Posted on 09/23/2004 9:01:15 AM PDT by Mighty_Quinn
Despite the President's promised June 30 th deadline to give back control of Iraq's government to the Iraqis under the United Nations, it's not clear under the current state of affairs when our military role there will begin to wind down even if we hand over power on time.
(Excerpt) Read more at rockthevote.com ...
please provide direct link to allegations of impending draft.
The kids I talk to are very supportive. Talk of elistment high and many of those that aren't interested say if a draft needed they would go though. I have only met one that supports JK. IMO the younger generation seem to have a good understanding of why we are there and what is at stake.
They are, at least some/most are MTV morons anyway.
TAKE THIS AWAY FROM THEM - SAY SOMETHING!
He can't. Its true that they made changes in who can be drafted and have filled the "boards" per local area. The drafts coming, but as with any politician, theyu dont want to talk about it YET.
i don't believe the yungens are falling for this. i don't believe the blacks are falling for the "one million disenfranchised" BS either. Am i kidding myself?
You can be sure a draft would be MORE than likely under a John F'n Kerry because most would not want to serve under the traitor. And where does Kerry think he's going to get the additional 40,000 troops he's promising?
Joseph Goebbels would be proud. We have here a case of the
"Reverse Big Lie"
Not only is the "secret Bush draft" a lie,
the truth is a secret Kerry-Edwards draft.
The Kerry camp coordinators have fired up a series of scare
ads on the draft. As is usual for "progressives", accusing
their opponents of what they themselves are doing.
Before getting to the details, it's important to note that
this issue is not primarily about a military draft. It's
about Universal National Service. Stealing two years from
every life, then 3, and heck, why stop there ...
And National Service is less about service than about
indoctrinating the slaves by controlling the agenda of
the approved forms of service.
But make no mistake about it, if Kerry is elected, they'll
also need a draft to meet military manpower requirements,
because voluntary enlistments and re-enlistments will drop
to near zero.
The Bush Administration has done zero to move toward a
draft and does not support it.
The only bills submitted are by Democrats. One of them,
HR 163, bears the title:
"Universal National Service Act of 2003"
it includes the provision:
"...or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the
national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes."
... and for other purposes ...
Involuntary servitude, i.e. slavery, doing whatever bidding
the ruling class prescribes.
Although Kerry and Edwards are on the campaign trail
promising to oppose a draft, they in fact support
UNS, but are hiding that. And even if they were to
oppose UNS, you already know what a Kerry promise
or position is worth.
Where have they been on this issue?
Kerry has removed a page, formerly at:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/natservice
and still referenced by dissidents at:
http://www.comdsd.org/article_archive/JustasUrgent.htm
"(II) A MANDATORY HIGH SCHOOL SERVICE REQUIREMENT.
As President, John Kerry will ensure that every
high school student in America does community
service as a requirement for graduation. . . ."
The current K+E National Service is more watered down:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_service/
Apparently, the older position was too honest.
And Edwards? Go see:
http://www.senate.gov/~edwards/issues/educ/service.html
Expect exemptions for the children of rich politicians.
The Selective Service System is already in place, and
could be reactivated in the event of some unforseen
emergency (Canada threatens to invade us :-). If Kerry
is defeated, the SSS, unneeded since Vietnam, is most
likely to remain right where it is today - dormant.
And it has been Democrat congressman Charley Rangel and a Democrat Senator who have both tried to introduce legislation restoring the draft.
The sad reality is that if John Kerry were to be elected the military would get out at their EAOS in droves they would submit early retirement packages etc... because the majority of the military hate, despise, loathe John Kerry because of his inconsistency and because of what he did in 1971...Besides only the Republicans have given the Military pay raises and standard of living increases.. When the military get out John Kerry will have no choice but to institute the draft... Besides 14 Democrats have already introduced legislation for a draft and that is what needs to be headlined... Fox news should run a special report and report its findings on exactly which candidate would need a draft....
This article is seriously flawed anyway... because IRAQ is already a sovereign nation... the transfer of power did happen before JUN 30 and we are only there as the support team.
I hope we don't loose it, that would be hughly series.
