Posted on 08/08/2004 5:48:24 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
There is no serious effort afoot to restore the draft, contrary to rumors circulating on the Internet. One Web site, bushdraft.com, claims to have "absolute proof that (President) Bush is making plans to reinstate the draft by the middle of 2005."
Like most rumors, these contain enough kernels of fact to sustain, if not a feeding frenzy, then a platter of tantalizing hors d'oeuvres for conspiracy enthusiasts:
Draft boards are indeed being maintained, but they have been routinely funded by Congress all along. The just-approved appropriation increases the previous year's spending on Selective Service by less than 1 percent.
Upon reaching their 18th birthday, American males are required to register with Selective Service.
Pending in subcommittee is a measure sponsored by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., that would reinstate mandatory service. It includes women. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C.
But virtually no one in Washington, including the bills' sponsors, gives them even a remote chance of becoming law.
Neither Bush nor Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry supports restoring the draft. Most members of the Senate and House have announced their opposition.
A pending defense authorization bill includes a proposal to increase the size of the Army by 30,000 and the Marine Corps by 9,000. Even if that provision is approved, there will be no need to reimpose the draft to fill the new slots.
The Pentagon also has voiced opposition to the draft. In a letter to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., Department of Defense General Counsel William J. Haynes Jr. wrote that the all-volunteer force has proven to be "more combat-effective and cost-efficient than a conscripted force."
"In general,volunteers are more motivated than draftees, resulting in greater personnel retention and unit stability," Haynes wrote. "Volunteers yield a more experienced and productive military force."
Perhaps the highest hurdle to resuming the draft is the certain knowledge that such a move would be lousy politics. Last fall, a Gallup poll conducted for CNN and USA Today concluded that 81 percent of Americans oppose a return to conscription, and 17 percent support the idea.
Nonetheless, a persistent minority continues to push for resumption of the draft in some form. Rangel and other supporters contend that the current system is inherently unfair, relying upon volunteers of lower socioeconomic standing while members of the privileged classes avoid being placed in harm's way.
Opponents of the draft argue that it was never fairly applied, that it always ensnared young men of modest means in disproportionate numbers while their wealthier contemporaries [including former President Bill Clinton] were able to work the system for deferments or exemptions. A draft "lottery" begun during the Vietnam War did little to correct the inequities.
Draft advocates also argue that existing forces have been stretched too thin by the deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. Some critics say extended tours of duty in combat zones and frequent call-ups of Reserve and National Guard troops have hurt morale.
"That's why we have a Guard and Reserve - for times of need," said Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-New Hartford, an opponent of resuming the draft. "Reserves should know they are subject to the call when the nation needs them."
More important to recruitment and retention, Boehlert said, is providing adequate pay and benefits for men and women in uniform.
ping
Other than that idiot Hegel and maybe grandstander McCain, no Republican is on record favoring a draft. Its absurd to give this any credibility whatsoever
If Kerry wins the election, military ranks will thin very fast.
The sheeple are so stupid. Two Democrats want to reinstate the draft and the anti-Bush forces blame Bush for it.
I have a friend who does not share my political opinions who swears this is going to happen and that Bush is pushing it. He wanted odds on it. I should have said yes.
This is one of the stupidest ideas anyone has had yet. Maybe if we were in a ground war against the rest of the world, but a volunteer military is far more motivated and seems to be getting the job done.
A fool and his money are soon parted.
I would have bet the bank there would be no draft.
These bills are the equivalent of a push poll. The Congressional Black Caucus, with the addition of Congressmen Moran and McDermott, as well as Senator Hollings are trying to stampede the college vote toward the Democrats. If there wasn't an "unjustified" war in Iraq we wouldn't need the draft. Young people are buying it. It's Bush's fault that a draft is needed. This has been flying around campuses since May.
E-mail as many young people as you can to let them know what the real story is. Bush and Rumsfeld do not want a draft - RATS do. If they want to get drafted - vote Democrat.
It was purely a Rat trick and I have seen the rumor posted to several apolitical forums and had to counter the BS.
This is how the Rats plan to win, lies as usual.
To restate, the only people pushing for a draft are Democrats. Remember this on election day, kids.
Please provide these 2 links when discussing how the draft is entirely a DEMOCRAT sponsored piece of legislation:
Bill Summary & Status for the 108th Congress
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.163:
H.R.163
Title: 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.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced
1/7/2003)
Cosponsors (14)
Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 1/7/2003
Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] - 1/28/2003
Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] - 5/19/2004
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 1/28/2003
Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] - 1/7/2003
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 1/28/2003
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] - 1/28/2003
Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] - 7/21/2004
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 1/28/2003
Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 1/7/2003
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 1/7/2003
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 1/28/2003
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 1/7/2003
Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] - 1/28/2003
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 1/28/2003(withdrawn - 6/21/2004)
Related Bills: S.89
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN00089:
S.89
Title: A bill 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.
