← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Zoroaster

Dems to revive draft demand

Thread ID: 10369 | Posts: 24 | Started: 2003-10-09

Wayback Archive

Zoroaster [OP]

2003-10-09 14:07 | User Profile

[url]http://thehill.com/news/100703/draft.aspx[/url]

October 7, 2003

Dems to revive draft demand Rep. Rangel and Sen. Hollings see new mood on Iraq By Alexander Bolton

Key Democrats in the House and Senate will renew calls for the military draft as part of a critical barrage they are preparing to launch against President Bush over the length of troop deployments and the heavy reliance on reservists in Iraq.

Military experts outside Congress say there is a political advantage to be gained by Democrats who want to make the president squirm at a time a growing frustration among military families and other Americans over the occupation.

But they also say that there are legitimate policy grounds for re-instituting the draft, which was phased out after the Vietnam war.

patrick g. ryan
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) is a critic of troop deployment in Iraq.

Leading Democratic critics of the structure of troop deployment in the Middle East — proponents of a universal military draft — are Rep. Charles Rangel (N.Y.) and Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), the top Democrats on the House Ways and Means and Senate Commerce Committees, respectively.

Rangel has instructed his staff to conduct an in-depth review of the make-up of National Guard and armed services reserve units.

“My staff is researching now the number of people killed in action and wounded in action and where did they come from,” said Rangel. “It’s a profile of who are the National Guard people and what are their backgrounds and how fragile are their economic backgrounds.

“Are they people who thought they’d be spending a year in the combat area where they are fish in a barrel and there is no game plan at all?,” he asked rhetorically.

Such information could serve as a pillar for future Democratic attacks on the administration’s handling of reconstruction efforts, which have become more frequent and intense since Congress authorized the use of force last fall.

Rangel said many people had joined the National Guard for economic incentives, or to feel patriotic and march in Memorial Day parades, or to respond to floods or other emergencies but not to spend a year in Iraq.

Rangel said he wants to show the public that Americans being killed and wounded in Iraq are not unknown people or solely professional warriors, but ordinary citizens. Hollings declared that if that Rangel renews a push for the draft, “I’ll join him.”

In January, Rangel and Hollings introduced H.R. 163 in the House and S. 89 in the Senate, respectively. The legislation would re-institute a draft to compulsory military or alternative national service for men and women between the ages of 18 and 26 who are U.S. citizens or residents.

“I think it’s a combination of political move and more positively a wish to restore the concept of giving back to the community or serving the nation,” said Marcus Corbin, a senior analyst at the Center for Defense Information.

However, Corbin questioned the timing of renewed discussion of the draft, saying: “I don’t see it as something viable politically. Right now the feeling of not wanting troops in Iraq is as strong as it’s ever been with all the reserve mobilization. There seems to be growing resistance to the operation in Iraq.”

The issue could be more politically potent now, because in the intervening months since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime, large numbers of U.S. troops and reservists have been needed in Iraq to quell terrorism and maintain order.

Adding to difficulties for the administration, foreign allies have refused to contribute a meaningful number of soldiers to share the peacekeeping duties, as U.S. strategists anticipated at the start of the war.

As a result, tours of duty for American soldiers have been extended beyond expectations and reservists have spent more time in combat conditions then they or their families had anticipated.

Even top Republicans in Congress have grown critical of the Pentagon’s troop deployments.

Last week, House Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) called for a full review of the structure of U.S. armed forces. He expressed concern about the frequent use of the National Guard and Reserves.

“Brave Americans join the Guard and Reserves to make their skills available to our nation during times of crisis or particular need — not because they want to serve in the permanent forces,” he said. However, a spokeswoman for Blunt said he supports an all-volunteer force and would not support a draft.

Blunt’s disgruntlement shows that dissatisfaction with the heavy reliance on reserves is becoming a bipartisan issue that is gaining political traction, which could give Democrats an electoral weapon they are clearly ready to use.

Rangel said Republican lawmakers have privately expressed support for a draft but would not advocate it now because of fear of undermining the president.