The Republicans need to deal with this issue before it gains traction in the colleges and high schools. Scared kids vote . . . I know I did.
Excerpts:
The bills are not being pushed. It's quite true that the two bills mentioned would require both men and women aged 18 through 25 to perform a two-year period of "national service," which incidentally could be either military or non-military service. But the bills are sponsored only by Democrats, and there's not the slightest evidence that the Bush administration is pushing for them, quietly or otherwise.
One bill is HR 163 , whose principle sponsor is Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel of New York. It has 14 co-sponsors, all of them Democrats in a Congress controlled by Republicans. The bill was dead on arrival: it sits in a House subcommittee with no hearings or votes scheduled and no action expected.
In fact, Rangel told FactCheck.org through his spokesman Emile Milne that even he isn't pushing for passage, let alone Bush (emphasis added):
Rep. Rangel: I'm not pushing this bill . It's up to the President to come to me when he needs it.
The identical Senate bill, S. 89 , introduced by Democratic Sen. Ernest Hollings, and also was DOA. Not one other senator has co-sponsored it. It also sits in committee with no action scheduled or expected.
Both bills in question were drawn up before the Iraq war started, mostly to make a political point. Rangel said he acted to highlight Democratic objections to use of military force against Saddam Hussein. He wrote , "I truly believe that decision-makers who support war would more readily feel the pain of conflict and appreciate the sacrifice of those on the front lines if their children were there, too."
Bush opposes draft
Both Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld have repeatedly said they oppose a draft.
"We don't need the draft," Bush told a campaign audience in Florida last month. "I'll tell you one way you make (the all-volunteer Army) work. I just signed a defense appropriations bill, which is the fourth year in a row in which we've raised the pay of those who wear our uniform, and the pay's getting better. And the housing is getting better."
“This country does not need a draft,” Rumsfeld told an Army sergeant who’d just returned from Iraq and asked about the draft at a town hall meeting in Fort Bliss, Texas on Aug. 23.
Here is one link:
http://www.rockthevote.com/rtv_draft.php
There's nothing to discuss. We don't need a draft (we being the military), and there's not going to be one.
I'd much rather have more stuff, personal gear, team gear, and unit equipment, than I would have to babysit a pack of draftees who don't want to be there. The military was much larger 10-15 years ago than it is today, and we had no draft. If they really want to fix the manpower problems, then need to look at retention of highly trained and qualified people who leave the military early, not scooping up kids off the street.
This isn't 1968. Training, both formal and OJT, can take anywhere from several months to a few YEARS to produce a qualified soldier. Precisely how long are you proposing we draft people, anyway? To be cost effective, you'd need to tap them for at least five years. We could make cannon fodder troops, if you really want to cut costs, and send them into combat with a few weeks of training and a sack of old gear. I'd rather work with people who want to be there, and are trained to do things right.
Leave the draft where it belongs. If we need more troops, then address that issue at the source: the military that already had them, but lost them to the civilian sector.
"He can't"
See my post # 21! He already has!
Thanks.
Yea and if kerry is elected he will need to re-instate the draft. No one would be willing to serve in the military under that clown. Ive been hearing that alot of people in our armed forces would retire early or not re-enlist if kerry becomes president. kerry called military personel serving in Vietnam war criminals before congress back in the early 1970s. After that I wouldnt want to serve under this backstabber either. He would probably do the same thing to the men serving in Iraq too.
KERRY: DRAFT LIKELY TO RETURN UNDER BUSH (LIAR ALERT! KERRY TRYING TO SCARE YOUNG VOTERS!)
HR 163 & SB 89 Exposed: The Honest Truth About the Draft (why the Dems pushed the draft in 2003)
From NewsMax.com Monday, Dec. 30, 2002
Rangel Wants Mandatory Military Service
CNSNews.com - Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., will introduce a bill in the next congressional session to make military service mandatory.
"I'm going to introduce legislation to have universal military service to let everyone have an opportunity to defend the Free World against the threats coming to us," said Rangel on CNN's "Late Edition."
Rangel, who voted against a joint resolution authorizing military action against Iraq in October, believes mandatory enlistment for men ages 18-26 would serve as a deterrent to war.
