1
   

Reinstating the Draft

 
 
nihil
 
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2004 03:44 pm
Subject: 13 months till draft begins

The Draft will Start in June 2005

There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89
and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at
early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The
administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while
the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is
needed immediately.

$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System
(SSS)
budget
to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15,
2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the
system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation.
Please see
website:
www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan
- fiscal year 2004.

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350
draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though
this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and
influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's
prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a
permanent state of war on "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may
have no choice but to draft.

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year,
http://www.hslda.org/legislation/na...s89/default.asp entitled the
Universal National Service Act of 2003, "to provide for the common
defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the United
States, including women, perform a period of military service or a
period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and
homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently
sit in the committee on armed services.

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam
era.

College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and
the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to
keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign
affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge,
the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other
things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing
each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along
gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter.
Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end
of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.
-------------------------

Why isn't this receiving more (any?) coverage?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 982 • Replies: 12
No top replies

 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2004 04:06 pm
It's not receiving more coverage because both bills were introduced in the Congress in Jan/Feb 2003 and were immediately sent to subcommitties never to be seen again which basicly means that they are dead and have been for some time now.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jun, 2004 07:50 pm
And whats even more revealing is that BOTH bills were sponsored and proposed by Democrats.I notice nobody mentions that.Why not?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 07:20 am
Easy mysteryman, it is because the Republicans don't have the balls.

The problem is the war, not the draft. If you are going to be sending 140,000 US troops into combat for years, you had better have a plan to get the manpower needed.

Right now we are forcing soldiers who have spent their time in Iraq to re-enlist. This is the least fair type of draft. We are also taking troops out of Korea.

These are not good solutions. When either Korea or Iran acts up, we are going to have real problems.

The Republicans are acting like cowards. They want the war, but they are not willing to pay the political cost that it will take to win it. It is the US boys on the ground that pay the real price.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 08:31 am
A draft will be the sure way to radicalize a huge portion of the country. For that reason, it would be tempting to wish for it. However, my true belief is, they have to scale back the nation building and phony crusading and use the military for what's important.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 01:32 pm
I dont believe there will be a draft,it isnt needed.
But,lets assume there is...who would be eligible?
would you exempt women? What about women with children?College students?whaqt about older people?What would the upper age limit be? 30? That could be called age discrimination,couldnt it?
Can we draft married couples? Couples with Kids?
Exactly who would be not eligible?
FYI,the pentagon has said they dont want or need a draft,so why are we even talking about it?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 01:45 pm
Draft for a war of choice. No way.
A draft would only be tolerated by the American people when the need was thrust upon us by an attack of some sort. It would not be tolerated to support a war of choice such as Iraq.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 01:53 pm
That's why I wistfully toyed with the notion. I would love to see the nation rise up against the idiocy.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 02:18 pm
It hasn't gotten any more publicity for the reasons already stated, and for the reason that the DOD and top military brass do not want a draft. They are quite happy with an all volunteer military thank you very much.

I have heard it discussed (on TV and radio so I do not have a link to post) that the Democrats are desperate for something, anything they can use for leverage to undermine George Bush. This one isn't going to fly though I don't think.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 02:35 pm
And the Republicans aren't desperate to have the upper hand?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 03:03 pm
The Republicans have the upper hand Edgar. They don't need to be desperate.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 03:32 pm
Don't the numbers at some point get daunting?
Some soldiers are now on their second tours in Iraq/Afghanistan. How many times can we keep sending the same people over there? And the Reservists? They read (or should have read) the fine print in their contracts: a weekend a month, two weeks in the summer but maybe a call to active duty in a far off place.
I doubt that either political party would advocate a draft and so far the military seems to believe that they have a sufficient number of soldiers, but I have to wonder. I try very hard to be non-partisan and unbiased on a topic such as this one but I can't help coming to the conclusion that our military is going to run out of people if this drags on for several more years.
Thank you for any comments, -johnboy-
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2004 03:57 pm
There are polls and news stories that suggest the Republicans hold is perhaps slipping.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Reinstating the Draft
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/02/2024 at 04:38:11