Rangel Wants Mandatory Military Service

NewsMax.com ^ | 12/30/02 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

CNSNews.com -- 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 Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) 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 peace time and in war time, 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.

[elbucko]

Where do I sign up for your program. Excellent idea.

[airborne]

Does anyone know how many sons Rangel has?

[elbucko]

Does anyone know how many sons Rangel has?

Good question. Does anyone know where Rangel was between the years of 1965 to 1975?

[Steel Wolf]

The all volunteer force has proven to be extremely effective. Reinstating the draft won't do anything but hurt our current level of readiness.

Bingo. The current volunteers (myself included) don't want any draftees for just that reason. We can get a lot more done with fewer people who want to be here, and more resources. Large numbers of less trained individuals is an open invitation for large numbers of casualties.

Military operations have become so technical that only people willing to commit serious amounts of time, effort and sweat are going to be effective. Pilots, linguists, Green Berets, technicians, etc, require years of training before they're really up to speed, and they have to be truly motivated to do it, not just doing the minimum.

This isn't to say that draftees haven't done well over the years. Aside from the fact that its just not American to MAKE someone serve, its a poor business practice when you have scarce resources.

[bmwcyle]

Then by all means give Rangle military service NOW!

[Steel Wolf]

Instead of reporting for basic training and actually being forced into military service, we could improve the selective Service registration. Well call it the "Inactive Reserves".

While I don't believe in forced active duty conscription, I think that sending all physically able males (and volunteering females) to basic training when they turn 18 would do wonders for this country. (Even a stripped down, basic version of basic training would suffice). After they were done, there would be no other forced commitment. A short course on how to defend the country that would build an appreciation of the price of freedom.

[semaj]

A better proposal would be to unionize the military.

[danelectro]

Good question. Does anyone know where Rangel was between the years of 1965 to 1975?

according to the house website he served...Congressman Rangel served in the U.S. Army in Korea, 1948-52, and was awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star.

[taxcontrol]

Actually, I offered it as an idea, expecting the Democrats to choke on it. I think it would be a good counter to the mishmush that kids get forced upon them at liberal (read as most) colleges.

Four years in the Inactive Reserves (4 days over 4 years) and then the person goes back to the current selective service (just tell us where you are located in case of a call up) system for 4 years.

The 8 year selective service requirement is met.

The kids in the Inactive Reserves get some basic skills that would be valuable in the event of an actuall call up.

While you could argue that the person is giving up their freedom for the four days, it beats the heck out of active duty service.

The military is not required to accept people who do not want to be there

Protesters who disrupt or do not comply with the requirements of the training could be proscuted and convicted of a federal offense (perhaps no jail time but a 1 year probation) and thus not be qualified for further participation (or owning firearms or voting or student loans).

The military gets to position the military lifestyle and perhaps recruit some good folks.

The reserve units actually get to learn how to handle a large number of civilans. Such regular processing would provide valuable training for the Reserves.

Now that I think about it, this might not be a bad idea. The cost would be large and there would need to be considerable infrastructure (computers, firing ranges, staff, etc.) put in place. But all in all - not a bad idea.

Now if we could get the attention of some politicians.

[Steel Wolf]

A better proposal would be to unionize the military.

Ah, I can see it all now...

"Alright, men, they've vetoed our latest 0.008% pay increase. The union has decided we're going on strike."

"Alpha and Bravo companies will be sent to seize the captiol building, and strike the budget planners in AO House, while Charlie and Delta will infiltrate AO Senate to cut off their reinforcements. Any questions? Alright, then, let's get this strike under way!"

[Trueblackman]

This is too funny...Rangel was the main assw*pe during the short 2 years that Democrats controlled Congress under Bill Clinton that lead the charge against pay raises for the military and was one of the core group that wanted the military budget cut to the bone so the money could be poured into the black hole that are social programs. Rangel has always been opposed to the military and is only doing this so more protesters can turn out in the street on the idea they will be drafted. Rangel believe that military service should be mandatory, but wanted us to do away with mandatory service for those living in public housing because in his words it was disgraceful and smacked of slavery. This was called the Lazio Amendment and check his votes on military issues as well. A assw*pe indeed.

