Should soldiers be allowed to visit prostitutes?

[Lunar]

Besides, bringing along non-Muslims for prostitution is likely to antagonize the populace.  They don't want to see Western brothels on every street corner two weeks after we move in. 

Image is everything in that corner of the world.  We're in desperate need to project ourselves as an understanding grandmother (with a bazooka behind the rocking chair).

[opebo]

Besides, bringing along non-Muslims for prostitution is likely to antagonize the populace.  They don't want to see Western brothels on every street corner two weeks after we move in. 

Image is everything in that corner of the world.  We're in desperate need to project ourselves as an understanding grandmother (with a bazooka behind the rocking chair).

Nonsense!  The image we need to project is a sexually potent, horny tyrant.  Basically Sadam and sons - can't argue with success.  Grandmother my ass.

Besides, the phrase 'Western Brothel' is an oxymoron, as the West is one of the least likely places in the world to find a brothel, particularly in the US. 

[dazzleman]

“How do you ask a man to be the last man to die without at least giving him a blow job?”
  --Al, opebo, Trondheim, angus (paraphrased)

Killing these lower class members while trying to deny them (or for that matter everyone) access to sex sums up the foreign policy and social issues policy of the GOP. 

Why do you call them lower class members?  That's not necessarily true.

As far as the prostitutes go, I think soldiers will get sex when they're on leave regardless of whether anybody tries to stop them.  I say leave them alone when they're on leave, as long as they don't get into serious trouble and hurt anybody.

[angus]

I don't find Muslim girls hot anyway. Except for Indonesians and Malays but that's not where the US is. Of course lots of Lebanese girls are hot, but they're all Christian. I will admit that Iranian women are actually pretty hot when they're dressed in western clothing, but that's not going to be happening again on a massive basis for a long time.

that's beside the point.  some folks like the hamito-semitic look, others don't.  I actually think Arafat's daughter is hot.  Just kidding.  Anyway, to say that only non-Muslim chicks can be whores for the Army I believe is tantamount to a violation of the civil liberties of Muslim-Americans.  If we're going to truck our own whores out there, then it should be a meritocracy.  You get the lucrative government contract if you're a good lay, otherwise you don't.  It should not be based on cultural, religious, ethnic, or racial factors.  Ah, well, the Democrats would probably want some sort of affirmative action program that guaranteed that X percent of the whores be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Shinto, Buddhist, Hindu, whatever.  Already it seems like a bad idea.  Goddamned democrats would ruin it for everybody.

Highly entertaining post, angus. But there's still more problems. What about the female soldiers? The gay ones? The lesbians? Are we gonna ship out hookers for them as well?

I thought about all that.  of course it's one of many logical consequences, as is some wierd DNC affirmative action demand.  I decided to go with the latter as something that would offend me more.  or at all. 

[Ebowed]

Option 2.

[WMS]

that's beside the point.  some folks like the hamito-semitic look, others don't.  I actually think Arafat's daughter is hot.  Just kidding.  Anyway, to say that only non-Muslim chicks can be whores for the Army I believe is tantamount to a violation of the civil liberties of Muslim-Americans.  If we're going to truck our own whores out there, then it should be a meritocracy.  You get the lucrative government contract if you're a good lay, otherwise you don't.  It should not be based on cultural, religious, ethnic, or racial factors.  Ah, well, the Democrats would probably want some sort of affirmative action program that guaranteed that X percent of the whores be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Shinto, Buddhist, Hindu, whatever.  Already it seems like a bad idea.  Goddamned democrats would ruin it for everybody.

Highly entertaining post, angus. But there's still more problems. What about the female soldiers? The gay ones? The lesbians? Are we gonna ship out hookers for them as well?

I thought about all that.  of course it's one of many logical consequences, as is some wierd DNC affirmative action demand.  I decided to go with the latter as something that would offend me more.  or at all. 

I just thought the whole concept was hilarious - a bunch of hookers filling out affirmitive action forms, going through paperwork, having their 'references' checked, and so on. And then you've gotta deliver them to all the right places. And the aforementioned affirmitive action among the soldiers has to be followed too, so all of them have to fill out affirmitive action forms. Geez, the war will be over before any of the soldiers even sees a hooker...

