posted
Well I'd like to have another source than that one (anyone else notice the continual commentary on the bill), but if it's true, well that's a very serious step.
posted
You know, the more I think about it, the less I believe this. However, I wouldn' be surprised if there's some truth in it somewhere, but I don't know where. The idea that a few congressman actually think that they can get a bill that radical (women in the draft, plus the very large draft age and no college protection) through congress without notice is really, well absurd. I vaguely remember about a year ago a Democrat in congress put forward a draft bill (I don't know any of the speicifics) to wake up the public and warn them there might be a draft that they would need to fight against. I suppose it could be similar to that. Or I could be plain wrong and a couple of congressmen (or however many) could really be that stupid.
I'm not afraid to do my duty to my country, but I won't go if there are enough volunteers. What's the point? Where is the catyclysmic war that would normally warrant this. There isn't one, unless it's being planned, but now I sound like a conspiracy theorist.
posted
Ah...so this is what they were talking about in hat' chat. This has been hinted and rumored about for years, and congress has kept it in the back, as Jeni says, it's been on the docket since 2003, and actually has been talked about since 2001, the military doesn't need it, they don't want it. and saying that they're the ones with the final say in calling people...even if it passes...I'm not sure anyone will actually get called. Satyagraha
Posts: 1986 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
I guess I'm rather unconcerned because I really don't think it'll happen. If your concerned, vote against those who support it, write to your representitive, but in your what if scenerio of it getting passed and the draft being called... well then there's a draft. Not really a whole lot you can do it about it once it's happened.
posted
I guess when things are out of my hands I take a fatalist attitude and figure that if it happens I'll try to be ready, but if it does happen, not wanting it to happen wont really help.
If you pose the question "do you think it should happen?" you'll get a non-apathetic response (well not really, right now I probably wouldn't post a response but that's beside the point). The question of "what if it does happen and there's nothing you can do about it?" Simply leads to the conclusion that there's nothing I can do about it.
[EDIT: In all actuality, people who spell “conclusion” wrong are, in fact, the coolest people around. I think they get a draft exception for stupidity. ]
posted
It doesn't help that the Marines and Navy are already all over me, trying to get me to drop out of college and enlist. Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:....and people say this election doesn't matter.
You're right. All the sponsors of the bill linked via Thomas are Democrats. All of them are also highly vocal critics of the Bush administration.
So we know the article is being at least a little disingenuous about it being "the administration" trying to get the bills passed.
Frankly, this took about 5 minutes to confirm. Maybe the knee-jerk politicos of either persuasion on this board can add a little research to their rants.
posted
The draft just isn't going to happen. It's just political maneuverings for an unpopular war.
Casualty figures so far don't warrant it and only a fraction of the total US Armed Forces are currently commited to the conflict.
Beyond that, training necessities in the modern US Armed Services would require far too much time to turn conscripts into effective soldiers. Even the base infantryman of today takes two years or more to train fully.
There may be a harder push for recruitment, but conscription won't be instituted for this.
Still, as an American man, I had to put my name down and register for selective service on my 18th birthday. While I'm probably to old to be called up now, if I were called, I'd go and pay the debt that so many others have had to do before me.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have the time or energy to hunt up news articles on this, but there's pretty wide agreement that any new draft legislation would have to have most of the loopholes eliminated.
That's because the loopholes made it easy for those who were white and well-off to avoid the draft. The burden of "service" fell on the rest.
Here's an excerpt from a recent column by Anna Quindlen on the subject:
quote:The last time there was a draft was during the Vietnam War. In part the rationale then was the same as Hagel says it would be today: to share the pain of service across lines of class and race. The reality was quite different. Consider these Vietnam-era sketches, which bring to mind the simplest of the old anti-war slogans: Hell no, we won't go. George W. Bush: not drafted. Served in the Texas Air National Guard instead, somehow managing to skirt a long waiting list. Some question about how much time he actually served, and where. Dick Cheney: not drafted. Several deferments, first for being a student, then for being married. John Ashcroft: not drafted. Student deferments as well as an "occupational deferment" because he was teaching at a state university. (For the sake of bipartisanship, let's not forget Bill Clinton's loathsome toadying letter in which he sought a way not to serve but to "maintain my political viability." For the sake of bipartisanship, let's not forget that John Kerry enlisted and was awarded three Purple Hearts. Chuck Hagel got two.)
I'll add one to the Democrat list - Howard Dean, who received a medical deferment for a bad back and then spent a few months skiing in Aspen.
