Ready for bootcamp? TEN....HUT!!!!!!

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
I would have thought this would have had some coverage in the media, but apparently not. Yet. Yes, the DRAFT is coming. Without a doubt



Quote:

Pending Draft Legislation Targeted for Spring 2005

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. Cheney and co got away with it, we won't.



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.



Even those voters who currently support US actions abroad may still object to this move, knowing their own children or grandchildren will not have a say about whether to fight. Not that it should make a difference, but this plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft.







Ages 20-26, hmmm. That means that many of us in these forums will be donning fatigues and marching off to fight for.....not quite sure, its all rather amorphous recently. What theater of operation would YOU prefer? Iraq? Afghanstan? Iran? Syria? Cuba? Venezuela? Colombia? etc etc?



I wonder why the stealth in Congress and the absence of media mention? Perhaps the memories of Vietnam rankles still amongst some.



The probablity of impending compulsory military service is like a sharp pointed stick...... Looks like we better started practising those cadences....



Ready to serve?
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 40
    rara Posts: 623member
    Found this: http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr163.html



    Did you notice it says "all young persons [age 18--26] in the United States, including women"... this means that my sister would have to put off college for 2 years, I would have to put off grad school for computer science for two years, and my brother would have to leave law school right in the middle for two years.
  • Reply 2 of 40
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,035member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sammi jo

    I would have thought this would have had some coverage in the media, but apparently not. Yet. Yes, the DRAFT is coming. Without a doubt











    Ages 20-26, hmmm. That means that many of us in these forums will be donning fatigues and marching off to fight for.....not quite sure, its all rather amorphous recently. What theater of operation would YOU prefer? Iraq? Afghanstan? Iran? Syria? Cuba? Venezuela? Colombia? etc etc?



    I wonder why the stealth in Congress and the absence of media mention? Perhaps the memories of Vietnam rankles still amongst some.



    The probablity of impending compulsory military service is like a sharp pointed stick...... Looks like we better started practising those cadences....



    Ready to serve?




    http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/draft.asp



    Get a life.
  • Reply 3 of 40
    jubelumjubelum Posts: 4,490member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/draft.asp



    Get a life.








    s-jo... "'You got served...."



    "The FUD is falling!, The FUD is falling!"
  • Reply 4 of 40
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/draft.asp



    Get a life.




    Too bad it isn't 18 to 31. Ehh?



    That might put new perspective on it for you.
  • Reply 5 of 40
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Jubelum





    s-jo... "'You got served...."



    "The FUD is falling!, The FUD is falling!"




    Yeah, I really want to take the word of that rag of a publication.
  • Reply 6 of 40
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sammi jo

    I would have thought this would have had some coverage in the media, but apparently not. Yet. Yes, the DRAFT is coming. Without a doubt.



    Think that's bad? We might not even have Hockey Night In Canada next year.
  • Reply 7 of 40
    Quote:



    That Snopes item is hardly an iron-clad refutation of the possibility that the draft may be re-instituted. It amounts to little more than an opinion piece, the opinion being that there 'probably' won't be a new draft by Spring 2005.
  • Reply 8 of 40
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jimmac

    Yeah, I really want to take the word of that rag of a publication.



    Yup. They were already demonstrated wrong on the saudi flights.



    Some people seem to have the mistaken impression that snopes' ability to research Mr. Ed's species translates into political insight. It does not.



    That said, I doubt the draft will be reinstated.
  • Reply 9 of 40
    sammi josammi jo Posts: 4,634member
    The snopes.com opinion piece does cast some doubt on the likelihood of a draft for sure. (btw, snopes is far from100% reliable!).



    If the draft does get implemented, who is in favor of compulsory military service, and who is against? I am on the fence about it: a draft would be fairer and more equitable...the really dangerous work would be spread amongst all socio-economic groups....in theory. But a volunteer military, as we have now, should mean that people join because soldiering is their vocation (implying a higher quality army etc), in theory again. In the real world, many people join up because a job in the military is the living wage available.
  • Reply 10 of 40
    My friend Ed joined the Army (Special OPs) and he has told me that the one of the first things he is learning is Korean (forgot...Arabic too)...you figure that out. Get them Korean/English dictionaries out boys and girls...you're gonna need them.



  • Reply 11 of 40
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Welcome to WWIII.
  • Reply 12 of 40
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    This was introduced basically as a gimmick by Charlie Rangel, a Democrat. It's not being proposed by the administration, and never, ever will be. You have my, BRussell's, word on that.
  • Reply 13 of 40
    rara Posts: 623member
    Here's an excerpt:

    Quote:

    Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the following bill; [. . .]



    They seem to be all Democrats... so what does that mean?
  • Reply 14 of 40
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    The sky is falling! Just like last time!
  • Reply 15 of 40
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    The sky is falling! Just like last time!



    Chicken hawks and chicken littles.
  • Reply 16 of 40
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    For the sake of accuracy, chicken hawks = chicken littles.



    Case in point: Iraq
  • Reply 17 of 40
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Whats wrong with the draft?



    -The general population is faced with the desicions of the politicians they elected makes



    -The military won´t just be made up by people who have chosen to go to war



    -The members of the military won´t just be people who see a potential career in it and thus hold back critisism from within.



    -Those who have to fight and die for the nation won´t just be worse off kids and (Crude and rude stereotype ahead->) members of families who make it an honourable family tradition to learn how to kill other people.



    I always speak for the general draft we have here when it is discussed. It makes our military a part of the civil life and our troops more capable of handling peace keeping missions, "nation building" missions and general cultural conflicts than it seems the american troops are.



    You got to get over the Vietnam syndrome. Yes the draft was used to put ordinary kids in harms way by politicians who lost their balance but I believe it would also help the politicians keep their balance. If the Iraq war had meant than thousands of unwilling kids had been shipped to the middle east instead of those who have made a living out of killing people I think more questions would have been asked a year ago.



    Horray for the draft.
  • Reply 18 of 40
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    The military used to be compulsory and it was rather unimpressive back then. Better to get by with people that actually want to be there and meet the minimum requirements. Makes for a better military.
  • Reply 19 of 40
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    The military used to be compulsory and it was rather unimpressive back then. Better to get by with people that actually want to be there and meet the minimum requirements. Makes for a better military.



    Better military? Better in killing or better in handling wars ethical?



    You can have the special forces with the nessesary training for specail assignments. But if they are not rooted in a general army that reflects the average citizents of the country the army will go moral astray IMO.
  • Reply 20 of 40
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    What a stupid reply. Maybe you could reply back with something more intelligent?
Sign In or Register to comment.