[opebo]

“How do you ask a man to be the last man to die without at least giving him a blow job?”
  --Al, opebo, Trondheim, angus (paraphrased)

Killing these lower class members while trying to deny them (or for that matter everyone) access to sex sums up the foreign policy and social issues policy of the GOP. 

Why do you call them lower class members?  That's not necessarily true.

As far as the prostitutes go, I think soldiers will get sex when they're on leave regardless of whether anybody tries to stop them.  I say leave them alone when they're on leave, as long as they don't get into serious trouble and hurt anybody.

I think the argument that 'they'll get it anyway' is unrealistic, and greatly understimates the power of the State.  Heck, the government can make it nearly impossible for a civilian at home to find a prostitute (or at least so contract the supply that it is either too dangerous or too expensive for nearly everyone).  A soldier is under near total control of the State, and it is fairly easy to prevent him from engaging in this activity.  Simply denying 'leave' would immediately preclude all possibility of such contacts.

[A18]

Great, we should do that then.

[opebo]

Great, we should do that then.

Why?

[minionofmidas]

So they'll bugger each other more often.

[angus]

I think the argument that 'they'll get it anyway' is unrealistic, and greatly understimates the power of the State.  Heck, the government can make it nearly impossible for a civilian at home to find a prostitute (or at least so contract the supply that it is either too dangerous or too expensive for nearly everyone).  A soldier is under near total control of the State, and it is fairly easy to prevent him from engaging in this activity.  Simply denying 'leave' would immediately preclude all possibility of such contacts.

Nice to see that you're turning to accepted Price Theory arguments in order to back up your talking points instead of rushing to make emotionally-charged cries of "Fascist!" and "Religious Nuts!"  Seriously.  Yes, governments cause prostitutes, drugs, and nuclear weapons to have an artificially high price tag and dampen the supply relative to the true equilibrium prices and quantities that would emerge in a Free Market.  Maybe you're reverting to the Libertarianism you presumably have ignored in your great quest to discredit the Bushies.  In any case, I agree with most of your post.  But I also think you may be overlooking  the fact that with or without government sanction or government funding, the horny soldier will find a lay.  Whether it's illegal whoremongering or legal, or even if it's something more akin to Prison Sex, governments are weak when compared to the combined forces of 3.5 billion years of biological endeavor.  You simply can't keep a horny man from leaving his pecker alone.  I think we agree on this point.  And I think you know that the army is under tremendous pressure just now to boost declining morale.  There has never been a better time to pressure the government into not only tacit acceptance of the fact that soldiers like whores, but even to schedule leaves and absences in a way that facilitates the act.  I think it should have broad appeal.  The Imperialistic sorts want to do what they can to support the troops, and the Isolationists just want the boys to be happy and come back in one piece.  That's adds up to probably at least half the electorate.  The remainder will split along the usual lines, but if it's played and marketed right, we can have an ideological majority on this important issue.

[MissCatholic]

Off course they should. if politicians go and see them idont see why the troops cant.

[opebo]

Nice to see that you're turning to accepted Price Theory arguments in order to back up your talking points instead of rushing to make emotionally-charged cries of "Fascist!" and "Religious Nuts!"  Seriously.

I have never disputed 'price theory'.  However I don't see any difference between saying 'they're making it too expensive or dangerous' and calling them Fascists or religious.  It is the same thing.  The intolerance and belief in an objective morality is the motivation, and the State force resulting in unavailability is the result.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you are talking about masturbation, I would largely agree.  Anything beyond that is controllable with security cameras.  Even masturbation could certainly be largely prevented if the men had no bed linens in which to hide.  Of course they could also simply put Saltpeter or some modern hormonal equivalent in the men's food to prevent the sex drive.  The State can be very, very powerful if it wishes to invest the time and trouble. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No.  You have very little undertanding of the religious constituency that controls the government today.  There is no way these people will aquiesce to such a program of what they call 'sin'.

[Hitchabrut]

No

[opebo]

No

Why not, prude?

[A18]

Great, we should do that then.

Why?

Because I'm a religious. Are you a religious, angus?

[Rob]

Yes.