"When you talk about a war, you're talking about ground troops, you're talking about enlisted people, and they don't come from the kids and members of Congress," Rangel said. "I think, if we went home and found out that there were families concerned about their kids going off to war, there would be more cautiousness and a more willingness to work with the international community than to say, 'Our way or the highway.'"
The last time the U.S. had a draft was in 1971, when it was discontinued under then-President Richard Nixon at the height of the Vietnam War.
Prior to Nixon's ending conscription in the face of massive protests against U.S. involvement in Vietnam, the U.S. had continued with a draft since World War II, in peacetime and in wartime, under Presidents Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson.
Rangel, who argues that that we should not be more worried about Iraq than any of our other enemies, did not reveal specifics of his proposal during the interview.
Go to post#45 in this thread to find out who the sponsors are. (none are Republicans or conservatives btw)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1224114/posts?page=45#45
It's on everyone's lips. And it directly affects YOU.
There's no question about it: the United States military is being stretched thin. Our Armed Forces are not only on active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also in some areas of the former Soviet Union, South Korea and Europe.
At a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week about post-occupation Iraq, Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) thrust the issue of reinstituting a military draft right into the public debate. "There's not an American ... that doesn't understand what we are engaged in today and what the prospects are for the future. Why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?" The Senator went further and argued that restoring compulsory military service would force "our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."
The Nebraska Republican added, "those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class." The draft, he argues, would spread the responsibility of military service in Iraq equally among all Americans.
Senator Hagel's remarks come on the heels of statements by both the U.S. General in charge of American forces in Iraq, General John Abizaid, as well as Senator John McCain (R-AZ), who are insisting that the United States needs more soldiers to help with the situation in Iraq.
These leaders are not the only ones talking about the looming personnel crisis in our military. Options that don't include a draft have also been presented by other members of Congress, including a proposal by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) to move forces that are currently stationed in Europe to Iraq.
The push to reinstate the draft is not a one party issue. It has support from both Republicans and Democrats alike. Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY), a prominent African American leader, has been a long time supporter of reinstating a draft. "As a veteran, I strongly believe that fighting for our country must be fairly shared by all racial and economic groups. Nobody wants to go to war, but the burden of service cannot fall only on volunteers who, no matter how patriotic, are attracted to the military for financial reasons."
Why all of the sudden is there interest by politicians in the draft?
These recent statements stem from a growing belief that the U.S. government's original plan to scale back our military presence in Iraq by this summer will be stalled by the continuing difficulties there. Despite the President's promised June 30 th deadline to give back control of Iraq's government to the Iraqis under the United Nations, it's not clear under the current state of affairs when our military role there will begin to wind down even if we hand over power on time.
Why all of the sudden, should YOU be interested in the draft?
You are the generation of Americans that would be drafted into military duty, not the politicians talking about it. And so we ask you. Do you think the draft is FAIR? Our country was a different place in the 1970's, when the last draft occurred. We have new factors to consider in 2004:
* In 2004, women serve in the military--many have died in Iraq. Back in the day, women were not drafted. Should women be drafted today?
* In 2004, its "don't ask, don't tell." The military's policy towards homosexuals in the military prevents them from serving openly. Should the military discharge draftees who indicate their sexual orientation when asked to serve?
* In 2004, nearly two-thirds of high school graduates are enrolling in college. During the last draft, this number was lower and college students could defer the draft in order to finish school. With more draft eligible people attending college, should the United States continue that policy?
Some things to think about.
* Check out this article from this Village Voice about young New Yorkers debating the draft issue
* Check out this news clip from MTV about the draft
This issue potentially affects your life. So, if you care about you, you should be aware that this debate is taking place in Washington right now. It's also taking place among your candidates for elected office. Be part of the discussion. After all, if you don't stick up for your opinions, who else will?
To believe that Bush's re-election will bring back the draft is beyond fantasy. The Kerryites are scared to death of a Bush landslide victory and are coming up with anything they can think of to scare people into voting for Lurch.
