Posted on 12/22/2006 7:14:48 PM PST by blam
US tests call-up system but denies return to conscription
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Saturday December 23, 2006
The Guardian (UK)
The Bush administration is planning a test run of America's emergency military call-up, stoking speculation about a return to a draft at a time when the White House is considering sending more troops to Iraq. The secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, provided further evidence that the administration was leaning towards sending more troops to Iraq, acknowledging the high financial and human toll of the war so far, and indicating there would be further costs to bear.
"A lot has been sacrificed for Iraq, a lot has been invested in Iraq," she told the Associated Press on Thursday. "But the president wouldn't ask for the continued sacrifice, the continued investment if he did not believe, and in fact I believe as well, that we can in fact succeed and in fact that it's imperative we succeed."
As Ms Rice spoke, the Selective Service System, the government agency charged with providing troops to the military in an emergency, said it was preparing its first readiness exercise since 1998.
Officials were adamant there were no plans to bring back conscription. Planning for the call-up exercise is to begin in mid-2007, and the exercise is tentatively scheduled to take place in 2009.
But fears about a draft have flared periodically during the Iraq war. On Thursday, they were reignited when Jim Nicholson, the secretary for veteran affairs, said he believed "society would benefit" if the US were to bring back the draft.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
I doubt that, they are just testing the system as they say.
Why should the half who answer the call fight and die for the half that refuses?
It's quite a catch.
It was no big deal when they tested it in 1998.
I've never heard of them testing this system before.
You say it was done in 1998?
To ensure freedom for 1/2 you have to defend it for the other 1/2, which means those that are willing will have to defend those that aren't.
A better question is, imho, who would you rather have covering your back going into a fight? The one who knew what he was getting into but signed on anyway or the one who doesn't want to be there but was drafted?
For me, there's no contest.
I personally wouldn't want to fight the WoT for "Eminems" and their gangster rap, America's loose daughters flashing their boobs at spring break, and the stubble-faced left-wing bloggers who rant against everything that I stand for.
Get those people motivated... transform them into something worthy, and I will be right there leading them. (Good luck with that task...)
Yes.
Also if you read in the article down near the bottom you'll see where we did away with the draft but ever since 1980 all males of age had to register for the draft. The system has been "tested" every few years since then.
It's only a big deal now because the MSM thinks it should be so.
There are a lot of people that cops and firemen probably think don't deserve protecting too. We in the military (I'm a retiree) swore to protect the nation not just the parts we like.
Thanks. Here is a link to that article.
Very good example. I can't understand why they bother in certain cities.
I can save them some effort. If it takes them 3 years to prepare for the test, readiness is nil.
Now if the government would mail me a check for 10% of what they would have spent on the exercise, the taxpayers will come out way ahead.
I don't think Bush would bring back the draft. He's stated multiple times that he won't do that.
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.