@Mrk:

It occurred to me that you are probably from Norway; so it is totally excusable for you not knowing much about the constitution.

The 2nd amendment was not to protect against foreign aggressors; it was to protect against domestic aggressors.

I was confusing right to have weapons with right to have powerful weapons (like a tank, a plane, an armoured truck, a machine gun)

but conscription is a way to defend against the government infringing on the other rights of the people and using the army to enforce it. which is much more difficult to make a conscripted army to do, than a professional army.


it all depends on how "just and good" the nation is.

I see the point you are trying to make; but even if it has an effect. It still doesn't out weight the immoral and cruel prospect of forcing people to go to war that they don't believe in and didn't sign up for.

I am thinking of a system with conscription always, even in peace time. the people that have finished their time then goes to the reserve. in such a political climate, it would be much more difficult for a politican to argue for a war, especially if every member of the military (/or public) got a vote in the matter (that is how the romans used to do it, before around year 200 BC).

if senate had to declear war, for any campain to last more than 2 weeks, and then the conscipts would get deployed. then there would be much fewer wars, much fewer chicken hawks, and the people would have better protection from its own government.

oh, and it used to be "citizenchip = member of the army", because only the people that would fight the war should be alowed to vote on it. other people had rights, but voting rights where restricted to the people that had committed to defend the country with their lives. (not saying this was not flawed, but it is food for thought)

Yeah well like I said; you are talking about the Romans. I'm talking about the USA; which has a constitution that calls for no standing army during peace time and the draft is illegal.

"..... which has a constitution that calls for no standing army during peace time ..."

does not this also call for that the only/main army should be the drafted army? that way it is truely an army of the people, for the people

Nope

so you can draft in wartime, and no standing army in peace time.

should not this mean that if you need an army because it is a war, then you can draft it?

I hope you agree that the us is not in peace time now. so they could draft for the wars in afghanistan

Yeah dead I'm sure you were up in arms about the Iraq war eight years ago.

Any war that isn't in self defense is unecessary. Retaliatory attacks or conflict in kind is not of this nature (e.g. Taliban helping bin laden take down the towers, us taking down the Taliban government). That is to say the latter does not merit a war nor our involvement necessarily.