Go to
http://thomas.loc.gov/
.
and type
(bill number)
s89 ,,, or
h163
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr. This is what ticks me off so much about this issue and the commie media. The dam dems floated it and the commie media is not talking about how if kerry wins great men in the military will leave in droves before they will take orders from a CIC who has stabbed them in the back before and is currently doing the same thing in Iraq.
We might have a draft because of kerry not in spite of.
Yes I know it's more than an urban legend...but folks on the net other than Freepers relax when they can find it as an urban legend at the scopes site. And we do have lots of lurkers and trolls here.
This issue has been a focus among many voters and co-workers here and many are complaining the Bush wants to reinstate the draft. I copied and pasted the bills along with the list of co-sponsors and highlighted the (D) by each name and sent it in an email.
Some of my RAT co-workers were outraged that I would blame the RATs for this and sent back nasty emails. I just replied to them, along with the links to the House and Senate websites. That shut them up.
And the President and his surrogates need to be doing EXACTLY what you did.
Ask John Kerry this question "Sen. Kerry, you have been suggesting that Pres. Bush is contemplating having a draft. Will you now state that under no circumstances will there be a draft in a Kerry administration?"
There's no way Kerry could agree to that. If he did, he would drop further in the polls, because people would think "geez, this guy is a wimp and won't protect us".
look at it this way,Darwin's theory will weed out the stupid
kids who shoot themselves in order to avoid the draft.
The evidence is a bill which CHARLIE RANGEL (D-NY) and his 14 other dems in the House have put forth TO REINSTATE THE DRAFT.
THIS IS A DEM FAIRYTALE. THIS IS THE DEMS ACCUSING BUSH OF DOING SOMETHING HE'S NOT DOING, WHILE IT'S THE DEMS WHO ARE PUSHING THE LEGISLATION.
"The drafts coming"
What is your source for that statement ..??
The people trying to reinstate the draft are ALL DEMOCRATS.
Absolute, unadulterated crap. There is no draft coming except for the political ploys of Charlie Rangel and a handful of Democrats who are intent on using the draft as a scare-tactic. Rangel is playing to his race-pimping roots, suggesting that only minorities get killed in wars, and that is why we need to draft, so that white folks will have to die too. He’s got a handful of morons signed up to cosponsor his legislation. Of course, this is really designed to excite the simple-minded, the ignorant, and the easily riled (the Democrats target voters, and apparently some posters here) that a draft is coming, and therefore vote for Kerry to save us all by bringing the troops home so we don’t have to come and get your sons and daughters.
Bush doesn’t want a draft. The Senate and the House don’t want a draft. The military doesn’t want a draft. Only a handful of Democrats want one. And Kerry is hinting that one is coming. Gee, this is really difficult to figure out.
My source is more or less common sense at this point. Yes I just set myself up with that statement. However, if you look at what the actual mission is in the middleeast, the time required to complete that mission and the manpower currently available leads to one conclusion. The draft. You have the services at stop loss as we speak, you have recruters that are not meeting there quotas (typically 2 a month). Add all that up, sooner or later they have to tap the ready reserves. Afganastan is already suffering from lack of troops, Iraq will need more for stability. This doesnt even take into consideration the possible Iran factor. Our troops are thin and getting thinner and it doesnt take a rocket scientist to fiqire this out.
Oh, by the way, I'm for Bush.
A draft seems far more likely under a sKerry administration, IMO, as who in their right mind would VOLUNTEER to serve under a wishy washy Commander-In-Chief with a history, past and present, of actions that undermine the welfare of troops in harm's way.
just spoke with one of my friends still in the service, most kids are not looking at the Army because of the Bush policies. If kerry were in, you'd see enlistment go up. The only kids that are joining are the gungy ones.
You overlook one fact...he will say whatever benefits him at the moment...Remember...he IS a liberal, afterall.
Dream on.
Really, all Dubya needs to do is clean up a lingering bit of the Peanut's legacy with a stroke of the pen.
He can either do it proactively, do it after Kerry thinks of publicly promising to do it himself (which would make him look weak and reactive), or do nothing and let this scare tactic gain traction. The smart play is the first option; however, he might earn the Stupid Party name by picking the last one.
That was straight from three different recruiters, play politics all you want, only the the gungy kids want to go to war. so be tolerant, o.k.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.