Is this a joke..

[korme]

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/...ua_congressorg

Soapbox Alert

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. 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.

[Easy Mac]

just grab a hammer and try to flatten out your feet.

[Philliesfan980]

Will.. not... happen

[scooper]

Just think of this guys, Shorty will be fighting for all of us. Feel safe.

[korme]

i'm moving to asia where the women are still pretty

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

i'm moving to asia where the women are still pretty

if you say so

[Ksyrup]

FWIW...and for the record, I'm not claiming that anything in this article is correct, but it represents the "other side of the story."




Rosen: Draft bills a cynical ruse
Rocky Mountain News ^| 30 April 2004 | Mike Rosen


Posted on 04/30/2004 8:25:19 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham


Rosen: Draft bills a cynical ruse
April 30, 2004



'Vietnam War Redux: Mandatory Draft Coming." That was the headline over a cockeyed story by Sophie Lapaire on the Conspiracy Planet Web site, which bills itself as "Your Antidote to Media Cartel Propaganda," and offers links to a collection of exposés like: "Osama bin Scapegoat," "USA PATRIOT Act (Treason)," and the ever-popular "Moon Landing Scam." You get the idea. It's a hangout for paranoids and wackos of the black helicopter/Bilderbergers ilk.

Lapaire warns us that there's pending legislation in the House and Senate to reinstate a military draft, and that "the administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed." Well, she's partially correct. There are, in fact, two such bills, but they're not the work of the Bush administration. Speaking for the president, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard Meyers, have both officially expressed their opposition.

Its sponsors are a ragtag collection of Bush critics who oppose the Iraq operation and most aspects of the war on terrorism.

Co-sponsoring the House bill, HR 163, is Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, a far-left, anti-defense renegade who, you might recall, journeyed to Iraq in September 2002 for a grandstanding performance, criticizing President Bush and lobbying for Saddam Hussein. Another House sponsor is Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., another liberal naysayer on Iraq who's also made a career of racial opportunism. Rangel asserts that his fellow African-Americans are carrying an unfair burden in Iraq.

Similar charges were made about the Vietnam War. In fact, black combat deaths in Vietnam, at 12 percent, were less than the 13.5 percent of blacks in the U.S. population. Moreover, that was a military force made up largely of conscripts. Today, we have an all-volunteer force of military professionals. If, commendably, a higher percentage of individuals from minority groups choose to sign up and serve their country, that's their business, not Rangel's.

In the Senate, Fritz Hollings, D-S.C., is the lone sponsor of S 89. Hollings, who originally voted to authorize force in Iraq, now claims that he was misled and regrets his vote. This is his mea culpa.

These House and Senate bills would not only reinstate the draft for males between the ages of 18-26, but would add women, as well.

There would also be a requirement for two years of civilian service for those not called to the military, and there'd be no deferments for college.

These bills aren't going anywhere. The Senate bill has been referred to the Pentagon for comment, and the Pentagon opposes it. The House bill hasn't even been assigned to a committee and will be buried by the Republican leadership.

Now, let's cut through the baloney. The bills' sponsors don't even want them to pass. These liberals don't really desire a larger military; they routinely vote against more defense spending. This is a ruse, a scam. It's not about conscription; it's about undermining support for Bush and the war by raising the perceived cost in the minds of the folks back home, especially moms who don't want their little boys and girls to get caught in a draft.

There are about 40 million Americans between the ages of 18-26.

This isn't World War II. After the personnel drawdown of the 1990s, following the end of the Cold War, a few hundred thousand additional, active-duty troops might be justified right now, and they can be obtained through recruitment.

Given the nature of warfare today, even a major military mobilization wouldn't require more than a million more troops. And we certainly don't need 39 million new civilian government employees performing mandatory community service at taxpayer expense when they could be put to better use in the private sector, paying taxes.

Our highly trained and specialized modern military force no longer lends itself to transient draftees passing in and out every two years. While that kind of citizen-soldier may have still made sense when I got drafted, and proudly served in 1965, it doesn't today.

In this volatile world, there may come a time when this nation needs to reinstate national conscription, but that time isn't now.

Mike Rosen's radio show airs daily from 9 a.m. to noon on 850 KOA.

[Chubby]

I thought that a lot of the military was cutting back on people, people in the service would know better than I. I too doubt this will ever happen, just as the "judicial review bill" thing will never happen.

[WSUCougar]

Originally Posted by scooper

Just think of this guys, Shorty will be fighting for all of us. Feel safe.

It will be forever known as The Haircut Defense.

[korme]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

if you say so

meh, doable

[Maple Leafs]

Snopes if your friend.

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

[Chubby]

"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 "

excellent. now I don't care if the bill passes or not.

[yabanci]

It's true:

http://www.draftregistration.us/

[BishopMVP]

When Charles Rangel is introducing the bill, it probably isn't supported by the current administration.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by yabanci

It's true:

http://www.draftregistration.us/

I do like that page. Very nice. I shall share that one.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

I do like that page. Very nice. I shall share that one.

That's freakin' hilarious.

[Rizon]

This was posted on another board (as a news article) several months ago.

My response:

It's a scare article. The bill won't even come close to passing, like the article makes it seem.

Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to Senate committee

Bill S 89

Mr. HOLLINGS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

Fritz Hollings is a DEMOCRAT.

Bill HR 163

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

Rangel = Democrat
McDermott = Democrat
Conyers = Democrat
Lewis = Democrat
Stark = Democrat
Abercrombie = Democrat

This is leftist, liberal, anti-Bush crap and scare tactics to freak the public out before the Iraqi war. Shame on this "fine" newspaper for checking their facts.