Sponsor: Sen Hollings, Ernest F. [SC] (introduced
1/7/2003)
Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.R.163
Think they'd also prevent the Selective Service from running illegal alien, 'draft dodgers' to ground?
A 'draft' might be just what the doctor ordered to motivate a large portion of the illegal aliens to deport themselves.
Yes or no?
Yes indeed; the one cool-aid drinker I know is convinced that "it's all Bush's doing."
WASHINGTON, Aug. 5, 2004 --(DoD) ......radio program with Neil Boortz and NewsTalk Radio, Rumsfeld discussed military recruiting and retention. He said the Air Force and the Navy have no problem at all making their recruiting and retention goals. In the Army, active duty recruiting is going well, and the service will make its fiscal 2004 goal.
...With respect to retention, overall the military is doing well, Rumsfeld said. The retention for the active components is over 100 percent of target, and reserve component retention is about 99 percent.
In the National Guard, retention is almost 101 percent. DoD officials said that the re-enlistment rate is even higher for units back from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Rumsfeld said the military is studying recruiting and retention and will use all available authorities to attract the best people and keep those valuable personnel assets.
...Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker is working to rebalance the active and reserve components within the service and to increase the combat arm of the Army.
- More: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug2004/n08052004_2004080503.html
Commentary: New moves set stage for a stronger, combat-ready force
By R.L. Brownlee and Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker
WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Aug. 5, 2004) -- The last few weeks have seen a lot of discussion -- much of it confusing or inaccurate -- about the condition and future readiness of the U.S. Army. We owe it to our men and women in uniform, their families, and our country to get the facts right.
.....We are already growing our Army about as fast as we can. Our Soldiers are highly skilled and well trained, and it takes time and a significant training base to develop them. This deliberate growth will allow us to transform our Army in a way that gets at the heart of the problem, relieves the stress on the force, and does not sacrifice our Army's future. - More: http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=6235
- Military Update: Army finds no lack of recruits for infantry
Special to Stars and Stripes | August 7, 2004 | Tom Philpott
We don't need a draft. We need to stop sending our troops all over the world!
Which is exactly why those democrats are trying to reinstate the draft.
Your friend is a partisan idiot (politically)! Sorry for the harshness (I speak only of his political comprehension), but his thoughts are so uninformed.
The REAL UNWASHED TRUTH AS TO WHY THE DRAFT WILL NEVER BE REINSTAED IS... The Military does not want to have to try to train, and then promptly fail, mass numbers of draftees. Their budgets are stretched thin already. This would become very EXPENSIVE.
Today's volunteers KNOW what they want, are HIGHLY motivated, technologically savvy, and quickly trained into an effective combat force. THEY WANT TO BE IN THE MILITARY. THEY GET IT!!! Reference the Army's re-enlistment numbers beating expectations, in figures released last Thursday.
If a draft were reinstated, 50% of the dregs of society would fail, after an attempt at training. Lawsuits would be filed to lower the entrance requirements, when a huge number of worthless, spineless, liberal, moore-loving, Bush hating slime devils failed... after blaming the "current rules" for their own shortcomings. This is the "primordial soup" that is the building block of the dim party.
Of course, the Military says the same thing in a much more PC way of wording. The bottom line remains the same.
LLS
"We don't need a draft. We need to stop sending our troops all over the world"!
Yep, let's bring them home... and fight the Haji's on the streets of New York, L.A., San Farnscisco, Seattle, Washington, Newark, Memphis, Atlanta, Greensboro, Demoines, Hibbing, Denver, Leadville, Phoenix, Falgstaff etc??? Yep, bringing our troops home, and pulling them back from "all over the world", is exactly what we should do! NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LLS
Uhhh, "other purposes"?!? Excuse me, but SCREW YOU and your "other purposes"!
When the RATS sat something so ambiguous it can ONLY have an UNAMERICAN and Unconstitutional meaning. And the 'homeland security' phrase ain't to pleasing either.
I'll bet dollars to donuts these maggots foresee US Troops patrolling the streets - with arrest powers. And with the current wording of Posse Comitatus Act they could pull it off.
And as I recall reading, Klintoon pondered how he could use it!
(no wonder the RATS are pushing so hard to expand the Assault Weapon Ban, they want us completely unarmed)
Read yesterday's post about enlisted numbers.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=army
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.