Senior Democrat renews call for military draft

[Evo]

I don't ever want to see another draft in this country.

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An influential Democratic lawmaker on Sunday called for reinstatement of the draft as a way to boost U.S. troop levels and draw a broader section of the population into the military or public service.

U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House of Representatives' tax-writing committee, said he would introduce legislation to reinstate the draft as soon as the new, Democratic-controlled Congress convenes in January.

He has said the U.S. fighting force is comprised disproportionately of people from low-income families and minorities."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061119/pl_nm/usa_politics_draft_dc

 

[chroot]

Good luck with that, Chairman Moron. May your career be short and moot.

- Warren

 

[Rach3]

Good luck with that, Chairman Moron. May your career be short and moot.

- Warren

Seconded. ten character minimum

 

[Rach3]

Note what I was predicting in my other thread - the Democratic congress has no clear strategy for addressing Iraq. We're getting completely contradictory statements, from

If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," he said.

to

"The only way for Iraqi leaders to squarely face that reality is for President Bush to tell them that the United States will begin a phased redeployment of our forces within four to six months," Levin insisted.

http://wwmt.com/engine.pl?station=wwmt&id=32220&template=breakout_local.html

So which is it? Rapid total withdrawal? Or rapid troop increase with universal draft? It's impressive - they haven't even taken office yet, and the Democratic majority has already come up with two proposals that are even worse then the current Rumsfeld strategy.

 

[Office_Shredder]

Because the republicans NEVER had a contradictory statement from two members of their party when they were discussing issues like immigration, and whether to implement a guest worker or a mass deportation program :roll:

I think it's clear that a supermajority of the democrats do not favor a draft

 

[slugcountry]

this legislation comes up like once a year, its always posturing, they never expect it to actually pass - more like a, hey if you want to fight wars so badly do it yourself, kind of a message

 

[turbo]

Rangel said (and has said before) that Congress would not have approved the invasion of Iraq if their own sons and daughters were to be put at risk. He doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of getting a draft reinstated and he knows that. The rank and file military contains disproportionate percentages of ethnic minorities and the poor, and he is taking the soapbox to point that out.

I was subject to the draft, and although I was dead-set against the Vietnam War, I would have reported for induction, so that some other kid wouldn't have to. I would have requested CO status, but would not have resisted deployment to Vietnam. I would have asked to be given training as a medic or medevac pilot so at least I would have a chance to save some lives instead of taking them. Quayle and W didn't share my quandry - there was no chance of them going into combat. Sons of the wealthy have options. I lucked out - the military made their quota just 3 or 4 birthdays before mine (lottery system).

Currently, there are a lot of active-duty personnel that are being forced to stay in the service after their enlistment period has expired and there are a lot of guardsmen facing additional tours in Iraq. Our military is stretched, and if the W's war cannot be conducted without unduly penalizing our active duty troops and guard, then it is time to have another debate about the draft. It is particularly hard on self-employed National Guard personnel. When they get back from Iraq, they may no longer have a business, or even a home. These people volunteered for the National Guard because the guard is supposed to be deployed state-side to help cope with urgent needs and they were willing to do their part. Deploying them to Iraq for a year or longer is a misuse of the guard, and that should be avoided by fielding a larger standing army or by refusing to get involved in "wars" that have no defensive purpose.

 

[verty]

Our military is stretched, and if the W's war cannot be conducted without unduly penalizing our active duty troops and guard, then it is time to have another debate about the draft.

If they could sell the cause, wouldn't more join?

 

[turbo]

If they could sell the cause, wouldn't more join?

Yes. My dad quit high school early to join the Airborne because he thought that the war in Europe was necessary and just. I would have volunteered for service if I thought the Vietnam War was just. It was not and I did not.

That war could have been avoided if the US had kept its promises. When the Japanese invaded SE Asia, Ho Chi Minh told the US intelligence personnel that he would help drive out the Japanese and hinder them in any way possible if in return, the US refused to turn the country back over to the French after the war. The US accepted his help then reneged on the deal and turned control of French Indo-China back to the French. The Vietnam war was fought to protect business interests and imperialism, NOT to prevent the spread of communism and foster democracy.

 

[Bystander]

(snip)These people volunteered for the National Guard because the guard is supposed to be deployed state-side to help cope with urgent needs and they were willing to do their part.(snip)

Nerp, see, "Federal Mission" at http://www.arng.army.mil/default.aspx .

When the Japanese invaded SE Asia, Ho Chi Minh told the US intelligence personnel that he would help drive out the Japanese and hinder them in any way possible if in return, the US refused to turn the country back over to the French after the war. The US accepted his help then reneged on the deal and turned control of French Indo-China back to the French.

OSS went into SE Asia in '45 (near war's end, not beginning), seeking assistance from local resistance groups in recovering downed fliers. They were unsuccessful in establishing any useful connections.