Phil Ochs, one of my all-time favorite writer/singers, summarized the draftholes neatly in his "Draft Dodger Rag":
quote:Oh, I'm just a typical American boy from a typical American town I believe in God and Senator Dodd and a-keepin' old Castro down And when it came my time to serve I knew "better dead than red" But when I got to my old draft board, buddy, this is what I said:
CHORUS Sarge, I'm only eighteen, I got a ruptured spleen And I always carry a purse I got eyes like a bat, and my feet are flat, and my asthma's getting worse Yes, think of my career, my sweetheart dear, and my poor old invalid aunt Besides, I ain't no fool, I'm a-goin' to school And I'm working in a DEE-fense plant
I've got a dislocated disc and a wracked up back I'm allergic to flowers and bugs And when the bombshell hits, I get epileptic fits And I'm addicted to a thousand drugs I got the weakness woes, I can't touch my toes I can hardly reach my knees And if the enemy came close to me I'd probably start to sneeze
posted
"Yeah, but do you want them to have the right to do so?"
Absolutely! The only reason that a draft would be necessary is if our country were in eminent peril. And in that instance, there should be draft if it is our only chance of defendng ourselves.
I feel confident that no president would be foolish enough to institute a draft for an unpopular offensive war after political debachel(sp?) of Vietnam. It would be career suicide. And no one in the military would want unwilling soldiers anyhow so why are you foolish enough to beleive that this will happen, unless our very country is being invaded, and we have no other alternative?
Posts: 181 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whooo hooo! I'm 27 I don't have to worry about it!
Just kidding. Draft sucks in this situation. We don't have invading armies coming in. There is no reason for the draft. Volunteer military is best.
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
it is a hoax, do a websearch and you will see it. snopes has some info on the hoax. While there are some people in congress who do want the draft, they are a minority, and the Bush administration is against the draft (particularly the sec def).
here is info from snopes (anti hoax site)
quote: As reflected in the message quoted above, the draft issue has largely come to public attention due to pair of bills introduced in Congress (S.89 and H.R.163) which seek to obligate all citizens and residents of the U.S. beween the ages of 18 and 26 (both male and female) to perform a two-year period of national service (not necessarily as part of the military), and the Selective Service's advertising for volunteers to man draft boards around the country. However, both the Congressional bills were introduced back in January 2003 and have languished in committee ever since with seemingly little support, and the Selective Service maintains that the timing of ads to fill draft board positions was coincidental, part of a process of filling expired board positions that has been underway for several years:
Of course there is also the fact that Rumsfeld is against the draft...here is a quote from him that was in the news when he heard about the rumors:
quote: "The people that are in the armed services today ... are there because they want to be there and are ready and willing and, without any question, capable of doing whatever the president may ask," Rumsfeld said.
Back when he was a senator Rumsfeld proposed one of the first bills to ban the draft.
posted
Maybe not quite a hoax - but not something to get riled up over either... Doing a quick search on either of these bills on www.congress.gov does show that both are legitimate bills. Both of them were proposed (one to the Senate, one to Congress) in early 2003 (S89 in January, the other in February).
However, a closer look at the status of each bill shows, roughly paraphrased, The bill was read twice to the [Senate or House] then referred to a subcomittee or DOD (Department of Defense) group.
And then nothing else happened.
For nearly 18 months.
If nothing's happened with them for a year and a half, then it's most likely for one of two reasons:
One) The bills aren't being seriously considered, and are unlikely to amount to anything.
Two) The article at www.congress.org is accurate, and there is a massive conspiracy under way to introduce a new draft and not let the public know until it's too late.
Consider the following: - The US military has been consistently shrinking since the Vietnam war. Not for a lack of volunteers (at least for the last 2 decades) - but for a lack of funding. All that the US government has to do, if they feel that the ranks need to be increased, is open up additional money for the DOD. The volunteers will come! - Such a conspiracy as suggested in option two would be political suicide for anyone attached to it. Would you vote to re-elect any elected official if he or she lied to you (even if only by ommission, this is still a lie!) about such an important issue? I know I wouldn't. - Remember the principle of Occam's Razor - "Of two equivalent theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred."
Taking all that into account, these bills--while they do exist--will never become law. Let's not jump at bait such as this!!!
Posts: 7 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The bills' existance isn't the hoax. The hoax is trying to attach significance to routine goings-on at the Selective Service, as well as blaming the Bush administration when the bills were proposed as anti-war political grandstanding.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
I have never had to deal with "the draft" in my lifetime. Dealing with it frightens me.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
]![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
