares for war | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Register Now |
|
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
10:47 AM Jul 11
|






![]](http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll118/CCRPG/VD%20Graphics/pip_r.png)





10:47 AM Jul 11