 

[turbo]

Nerp, see, "Federal Mission" at http://www.arng.army.mil/default.aspx .



OSS went into SE Asia in '45 (near war's end, not beginning), seeking assistance from local resistance groups in recovering downed fliers. They were unsuccessful in establishing any useful connections.

The American Liaison Personnel were in-country a long time before the OSS showed up. You may want to search on CBI. These guys were dealing with indigenous forces well before the Japanese gained the ascendancy in the region.

 

[Astronuc]

I don't ever want to see another draft in this country.

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An influential Democratic lawmaker on Sunday called for reinstatement of the draft as a way to boost U.S. troop levels and draw a broader section of the population into the military or public service.

U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House of Representatives' tax-writing committee, said he would introduce legislation to reinstate the draft as soon as the new, Democratic-controlled Congress convenes in January.

He has said the U.S. fighting force is comprised disproportionately of people from low-income families and minorities."

Voluteers then?

Perhaps a mandatory military service of 1 or 2 years for everyone would be fair. Several countries have such policies.

 

[Rach3]

Voluteers then?

Perhaps a mandatory military service of 1 or 2 years for everyone would be fair. Several countries have such policies.

The whole point of a military draft is that there's an invasion and Nazis or Soviets are murdering everyone in their path - everyone and the children take up guns and fight. It's the choice of last resort precisely because it forces citizens to be killed, and worse - to kill, in gross violation of their inherent rights. It is obsolete in the first world, a relic of a pre-nuclear past.

There are few things which disgust me more then the arrogance of one man to presume controlling the life of another - who should fight, who should die, how s/he lives his life. It is the communist model, and it is a failed model, one that violates the basic self-determination of the free citizen. Those countries with enforced terms of public service - they're halfway on the road to communism; they don't let free citizens in free markets determine where they will work and live, no, let some bureaucrat with a roulette wheel decide for them. Myself, I live in a country founded on freedom and liberty - and I'll die before I'll slave away for socialist planners.

 

[grant9076]

Although it is honorable to serve in the defense of one's country, the military lifestyle is not for everyone. Forcing a person to join an organization in which he/she does not belong is inherently bad for both the person and the organization.

 

[slugcountry]

what would be "fair" is if wars were fought exclusively for defense, until then no justification can be made to join the military in my view

 

[slugcountry]

The whole point of a military draft is that there's an invasion and Nazis or Soviets are murdering everyone in their path - everyone and the children take up guns and fight. It's the choice of last resort precisely because it forces citizens to be killed, and worse - to kill, in gross violation of their inherent rights. It is obsolete in the first world, a relic of a pre-nuclear past.

There are few things which disgust me more then the arrogance of one man to presume controlling the life of another - who should fight, who should die, how s/he lives his life. It is the communist model, and it is a failed model, one that violates the basic self-determination of the free citizen. Those countries with enforced terms of public service - they're halfway on the road to communism; they don't let free citizens in free markets determine where they will work and live, no, let some bureaucrat with a roulette wheel decide for them. Myself, I live in a country founded on freedom and liberty - and I'll die before I'll slave away for socialist planners.

you can just as easily slave away for capitalist planners

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Bush's use of the guard has clearly been inappropriate since his primary job is the defense of this nation, and not Iraqi freedom. Clearly, as Katrina showed all too well, this country was left venerable during what Bush describes as a time of a great peril [due to the threat of terrorism].

The only reason that we don't already have a draft is that this would have precluded support for the war. Given an operation of this size, is it any wonder that this was fought with insufficient numbers of troops? Is it any wonder that we now have a disaster on our hands? As time has shown, it was lunacy to engage in an operation of this size and duration with a "lean and mean" army. This also violated a basic principle of war: Use overwhelming force.

The fact is that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place, but we did, and now we are subject to the pottery rule: We broke it so we own it.

The way that I see it, we will be lucky if a draft can be avoided. First of all, Bush might have already started WWIII. If this is the case then clearly we will be seeing a draft. If we are talking about an open ended commitment of our troops in order to prevent a regional war, then a draft could be unavoidable as well. It depends on how many troops are needed. As it stands now, we are allegedly squeaking by while effectively acting as observers to a low level civil war. The situation seems to be continually worsening, and if any degree of control is to be maintained, we may end up sending more and more troops as conditions worsen. According to the testimony given Congress this week, we are near the limit of our ability to increase our presence with an all volunteer force.

On the other hand, we might manage to withdraw from Iraq or significantly reduce our presence without the entire region destabilizing, but at this point no one sees how this can happen.

 

[Rach3]

...capitalist planners...

You mean the capitalist party leader, whose agents forbid me from pursuing any career outside of physics research (in the vested, planned interests of the Peoples' Capitalist State)?

 

[Cyrus]

Bush's use of the guard has clearly been inappropriate since his primary job is the defense of this nation, and not Iraqi freedom. Clearly, as Katrina showed all too well, this country was left venerable during what Bush describes as a time of a great peril [due to the threat of terrorism].

