Posted on 11/19/2006 10:30:36 AM PST by Brilliant
A senior House Democrat said Sunday he will introduce legislation to reinstate the military draft, asserting that current troop levels are insufficient to sustain possible challenges against Iran, North Korea and Iraq.
"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," said Rep. Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y.
Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War who has unsuccessfully sponsored legislation on conscription in the past, said he will propose the measure early next year.
At a time when some lawmakers are urging the military to send more troops to Iraq, "I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft," he said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.
"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.
Rangel, incoming chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.
"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," Rangel said.
He said having a draft would not necessarily mean everyone called to duty would have to serve. Instead, "young people (would) commit themselves to a couple of years in service to this great republic, whether it's our seaports, our airports, in schools, in hospitals," with a promise of educational benefits at the end of service.
Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."
Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.
Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."
Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.
The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 — now about 16 million — from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.
Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.
I could support a draft...only if the name is changed to the Charles Rangel National Service Act.
heh-heh
It lasted about as long as the regular (and highly attended) "Friday afternoon strip shows at the O'Club". From what I was told, the new CG's wife made the mistake of visiting the O'Club on a Friday afternoon in '78. That did it for the Friday afternoon festivities.
Such fond memories...and who could forget the "Beaumont for Lunch Bunch", featuring strippers during the noon hour.
By the time I got to Germany in '77, the rugs & bedspreads had run out.
I would have called for volunteers first, but in any event the Congress should have fulfilled its responsibility "to raise and support Armies" of sufficient size and power to conquer the enemy territories in toto and to allow their reconstruction as civilized entities.
It is almost certain that this would have required a draft. If so, it should have been in place by December 1, 2001 at the latest.
It's much too late, now.
Instead, "young people (would) commit themselves to a couple of years in service to this great republic,
How surprising; the rats launch a "Bush plans to bring back the draft" scare during the 2004 election, and now when they have the Senate and the House, they're pushing for the very thing they claimed to be against.
What can you expect from the dems.
The point I wanted to make is that liberal socialists have a tendency of being the most tyrannical once they are given authority. They had a tast of authority during the Clinton regieme and liked it. Remember how they behaved during the Balkans, and Branch Davidian siege. The mechanics are somewhat dangerous in that it might empower them to be much more heinous than we've ever witnessed. Philosophically, the political left has pretended to be peace loving for the last 40 years. IMHO, they are the most likely to commit atrocities on an international level.
Nowadays, if you cant raise the requisite volunteer army,you should scale back your mission.
He may be right - although I'm still on Ritilan at age 50. I've been indocrinated to be believe that the second coming is here- give me a break. How many of our kids are on this s^)t? They will believe anything. Shame on the parents that allow it.
It seemed to work fairly well in WWI and WWII, didn't it? Last time I checked, neither of my grandfathers considered themselves "slave soldiers" when they were sent overseas.
Stupid is as....stupid is.
So I can clarify the point I was trying to make:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1388465/posts
Akbar Volunteered for U.S. Military Service. The Draft would help to ensure more like akbar would be put into the U.S. Miltary.
Not a good prospect for the Military, I expect.
FReegards, D2
The military's job is to defend the nation and to win wars.
The size and scope of the world war which is surely coming cannot be fought with volunteers alone. We can barely afford the tiny Army and Marine Corps we maintain now. We certainly cannot deploy 80-100 divisions to Asia for 10-15 years with volunteers.
Oh, yes - I forgot - we can do it with 300 000 males because we will fight on an information-centric battlefield and they'll all have laptops.
Sorry, but that model is taking a hit now from which it will never recover.
Nowadays, if you cant raise the requisite volunteer army,you should scale back your mission.
But that won't prevent me from messing around with it -In a FREE COUNTRY, if you cant raise the requisite volunteer army,you should scale back your mission.
We have no control over the scale of the mission.
The fantasy that we do is what's brought the Iraq expedition to grief.
So a black man wants to bring back a form of slavery.
Their time most assuredly belongs to them, not to the government.
Or, in a FREE COUNTRY, if you can't raise the requisite volunteer army, you will cease to be free.
Do you think we could have conquered Germany and Japan with volunteers? If so, you are out of your mind.
I still contend that somewhere in him, he thinks this would save a generation of young black men, who, right now, are unreachable. He just doesn't want to admit it.
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.