You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
200 points

How about a new rule that if you vote for a war, you are automatically enlisted. And if you’re ineligible to enlist you must either abstain or vote no.

permalink
report
reply
75 points
*

Congress members get as many votes for war as they have draft-age family members. For each vote they cast, they must enlist 1 family member. Starting with their own children.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

Some of em don’t care about their kids. They can go fight, themselves.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

Some of em don’t care about their kids.

As evidenced by their complete lack of concern regarding climate change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

Nah just ship the congressmen/women off with the infantry. Then they can see exactly what they’re voting for.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Given the low regard for their children and grandchildren they show when it comes to climate change, I doubt that would be an adequate deterrent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Senators are (with few exceptions) extraordinarily wealthy. When climate change is destroying crops and making some areas uninhabitable, these senators’ families will still be living very comfortably.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Most of their kids are 55+, they can’t enlist lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

No different than having no kids.

No kids/grandkids/niblings we can send to war? No right to vote for war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Why not?.. Look at the Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine, they clearly look like 60+.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

As if someone like Trump would even give a second thought to sending his kids off to war?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I see an obvious exploit with this: congress members enlisting family members who would rather vote ‘No’ just so they can get more votes for their own choice.

You might think “nobody would enlist their child to fight a war that they’re against” but I promise you, there are people like that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

We basically had that a century ago, before the nobility moved behind the scenes and became the 1%

Unqualified scions were sent to the battlefield to gain military merits, which was generally bad for everyone. I’m pretty sure it only really stopped after WWI, when the death toll from combat started getting ridiculous

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

many have already gladly voted yes for both many times. I don’t think that will stop enough of them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

Smedley Butler solved this issue back in the 1920’s, change the vote from Congress to eligible draftees to solve us going to war for stupid reasons.

Then during times of war, lock down every individual’s income and ability to earn money to that of the soldier. Keeping war profiteering from stretching wars on indefinitely.

It’s radical, but would probably keep us from just “being at war” eternally. A reality we have had to live in since at least 9/11.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

The problem these “add a meta policy” proposals all have in common is that they assume we have any control over the legislature… which we don’t have; they don’t work for us at all. At this point only organizing and other direct action will have any significant impact on actual policy.

In this particular case, legislators would continue to receive bribe income that they refuse to acknowledge as bribery.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The problem is the us hasn’t had a formal declaration of war since WW2. Basically we’ve just had military engagements. Some haven’t even been authorized by congress.

Basically we’d need to fix that issue before worrying about the other suggestions. Else it’d just be military engagement not a war so don’t need to fallow them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Is the US even still involved in a war since 2021? At least through direct action.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The Global War on Terror is what it’s called, it’s just a neverending operation of military sorties across the world to support whatever and wherever.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

You can be against war without thinking you’ll end war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Unfortunately he was a Lieutenant commander in the Navy. Going back probably doesn’t concern him.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 5.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 9.9K

    Posts

  • 113K

    Comments