Posted on 12/22/2006 8:11:59 AM PST by TexKat
Dec. 22 - The Selective Service System is making plans to test its draft machinery in case Congress and President Bush need it, even though the White House says it doesn't want to bring back the draft.
The agency is planning a comprehensive test -- not run since 1998 -- of its military draft systems, a Selective Service official said.
The test itself would not likely occur until 2009.
Scott Campbell, the service's director for operations and chief information officer, cautioned that the "readiness exercise" does not mean the agency is gearing up to resume the draft.
"We're kind of like a fire extinguisher. We sit on a shelf," Campbell told The Associated Press. "Unless the president and Congress get together and say, 'Turn the machine on' ... we're still on the shelf."
Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson prompted speculation about the draft Thursday when he told reporters in New York that "society would benefit" if the U.S. were to bring back the draft. Later he issued a statement saying he does not support reinstituting a draft.
The administration has for years forcefully opposed bringing back the draft, and the White House said Thursday that policy has not changed and no proposal to reinstate the draft is being considered.
The "readiness exercise" would test the system that randomly chooses draftees by birth date and its network of appeal boards that decide how to deal with conscientious objectors and others who want to delay reporting for duty, Campbell said.
(Excerpt) Read more at abclocal.go.com ...
How are you? How is your dear son?
Thank you
You have seen nothing yet. Just wait until those digits that read "98" last time, roll over to "00" this time. Congress will have to spend $3 Billion to fix it. When I registered for Selective Service many decades ago, it was only two digits for the year. Just sayin'. This never got Y2K tested and certified.
a comprehensive test -- not run since 1998"...when Democrat Bill Clinton was in office." There, fixed it.
The whole Selective Service machine should be dismantled. The notion of using forcibly conscripted troops to fight for "freedom" is too preposterous for words. Any form of military draft should be viewed as a serious human rights violation. The very existence of our "just in case" Selective Service system is a statement that we are just fine with human rights violations when they're expedient for us.
Do me a favor...thank your two boys for their service for me.
I will, and they will say your welcome!
Ping!
It's because of Vietnam Korea etc that made us waste a trillion dollars taking down communism in the 80's.
Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays!
My son is fine, he is gearing up for the next tour which is right around the corner.
How is your hubby, hope he and you are both fine.
Your son would not be vulnerable until he is 20.
http://www.sss.gov/viet.htm
The bone I have to pick with SS is that we do not register women as we do men.
The Bush administration's VA Secretary, Jim Nicholson, just said that our society would benefit from "replacing the all-volunteer force with a tough draft purged of the deferments that allowed many to avoid service in Vietnam." Meanehile, Mark Krikorian wants a draft so we have a bigger military to fight more awesome wars. And Charlie Rangel wants a draft so we have a more diverse military that will make it nearly politically impossible to fight any wars.
Meanwhile, I don't want a draft because, unlike Krikorian, Rangel, and Nicholson, my son would actually be vulnerable to it, so such a plan looks less like an awesome political theory abstraction and more like my son's life would be in the hands of the fools and knaves currently running our government.
I didn't feel this way about national service a few years ago, incidentally. But one effect of the Iraq War was to shred any illusions that our leaders are wise and prudent and take seriously the lives entrusted to their care.
For me that illusion was shredded back in the 60s.
I was willing to give this bunch the benefit of the doubt, thinking they knew something they couldn't tell me. They didn't and I gave up on them over the last year. Maybe the new sheriff at the Pentagon will bring me, and others, back?
Thanks for the info but at the link you provided it states:
"Under the current draft law, a college student can have his induction postponed only until the end of the current semester. A senior can be postponed until the end of the academic year."
If he's 18 when he enters college next September and the draft is instituted shortly thereafter...he can be inducted at the end of his current semester.
I think you are right. If Mr. Steyn is wrong and we are surprised to see the Europeans physically resist the Islamofascists' plans to take over the Continent, then the U.S. would have no choice but to immediately build up a larger military force to ready ourselves, and, alas, help out the Europeans again. I have no problem with helping the U.K. (that country fights) but France, Belgium, etc. Yuck.
I myself see nothing wrong with every able male conscripted to serve his country in some capacity. Real pacifists can serve as medics or in some other non-combat capacity.
Or can you envision any system whereby the government (run by fools or wise men, it's an imperfect world) would not be entrusted with the duty to protect this nation? And--and it's a big "and"--has to find a way whereby it militarily protects the United States?
Just wondering.
If we had a government that wasn't dominated by liars and fools, and the President had combat experience in the military, I'd be content with an SS system in which numbers were randomly assigned, like the system in effect during the VietNam war.
Or can you envision any system whereby the government (run by fools or wise men, it's an imperfect world) would not be entrusted with the duty to protect this nation?
Of course not.
And--and it's a big "and"--has to find a way whereby it militarily protects the United States?
Military protection is fine so long as it's a last resort. I prefer to improve relations with other countries by travel, trade, cultural exchanges, sporting events, the United Nations, etc. Such means are much less expensive than military options. The Republicans' failure to normalize U.S.relations with Cuba is the best counter-example I can think of.
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.