Skip to comments.Draft
Posted on 10/14/2004 7:37:20 PM PDT by mworkman
We are wondering if the most likely cause of a draft would be if Kerry were elected. The people serving might be less likely to reup and new signees might be less likely to sign up with Kerry as 'Commander and Chief'. This could cause a situation where we actually NEED a draft. Seeing what happened to the POWs in Vietnam, people might not want to serve under Kerry in Iraq.
Even the French won't serve under Kerry.
Kerry is still telling his supporters that Pres. Bush is going to have a draft:
"Kerry Says Bush Plan Could Lead to Draft
Oct 15, 12:59 PM (ET)
By The Associated Press
There is a "great potential of a draft" to replenish U.S. forces in Iraq if President Bush wins a second term, Democratic challenger John Kerry said on a campaign stop in Iowa.
Bush said in the second presidential debate that there would be no revival of the military draft under any circumstances if he is re-elected. "We're not going to have a draft, period," the president said.
However, Kerry told The Des Moines Register, "With George Bush, the plan for Iraq is more of the same and the great potential of a draft." The interview was published Friday as Kerry was leaving for Wisconsin and a speech on the economy."
The topic begs many pages of information to be set forth, but let me just say the following.
It was determined that the best course for the United States to follow was to create a full volunteer military.
In so doing this, the key things would become manifest.
1. Those that sign up accept the condtions.
2. The probablility that the willing will be better suited for military life, and more willing to serve honorably.
3. Lower probability of malfactants effecting the over all efficiency both in times of conflict as well as in peace time.
4. Provides a mechanism to raise the pay rates for those that serve, verse bankrupting the DOD budget with having to pay a lot of sad sacks that hate the military. Which in turn frees monies up to provide new generation weapon systems.
5. In recent years (after NAM) it was recognized that the USA must create a superior fighting force both in how it's
military operate (think) and in how it procures high tech weapon systems. Therefore, with an all volunteer military, the military has more control over the quality of personel it accepts into it's ranks. The entry tests have become more stringent. Therefore, only those that seem to have some intellegience get accepted. Often quite high achievers end up joining up. Why? They wish to serve. Verse the concept of just drafting anyone who doesn't even know how to read and right etc..
6. Frees those really not interested in serving in the military a way to pursue their life time ambitions by going to college etc.. Nothing wrong with this, if taken with the above 5 points and others that could be presented.
These are a few reasons why the recent conventional wisdom has steered clear of re-inacting a draft. Even if Kerry where to become president, it takes an act of congress to re-inact the draft as far as I understand. So in the short term, with both houses controlled by the republicans I doubt very much if a draft could materialze. Surely Kerry is off on Neptune or perhaps Pluto on this issue as in so many other things. I he for some strange reason actually believes what he said on this issue then it should be apparent that he is a much bigger dope then we give him credit for. It is a political ploy in hopes of becoming King John. I see no other way to view this issue.
Whoopos..........he he. Look who's talking.
"Verse the concept of just drafting anyone who doesn't even know how to read and right etc.. ".
I meant "write" verse "right" of course.
This is a point that W's people should be making more of than they are -- for the benefit of those voters who just can't get rid of 'the draft' between their ears.
It's been a big talking point for both sides in the last couple of days actually. I think its incredibly important too, war is not something that most people want a part of; especially if they're being forced into it. Its good that the GOP party leadership isn't letting it happen. With only 2 supporters, House Maj Whip, Roy Blunt, said, "This overwhelming vote should put an end to the rumors, started by bloggers and perpetuated in email campaigns, that there is support in Congress for reinstating the draft."
So it appears Congress is not on board with the draft at the moment.
Many Republicans have been disappointed by the GOPs response to rumors claiming that President Bush will reinstate the draft in a second term. Michael Moore and his minions are touring college campuses and whipping young draft-aged students into a frenzy by telling them that only John Kerry can rescue them from an impending draft.
The GOP and the President have unequivocally denied that the Bush Administration will reinstate the draft. In the first debate, President Bush went to great lengths to explain why a draft will not be necessary, stating that advances in technology, re-positioning of our troops to more accurately meet the threats of a post 9/11 world, training of Iraqs security forces to assume control of their own welfare and improved intelligence will ease the pressures on our current military personnel. Unfortunately, many Americans havent heard that message and probably wouldnt believe it if they did.
The GOP has failed to take advantage of an enormous opportunity. Taking the issue a step further would expose John Kerry and the Democrats and force them to answer some hard questions. Consider the following points:
1) In the first Presidential Debate, John Kerry said, Thats why, in my plan, I add two active duty divisions to the United States Army, not for Iraq, but for our general demands across the globe.
2) In that same debate, Kerry went on to say, I also intend to double the number of Special Forces so that we can do the job we need to do with respect fighting the terrorists around the world.
3) Kerry has also claimed that troop morale and re-enlistments are declining.
4) The U.S. House of Representatives recently voted down a bill offered by leading Democrats that, if passed, would have called for the reinstatement of the draft.
5) There is pending legislation in the Senate, which if passed, would be the first step toward reinstating the draft. The sponsors of the legislation are Democrats, not Republicans!
6) To my knowledge, John Kerry has never unequivocally stated that he will not reinstate the draft, if elected.
The Kerry Plan, as outlined at http://www.johnkerry.com/ would require the addition of some 40,000-50,000 troops to our Active Duty Military. This at a time when Kerry indicates military re-enlistment levels are declining. Kerrys own party has introduced legislation in both houses of Congress to reinstate the draft. The points outlined above beg the following questions:
1) How will John Kerry accomplish these goals without a draft? How will he fill the vacancies created by the supposed exodus from the military, let alone add 50,000 troops, without a draft?
2) Does the legislation proposed by Democrats in both houses of Congress not indict John Kerry and Democrats as the only candidate and party with the desire to reinstate the draft?
3) Isnt the rumor regarding Bush and the draft just a scare tactic being used by Democrats to mislead young voters?
4) Isnt this an attempt to divert attention from their own hidden agenda and their congressional record as it relates to the draft?
Democrats have succeeded in scaring many young people into believing that if George Bush is re-elected they will wind up in some Middle Eastern country fending off terrorists. Some might even call it misleading. All Americans deserve the truth! They need to know who represents the real threat as it relates to the draft. John Kerry is a risky bet for young people and America.
Exactly, Blunt is a straight shooter, he knows what is going on, and will tell the people, unlike other politicians I know who use any and all rumors to their advantage, regardless of the truth...