[Rizon]

Oh, those links don't work. You have to manually enter the Bill #s

http://thomas.loc.gov/

Worksafe link.

[BishopMVP]

Basically anti-War and anti-Bush politicians hope that a draft or enough talk of one will drive opposition to the war in Iraq and the current administration. The Pentagon doesn't want a draft and the administration doesn't want a draft. Not gonna happen.

[Sharpieman]

I agree with what BishopMVP said. I hate when Dem's do this crap.

[sterlingice]

The only thing I take out of the thread is the thought: "There's a site called uglypeople.com?"

SI

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

The only thing I take out of the thread is the thought: "There's a site called uglypeople.com?"

SI

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...uglypeople.com

[BlingBlingKilla]

Since I DO know something about Black politicians, I can tell you that Rangle has supported a draft for MANY MANY years. As it is now, the army is made up of mostly undereducated minorities who look to the G.I. Bill as the only way they can pay for college, or the only secure job they can find.

I think a draft is a great idea. Maybe if rich people had their sons go to war, they wouldnt be so fuckin eager to send someone elses.

This aint no `trick` by the Democrats. He really wants a draft, and I think its a good idea too.

[SFL Cat]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

meh, doable

sez you...I say ain't enough beer in the world...

[korme]

i was kidding sfl

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Rizon

This is leftist, liberal, anti-Bush crap and scare tactics to freak the public out before the Iraqi war.

It has nothing to do with Bush and very little to do with the Iraq war. Charlie Rangel and others in his camp have been pushing for a draft for years.

Why? Since the end of the draft, the makeup of the U.S. armed forces is disproportionately poor and minority. The argument has been for many years that "the elite" (read: rich politicians of both political parties) would take a different approach to military decisions and actions if their kids were doing the fighting. These bills aren't that aren't that hardcore. They call for young people to be drafted into two years of national service, which is also an old idea. It was a national debate topic when I was in high school back in the '80s.

I'm not a fan of the idea, but I see their point. That said, there is no political will to ever make this happen.

[BlingBlingKilla]

kcchief you dickwad you stole my point exactly. Get your own material

[Ragone]

True or not.. i turned 27 last year.. and i'm happy to see that age range myself maybe it'll instill some discipline in our younger generation or at least teach them how to shoot.. err wait this maybe a bad idea after all

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

It has nothing to do with Bush and very little to do with the Iraq war. Charlie Rangel and others in his camp have been pushing for a draft for years.

Why? Since the end of the draft, the makeup of the U.S. armed forces is disproportionately poor and minority. The argument has been for many years that "the elite" (read: rich politicians of both political parties) would take a different approach to military decisions and actions if their kids were doing the fighting. These bills aren't that aren't that hardcore. They call for young people to be drafted into two years of national service, which is also an old idea. It was a national debate topic when I was in high school back in the '80s.

I'm not a fan of the idea, but I see their point. That said, there is no political will to ever make this happen.

The only problem is, well, the numbers don't bear it out. At least in combat positions, our military is overwhelmingly rural, white Southerners/Midwesterners. But I wouldn't expect Rangel to bother trying to research and see whether the facts match his perception.

[Leonidas]

Yesterday Hillary had a press conference calling for a military buildup. She didn't come right out and call for the draft, but asked for everything leading right up to it. This kills me. People who once protested the draft now suddenly think it's a great idea. Can you say hypocrite?

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

i'm moving to asia where the women are still pretty

pix pls, k thx





I know odd bump

[wade moore]

i heart SnDvls.

[Young Drachma]

The Dems are calling for a draft NOT to get more poor kids and minority kids in the military. It's precisely because they think that the only serving that they want to spread the burden a bit. Not that it makes me anymore inclined to support it, but...I think it was important to clarify that their position is more a poke at the fact that we're sending off the kids of people who are considered marginal losers in the economy, so that the kids of people who benefit from the current administration, can go to college and assume their positions at the helm of the hierarchy.

Not my position, theirs.

That said, draft whoever you want. I can't be drafted.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

The Dems are calling for a draft NOT to get more poor kids and minority kids in the military. It's precisely because they think that the only serving that they want to spread the burden a bit. Not that it makes me anymore inclined to support it, but...I think it was important to clarify that their position is more a poke at the fact that we're sending off the kids of people who are considered marginal losers in the economy, so that the kids of people who benefit from the current administration, can go to college and assume their positions at the helm of the hierarchy.

Not my position, theirs.

That said, draft whoever you want. I can't be drafted.

You've been waiting two years to say that, haven't you?

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by wade moore

i heart SnDvls.

thanks wade...good luck to you too

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by John Galt

You've been waiting two years to say that, haven't you?

hahahaha...

Actually, when they first started doing all the draft talk a few years ago...I went online to see if I could be drafted based on my classification of discharge from the Air Force. (I got out 87 days earlier than my date of separation in '02, because I had an acceptance letter to college and my base was overmanned to my career field, as was the Air Force)

Once I realized I couldn't, it made it easier not to care as much. lol

But now I'm 27, so I'm covered either way.

[Julio Riddols]

So in other words, you sat and waited for this thread to be reborn out of its 2 year slumber so you could say that. But you used your age for a ruse.

[ice4277]

I miss BlingBlingKilla.

Nevermind, no I don't.

[RendeR]

I think we should have a draft. better yet, I think every citezen age 18-21 should serve at least 2 years in the armed services, not counting training time. Military service develops personal confidence, a sense of duty and honor, and promotes a stronger sense of patriotism.

Its good for people.