Wars should be voted on...

[TheZenMan]

Why though?

Because it's money and not your life you offer?

You speak of support for the war, what if you can't fight, but are wealthy? Can money not support a war? Why is a wealthy, supportive person in favor of our country's decision to goto war's vote not accepted? They're willing to support all who choose to fight, but cannot themselves because that is what they believe to be right.

Why do you just tell them "Nope, vote no or don't vote." Yet anyone who can meet the criteria is capable of securing a NO vote?

Why not just make the guideline: Only those willing to fund the war can vote in favor, and those who cannot must either vote "NO" or not vote?

Define support.

[outsider]

Bah. Funding is something else that has already been discussed.

[GoodCitizenDan]

In regards to the title, I disagree.

Wars should be voted on by every American old enough and able to raise arms. Then those that vote for it should be sent to fight that war.
This sounds like some hippie ranting on a street corner. I like the sentiment but I'm a big proponent of things that work.

Your plan, sir, would not work.

[outsider]

As opposed to how it is currently, indeed it would work.

[TheZenMan]

Bah. Funding is something else that I've already dismissed.

Yes, I know.

[outsider]

It took you how long to come up with that creative edit? Your argument is shallow.

[TheZenMan]

I was on vacation.

Invalidation attempt...fail.

[fibula]

I still aint got no reply from my last post ...

[outsider]

I was on vacation.

Invalidation attempt...fail.


Yes you did fail. Or from a page of your book:

I totally agree with you

Don't try to invalidate me now. Where's that rolleyes smiley

[TheZenMan]

I actually do agree with your sentiment.

If you talk the talk, then walk the walk.

But you can't put something up for votes according to sentiments.

So it's fail.