The only reason that we don't already have a draft is that this would have precluded support for the war. Given an operation of this size, is it any wonder that this was fought with insufficient numbers of troops? Is it any wonder that we now have a disaster on our hands? As time has shown, it was lunacy to engage in an operation of this size and duration with a "lean and mean" army. This also violated a basic principle of war: Use overwhelming force.

The fact is that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place, but we did, and now we are subject to the pottery rule: We broke it so we own it.

The way that I see it, we will be lucky if a draft can be avoided. First of all, Bush might have already started WWIII. If this is the case then clearly we will be seeing a draft. If we are talking about an open ended commitment of our troops in order to prevent a regional war, then a draft could be unavoidable as well. It depends on how many troops are needed. As it stands now, we are allegedly squeaking by while effectively acting as observers to a low level civil war. The situation seems to be continually worsening, and if any degree of control is to be maintained, we may end up sending more and more troops as conditions worsen. According to the testimony given Congress this week, we are near the limit of our ability to increase our presence with an all volunteer force.

On the other hand, we might manage to withdraw from Iraq or significantly reduce our presence without the entire region destabilizing, but at this point no one sees how this can happen.

:rofl: Someones been watching too much news lately. I can smell a good 2-3 sound bites in what you wrote. :rofl:

You're mistaken, we should ivade Iran while were still there.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Then your nose needs to be somewhere else.

Your second statement makes no sense. What do you mean?

 

[Cyrus]

I was just being sarcastic.

This: "the pottery rule: We broke it so we own it."

Is a sound bite used by a lot of analysts on the news.

The way that I see it, we will be lucky if a draft can be avoided. First of all, Bush might have already started WWIII.

This, no. How do you justify this?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I was just being sarcastic.

This: "the pottery rule: We broke it so we own it."

Is a sound bite used by a lot of analysts on the news.

Okay, maybe I was using too many cliches, but they come about for a reason. And at $2 billion per week for three years, we own it.

This, no. How do you justify this?

In a word: Momentum. Why don't you ask me again in a year.

 

[Cyrus]

In a word: Momentum. Why don't you ask me again in a year.

Nah, sorry. I don't buy that. Not by a long shot. Whats going on in Iraq is by no means going to cause a world war.

If you said oil shortage, then yes. I could see that. Iraq, no.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Let's see what Iran and Syria do.

Generally, you know, this is what McCain et al are so concerned about. This is why dad sent his friends to help junior. What do you think people like McCain are talking about?

 

[Cyrus]

Did you see Kopel on Iran?

He has some damn good programs on Discovery now. Iran already has more control over Iraq and Afganistan than the US or British through their political influence and agents.

They said that if the US tries to make trouble with Iran, Iran is going to turn Iraq and Afganistan into a living hell for the Americans.

So, the pressure from Iran is already there. It's not "what they'll do", its "what they ARE doing"

 

[Cyrus]

Here you go:

http://dsc.discovery.com/beyond/pla...26602802&lineupId=284952661&titleId=302033976

 

[Bystander]

The American Liaison Personnel were in-country a long time before the OSS showed up.

China, not Indochina.

You may want to search on CBI. These guys were dealing with indigenous forces well before the Japanese gained the ascendancy in the region.

June, 1940? Don't hardly think so. http://www.vwam.com/vets/history/early2.html will give you a little more complete picture of the diplomatic and military picture; the typos are a bit bothersome, and it omits details on the Nationalist Chinese factions, FDR's instructions to his staff that they were not to mention "post-war SE Asia" to him again (presumably, following the 16th parallel joint British-Chinese occupation agreement), the fact that very little military assistance given the Chinese was actually used rather than squirrelled away for the upcoming civil war, that the French did nothing in the way of resisting Japanese occupation.

Getting back to the OP and "the draft," DoD's tactical doctrines no longer include "human waves" requiring conscripted "cannon fodder;" it's a matter of fighting "smarter" with better trained and better equipped troops. A draft is for people with no more smarts or imagination than Douglas Haig demonstrated in WW I.

"Universal service?" Manpower, or "personpower," is no longer a "prime mover" in this country; McCulloch, Briggs & Stratton, Cummins, Caterpillar, Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce, GE, Babcock & Wilcox, and their competitors have displaced "tote that barge, lift that bale" labor.

 

[edward]

Smart bombs can only destroy buildings and kill people. It takes boots on the ground to control a country, and we have not been able to do that in Iraq with the number of troops present.

We either pull out now and let the situation resolve itself or we bring back the draft and put in 500,000 troops or whatever it takes to control the ME.

And this is about oil , it has always been about oil. The WMD ruse was used to get at that oil. Does anyone really think that Dick cheney and his like ever really gave a crap about freedom for the Iraqi people?