Slave Mentality ...

ViRedd

New Member
The idea of a Draft can only be the love-child of a totalitarian. When a government institutes a draft, government is in essence saying: "You there, you have no right to your own being. The State superceeds the individule." Conversely, in a truely free society, all military is voluntary. If wars are precieved to be unjust by the citizenry, then only a small minority would volunteer and the war woudn't be fought.

Vi


Rep. Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 under a bill the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee says he will introduce next year.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said Sunday he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars.

"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," Rangel said.

Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War who has unsuccessfully sponsored legislation on conscription in the past, has said the all-volunteer military disproportionately puts the burden of war on minorities and lower-income families.

Rangel said he will propose a measure early next year. While he said he is serious about the proposal, there is little evident support among the public or lawmakers for it.

In 2003, Rangel proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. It was defeated 402-2 the following year. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.

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," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq. "I think to do so is hypocritical."

Sen. Lindsey Graham, 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, the next chairman of the House tax-writing 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, 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.
 

bigballin007

New Member
Well if this is true I will be the first to refuse to allow myself or my children to sign up as a terrorist agent as that what the government of the USA is and in no way will I or my children support a terrorist organization.
Bush is a criminal more than anyone single person viewing this post is no matter what they have done unless they have killed a hundred thousand innocent people as Bush has done.

Bush should be charged with war crimes and I hope that the world steps in and tortures him the way he has tortured millions of innocent people.
 

ViRedd

New Member
Millions have been slaughtered by their own governments over the past 100 years. Government is force.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
Millions have been slaughtered by their own governments over the past 100 years. Government is force.

Vi
The point Rangle was making was If every son had to do military service then maybe wars would not come so easy! The problem we all know with that is: Sons of influence don't do combat through draft status. All sons of influence that have done combat duty that I can think of, have volunteered, unlike our President, who enjoyed his fathers influence and avoided combat and most of his reserve duty at home!
 

medicineman

New Member
Med ...

Would you be for the draft, or against it?

Vi
That's a hard one! If it meant that every mothers son that was physically and mentally fit, had to go for a 2 year period and no amount of influence could let them beg out, Maybe! But the greater adversity I have, is war itself! If there were no wars, we'd need no standing Military at all. Just some National guard units to help out in National disasters like Katrina. Then an all volunteer system would be fine. In Isreal, everyone has a term owed to the Govt. If you are unlucky, you get to fight in one of the many wars they have. I'm opposed to solution by war. If we were attacked, Not by some radical nut jobs like 911, but really attacked like a nuke at a port like long beach, then I'd be for the scorched earth policy of whomever attacked, and I'm not lessening the 911 thing, but we attacked the wrong guys! From every thing I've read or seen, they let Osama get away when they pulled out of the Bora-Bora area. They had him cornered and just pulled out. Now I'm not a big conspiracy addict, but the ties with the Bush family certainly raises an eyebrow! I won't go into the Bush blew up the twin towers theory so his friends could make a killing on war profiteering, but it's out there! So to answer your question, I don't think I'd vote for it!
 

medicineman

New Member
Well if this is true I will be the first to refuse to allow myself or my children to sign up as a terrorist agent as that what the government of the USA is and in no way will I or my children support a terrorist organization.
Bush is a criminal more than anyone single person viewing this post is no matter what they have done unless they have killed a hundred thousand innocent people as Bush has done.

Bush should be charged with war crimes and I hope that the world steps in and tortures him the way he has tortured millions of innocent people.
I'm with ya on this one!
 
Top