Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: The Draft coming back?

  1. #1
    Wuptdo's Avatar
    Wuptdo is offline Verified Five Year Club
    Site Supporter
    3-Star Forum General
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    North Cary, NC
    Posts
    4,803

    Default The Draft coming back?

    My better half recently received this via e-mail. She was very upset by this. I not sure if this true or not, but maybe his Lordship David Price can shed some light on this. Myself, I think it is great idea, especially if we started with all those high school drop-outs, EOG failures, and juvenile criminals. Heck, I want to be on the local draft board!



    Draft Reinstated



    For those of you with loved ones in this age grou, PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION.

    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: http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004.

    "Strategic Objective 1.2: Ensure a mobilization infrastructure of 56 State Headquarters, 442 Area Offices and 1,980 Local Boards are operational within 75 days of an authorized return to conscription."

    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 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/nat...hs~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.

    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.

    The public has a right to air their opinions about such an important decision.

    Please send this on to all the friends, parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents, and cousins that you know. Let your children know too -- it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change!

    Please also contact your representatives to ask them why they aren't telling their constituents about these bills -- and contact newspapers and other media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important story.


    Thoughts?

    Wuptdo

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    171

    Default

    Wup, click the link below to access a pamphlet that people indicating a desire to serve on local draft boards received. I do not know the mechanism by which these individuals were identified, but, for what it's worth, here it is.

    http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/dra...d-pamphlet.pdf

    A 400k, or so, PDF. [/url]
    Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

  3. #3
    dhyatt's Avatar
    dhyatt is offline Super Moderator Five Year Club
    Site Supporter
    Site Admin
    3-Star Forum General
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Posts
    4,743

    Default REINSTATING THE DRAFT

    EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT REINSTATING THE DRAFT
    A high school student's research for the truth.

    My friends are all telling me that the draft is going to be reinstated. This worried me, so I decided to research where they were getting their information from. I went to congress.org and read an article about it on Soapbox.

    The article my friends referred to was from an anti war group trying to perpetuate the rumor without telling the whole truth concerning this issue. It said that the bills were S(89) and HR(163). I clicked on the link, bills in congress. These 2 bills are solely sponsored by Democrats. The S(89)bill is sponsored by Ernest Hollings,D, and the HR(163) bill is sponsored by Charles Rangel,D, of New York.

    After learning this I called up Rangel's Washington DC office. I spoke to one of his office personel. I asked why Rangel sponsored this bill, and I was told that Rangel wants equality. He thinks that, because the poor and less fortunate are the ones in our military, the middle and upper class Americans who run the country should have to experince being in the military. Now think about this. The only reason the sponsors of these bills want to reinstate the draft is so that America will experience equality. There is no real need for a draft.

    Also, the military provides the poor people with money and an education, so it is actually beneficial to them. America has public schools in which all people can attend. The poor people have the same opportunity as the rest of Americans to work hard, get a good education, and receive scholarships to further their education after high school.

    I guess I am considered to be from a middle class American family. We have to work hard to obtain everything we have, including paying for a college education. Educational opportunities are what you make of them, rich or poor everyone has the same option of working hard in school to further their education and become successful in life.

    It sounds as if Rep. Rangel would disagree with this and try to promote a form of class welfare that sounds like socialism. What a terrible reason to try to institute the draft. (By the way, I do support the war in Iraq and realize it is needed to protect America, but I don't like the reason I was given for instituting a draft in 2005.) Socialism scares me, and it should be of concern to all of you.

    I thought we could use a little perspective here...
    Don Hyatt
    Webmaster
    CaryPolitics.org

  4. #4
    Cathy Guest

    Default

    Thanks for that posting Don! It was needed.

    Cathy

  5. #5
    Wuptdo's Avatar
    Wuptdo is offline Verified Five Year Club
    Site Supporter
    3-Star Forum General
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    North Cary, NC
    Posts
    4,803

    Default Thank you.....

    Mark,

    Thank you! It was very helpful.

    Also, I heard this on "Talk" radio. The "draft" per se may also be used for additional items (people) the government may need. For instance, homeland security, airport screeners, and border patrol.

    Just for the record, I believe that every young person upon graduation of either High School or College should serve their country or community in some way for a least a year. Whether it be in the military, border patrol, a nursing home, VA hospital or something like either Americorp or the Peace Corp.

    Wuptdo

  6. #6
    Cathy Guest

    Default Re: Thank you.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuptdo
    Mark,

    Thank you! It was very helpful.

    Also, I heard this on "Talk" radio. The "draft" per se may also be used for additional items (people) the government may need. For instance, homeland security, airport screeners, and border patrol.

    Just for the record, I believe that every young person upon graduation of either High School or College should serve their country or community in some way for a least a year. Whether it be in the military, border patrol, a nursing home, VA hospital or something like either Americorp or the Peace Corp.

    Wuptdo
    Yes....and we can require that they all wear "red shirts" so that everyone can easily identify them...

    Cathy

  7. #7
    johnb is offline Verified 3-Star Forum General
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    3,203

    Default

    There isn't going to be a draft. The one group in America that is most opposed to it is the military.

    Draftees are harder to train, discipline, and motivate than are volunteers. The professional, all volunteer force is superior to a draft army in every meaningful respect.

    There is some number of young men who don't and will never feel honour bound to serve their nation and their people. Drafting them will not change that. They would be a drain on the young men who do acknowledge the debt they owe their people, their nation, and their civilization.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    985

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnb
    There is some number of young men who don't and will never feel honour bound to serve their nation and their people.
    I'm assuming you mean the 98.8% U.S citizens of military age (1.4 million serving out of a population of 120 million 15-44 year olds) who are not in the military.

    Or, since you seem to think only men should serve, the 98% percent of men ( (1.4 million total active duty - 198,000 active duty females) / 60 million males aged 15-44) that are not serving in the military.

    I wonder, really, how the contributions of many military personel can said to be serving the nation, conceived as a monolithic entity, or the many people of the nation, individually, in a more proper, more efficient, or simply better fashion than the contributions of countless other members of society. Anyway, the U.S. military manages, according to John, with the input of the most honorable, self sacrificing, and service oriented top 2% of society, so it is no wonder that the U.S., left with the rest, is declining markedly in every area except successful military operations.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    985

    Default

    (looks up) 'tis mine.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    171

    Default

    (looks up) 'tis mine.
    Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •