The Draft is Back for 2005

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-03-01 04:32am

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-03-01 04:34am

Rogue 9 wrote:Lock and load, boys!

So the Vancouver Indymedia is now a source for the re-instutition of something that would slash military efficiency and competence and probably kill the President's chances of reelection? Wow, I'm really impressed.

Seriously, we're more likely to have our own Gurkha regiment than not before we resort to the draft.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-03-01 04:39am

So the Vancouver Indymedia is now a source for the re-instutition of something that would slash military efficiency and competence and probably kill the President's chances of reelection? Wow, I'm really impressed.

The machinery is unquestionably being oiled. I remember seeing a call for volunteers to the draft boards some months ago. And who gives a shit about re-election if it's after November 2004, exactly? He can do whatever he wants if he wins.

Seriously, we're more likely to have our own Gurkha regiment than not before we resort to the draft.

I'm inclined to agree, unless there's plans for a major war in any year of Bush's presidency besides this one.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-03-01 04:43am

Vympel wrote:And who gives a shit about re-election if it's after November 2004, exactly? He can do whatever he wants if he wins.

If it was seriously planned for the Spring of 2005--an actual implementation, not just an overhaul of the Selective Service System--genuine news services would be carrying it in a fashion detrimental to the election before it occured.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-03-01 04:55am

Well, that'll show me to double check before I pick something up at an extreme leftist board. >_< I'm going to go yell at Emancipator now.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-03-01 05:05am

So would it have killed you to look up Bill HR 163 instead of dismissing the accusation on the sole basis that it came from a leftist source? Go to http://thomas.loc.gov and look up HR 163, and you will see this:

Universal National Service Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)

HR 163 IH

108th CONGRESS
1st Session

H. R. 163

To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons 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.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 7, 2003

Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

Of course, that doesn't mean this bill will pass. But it does certainly look to me like somebody really does want to reinstate the draft.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2004-03-01 05:20am

They're only short on men now, not money, right?

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2004-03-01 05:22am

Shinova wrote:They're only short on men now, not money, right?

They're short on money, too. It's all deficit spending that they're doing right now. Whether or not that is a bad practice would mean starting an economics debate, but I hardly consider it a good practice.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-03-01 05:25am

What the fuck? I thought a volunteer army was supposed to be far superior to a conscripted army.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-03-01 05:28am

Darth Wong wrote:So would it have killed you to look up Bill HR 163 instead of dismissing the accusation on the sole basis that it came from a leftist source? Go to http://thomas.loc.gov and look up HR 163, and you will see this:

Of course, that doesn't mean this bill will pass. But it does certainly look to me like somebody really does want to reinstate the draft.

The bills are being proposed mainly by democrats on the principle that a draft-army will be publically harder to deploy overseas, and have a miniscule chance of passing and none of being approved by the President.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2004-03-01 08:48am

The draft is always floated around, year after year, but it never passes.

This time I think that it's even less likely.

This bill is being proposed by liberals such as Conyers for a very specific reason: to force everyone to serve so that rich white men can no longer send poor black men to die while they sit around at home. It will never pass.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-03-01 09:13am

Vympel wrote:

So the Vancouver Indymedia is now a source for the re-instutition of something that would slash military efficiency and competence and probably kill the President's chances of reelection? Wow, I'm really impressed.
The machinery is unquestionably being oiled. I remember seeing a call for volunteers to the draft boards some months ago. And who gives a shit about re-election if it's after November 2004, exactly? He can do whatever he wants if he wins.

My guess would be the Senators and Congressmen who'd have to vote to reinstate the draft before it happened.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-03-01 09:40am

They're staffing the boards and stuff now, which is something they weren't doing before, IIRC

So it's undeniable that this is the real deal if Bush gets reelected

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-03-01 09:51am

You mean that Conyers and the rest of the bill's sponsors want to help Bush fight a war??

This bill is old news.

It was just an attempt to illustrate the inequalities in a volunteer army where the 'children of privilege' don't serve, while those of the poor and middle classes do.

Show me a bill that brings back the draft that's sponsored by the Administration, and then I'll start to worry.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2004-03-01 10:38am

Shinova wrote:They're only short on men now, not money, right?

They are short on people for the Army and Marines and maybe the Airforce.

The Navy has been meeting it's recruiting goals and is actually downsizing a lot of people.

Funny, they don't have a lot of volunteers to join the services who get to hang out on the ground and play cop in Iraq.

With the way that reserves have been used in the last 15 years I imagine they are going to have problems keeping reserve units up to strength as well.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-03-01 10:43am

He can do whatever he wants if he wins.

No he can't, his party will eat it during the midterm elections and also in 2008 if he tries to reinstate the draft.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2004-03-01 10:46am

Darth Wong wrote:H. R. 163

To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons 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.

Such a bill would likely meet a grevious death after harsh resistance, not the least from AUSA (representing the Army). Today's US Army is not designed for draftees. Men and women take time and money to train, first with the transiton from civilian to soldier, and then with specific MOS skills. That is only the beginning, for then the unit that receives the soldiers has to further train and hone them as part of a cohesive force, for the OSUT and AIT units do a sub-par job. Then there are the varous schools and skills that are unit-specific that eat up training and TDY funds. Once that is complete, the draftee's time would be up and it would be, "Seeya!" Money and time wasted...

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-03-01 11:46am

that bill was a publicity stunt by Chuck Rangel, the Congressional Black Caucus and the Progressive Caucus designed to build up opposition to the Iraq war. It failed.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2004-03-01 11:59am

Glocksman wrote:You mean that Conyers and the rest of the bill's sponsors want to help Bush fight a war??

This bill is old news.

It was just an attempt to illustrate the inequalities in a volunteer army where the 'children of privilege' don't serve, while those of the poor and middle classes do.

Show me a bill that brings back the draft that's sponsored by the Administration, and then I'll start to worry.

That's what I'm saying.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-03-01 12:01pm

Hamel wrote:They're staffing the boards and stuff now, which is something they weren't doing before, IIRC

So it's undeniable that this is the real deal if Bush gets reelected

I'm laughing so hard I'm crying!

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2004-03-01 01:17pm

This bill in one form or another has been introduced by various agencys for the last fourty years and for the last ten of those(Maybe more not sure on that point) the military has been slashing budgets related to Boot-camps and closing down old ones, For example the Navy has gone from three basic intstruction facilites to one, most recenlty cutting the Pensacola basic which many of my current bosses attended not to many years ago

We could draft all we want but the facilites and instituions desinded for drafts have been nearly entirely eliminated from the military

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-03-01 02:53pm

Darth Wong wrote: Of course, that doesn't mean this bill will pass. But it does certainly look to me like somebody really does want to reinstate the draft.

Some senators and representatives have wanted the draft back for thirty years. Bills to reinstate it come up all the time.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-03-01 03:27pm

Draft bills make their rounds every few years or so. They never pass. Our military is one of the best in the world partially due to being a volunteer military.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-03-01 03:33pm

Durandal wrote:Draft bills make their rounds every few years or so. They never pass. Our military is one of the best in the world partially due to being a volunteer military.

One of the best?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-03-01 03:42pm

Joe wrote:
Durandal wrote:Draft bills make their rounds every few years or so. They never pass. Our military is one of the best in the world partially due to being a volunteer military.
One of the best?

Oh sorry, the best, bar none. Absolutely top notch and nigh unbeatable.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The Draft is Back for 2005

The Draft is Back for 2005

Re: The Draft is Back for 2005

Re: The Draft is Back for 2005

Re: The Draft is Back for 2005

Re: The Draft is Back for 2005

Re: The Draft is Back for 2005