[pepsionice]

I think we ought to help Chucky get what he wants. If you made mandated military service a required thing, for both men and women...we could radically change the attitude of a bunch of losers in America. Put all these idiots in LA in a Army uniform and watch how quick they have to shape up in attitude. They might actually get some common sense and perhaps even vote Republican once they return to society.

The bump in this road however, is colleges. They would go nuts if you messed with their gravey train. If you took every American kid away for 18 months, then a huge number of colleges would go bankrupt. They count on these kids not going to the military.

And as for the effect on women...the term 'valley girl' would disappear at 18. They would have to mature and actually learn what it takes to fit into life. Teaching 2 million women each year self-defense might be the best investment in America and reducing the crime situation in America. More women would be favorable to carrying weapons and using them too.

[cruiserman]

. . . to let everyone have an opportunity to defend the Free World against the threats coming to us

This is already true.

[airborne]

That question was from me as the father of a 13 year old and a 17 year old. I shudder to think of them serving for a Dem President who might use them like Clinton used the military. BTW, I enlisted 82nd Airborne (78-81) and am proud of being a voluntary member of Co. C 2/504 (ABN)(INF)
"Devils in Baggy Pants"

[TheGunny]

We were not able to recover from the last draft until the mid 80s. This guy is a maroon, and you can believe that there is a hidden agenda here! Bone head he is....

[wtc911]

Rangel is a combat veteran of the Korean War and holder of a Purple Heart.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I graduated from high school just a few days after you were drafted in 1967. I got a loan from my uncle and a couple of part time jobs in Iowa City to make sure that, a)I eventually got my BA degree and, b)make damn sure I didn't end up in Viet Nam. By the time I was into my fifth year of persuing the 4 year degree, my lottery number and President Nixon had re-jiggered the odds.
In retrospect, I think a couple of years in the Army (and I know a little bit about it--I was an Army Brat overseas) would have been a tremendous benefit to me.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

You may have a pretty good point there. I recall a pal in my high school class had this "choice" presented to him by the local sheriff and parole officer and he joined up and went to Germany. I don't think it would have harmed me to have been in the Army (or other service) one bit.

[mil-vet]

I do not dispute the basics of your reply. The sad truth is that there is no perfect "across the board" solution.

The system as it was, as flawed as it was, DID work (however imperfectly).

Going back to the public education example/illustration, thirty years ago US students were generally in the top three, if not #1, in internatioanl academic competitions. Now, because it was decided that the education system was imperfect and should therefore be changed, we are lucky if US students break into the top 20 in said competitions. It wasn't perfect, but it wasn't broken, and "they" went ahead and "fixed" it anyway; now it's not only imperfect, it doesn't work! Additionally, please understand that it isn't so much improvements in the educational systems of other countries that caused this, as it is the dismal demise of the American educational system!!

Yes, not all of the punks who were told to join the army vice going to jail "made" it! Yes, turnover was (and IS, by the way) a problem within the ranks. I attended a USAF basic training graduation last Friday, and the narrator told us that there are over 40,000 new trainees every year entering the USAF (just over 10% of the active duty manning for the USAF). Clearly there is turnover; always has been, always will be. The mercenary - oops, I mean "all volunteer" - military works, but so did the military under the draft! I guess the statement "however imperfectly" would apply to both.

Note that I'm not trying to be contentious, here! This is an interesting discussion. My position is that sometimes "the old way" isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially if it is understood that there is no perfect solution!! Sure, it's good to strive to improve, but don't break it (whatever "it" is!) in the process, and that's what has happened.

BTW, many of the folks whom earned the Medal of Honor were (to use your word) "unwilling" members of the military. Like the folks who crashed in that field in Pennsylvania on 9/11, sometimes duty calls, even if one is not exactly enthusiastic. Additionally, part of "no perfect solution" is lack of "equitability" - as long as there are people who think they are too good to fulfill their role or responsibility, in ANYTHING and for whatever reason, not just service to country, there will be those folks will dodge their duty. Kinda like that's just the way it is, and no amount of dummycraptic "feel your pain" BS will ever change that - heck, it's generally the liberals who take the point on dodging responsibility, isn't it? *SMILE*