Well Cynthia, stupid bitch, Kerry's advocating a massive expansion of the Army and SpecOps. Who is more likely to reinstate the draft?
By its very nature, SpecOps CANNOT be made up of conscripts. Only a highly motivated volunteer would stick with the rigorous training and the high-risk assignments once put in the field.
An unwilling conscript would gravely compromise the mission by a less than diligent attention to tasks. This is not to say, that once conscripted, some few of the draftees could have a flush of patriotism and bravery, and might go on to be some really outstanding SpecOps commandos. Maybe right up there with flying pigs. Which in other words, would be highly improbable.
Should Kerry somehow manage to gain the Presidency, it is a certainty that the draft, in the form of "national service", would be instituted. Most of the inductees would be put in VISTA (which would be something of a mockery of "Volunteers") or some version of the Peace Corps, with only a few unfortunates actually being put in uniform. This small corps of uniformed draftees may be counted upon to provide all the griping and protests needed to reinvigorate the "anti-war" peaceniks.
You're right -- Kerry's calling for more troops in Iraq (though he didn't mention it on Thurs night unless I missed it). That said, however, what is untrue in Tucker's column?? She says that the reason a lot of people worry about the draft is because there aren't enough soldiers and marines to fill the ranks in Iraq, along with our other current commitments, and also provide a force to back up "diplomacy" against Iran and North Korea (and elsewhere). Are you saying we DO have enough troops now? If you're not saying that, what exactly in her column do you disagree with?