“You see the problems they’re having in finding replacements for the troops that are over there,” said Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

“We can’t sustain a one front war for any length of time.,” said Murtha, who supports a draft but is not sure the time is ripe for its reintroduction. “You can make the deployment but you can’t sustain it because we have so many worldwide commitments, so I’m for the draft.

“There’s 128,000 [troops] over there right now. To sustain 128,000 American troops [you have to] have more National Guard and reserve troops than regular.”

He added, “I don’t think we can afford that. I’m talking about the complaints I’m getting right now from all reserves and guards about their lives being so disrupted. I’m getting major complaints from almost every major unit.”

Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said he does not think the Democrats’ support for the draft was politically motivated.

“I would acknowledge that there is a big problem with reserve operational tempo,” he said. “I do share the worries that motivate the congressmen about the draft.”

However, O’Hanlon and Corbin questioned the accuracy of Murtha’s estimate that it would require a force of 50 percent reserves to sustain the occupation in Iraq.

Jonathan Kaplan contributed to this report.

========================================================== The demand to reinstate the draft will gain momentum. The Zionist/NWO elites who run Washington envision an American military presence in the Middle East similar to that in Central Europe during the "Cold War."

The Cold War lasted roughtly 50 years and required 250,000 American troops. It will take at least that many troops, perhaps many more, to expand the war in the Middle East and to secure a greater Israel.

Look for the Zionist-controlled media to launch a kind of "Rally Round the Flag" campaign to gain lemming support for the draft.

-Z-

edward gibbon

2003-10-09 19:13 | User Profile

What Rangel, Hollins and Murtha have in common is that all three are combat veterans. They know damn well that very few enlist for the chance of danger or to test themselves. They are aware that all the tough talkers advocating violence in the Mideast and killing took great pain to avoid any exposure to harm on their part.

Jorge, a deserter during the war in Vietnam, has stated he had faced combat and raised twins, but nurturing twins was the more daunting task. Perhaps Jorge will talk his twins into enlisting or serving. Then they could tell their macho posturing father some harsh truths. "Bring 'em on" Bush would be forced to acknowledge that fear in battle was beyond what his dunce-like, but cunning, brain could imagine. The USA would be much more hesitant and thoughtful before commiting troops if the children of Bush, Cheney, Hastert and Gingrich were involved.

I want to see Jews enlisting instead of American the poor and see if they are willing to die for greater Israel I would like to remind this forum that the children of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and William Buckley escaped Vietnam while their fathers were loudly cheering for more US troops.[QUOTE]The demand to reinstate the draft will gain momentum. The Zionist/NWO elites who run Washington envision an American military presence in the Middle East similar to that in Central Europe during the "Cold War."

The Cold War lasted roughtly 50 years and required 250,000 American troops. It will take at least that many troops, perhaps many more, to expand the war in the Middle East and to secure a greater Israel.

Look for the Zionist-controlled media to launch a kind of "Rally Round the Flag" campaign to gain lemming support for the draft.[/QUOTE]I suspect this will be true.

Hilaire Belloc

2003-10-09 19:35 | User Profile

Well as Nicolo Machiavelli wrote in his "Art of War", a citizen willing to give up his most important duty(defending his country) to a mercenary(professional soldier) is also a citizen willing to sacrifice his precious freedoms to a tyrant. Recent events prove that he was right.

JAT

2003-10-09 20:46 | User Profile

I recall reading somewhere that Blacks are under-represented in military combat roles. The Blacks in the U.S. military tend to gravitate towards command and control, and logistics.

EDUMAKATEDMOFO

2003-10-09 21:01 | User Profile

Frankly, I think all this talk of a draft is alarmist. No one in the miltary, particularly the senior leadership, wants it and the day the draft is instituted is the day the wheels officially fall off the Iraqi misadventure. Surely the architects of the war know this. The problems with troop procurement in Iraq are rife, but until we hear news of inactive reservists being called up en masse I don't think a draft is imminent.

jesuisfier

2003-10-09 21:04 | User Profile

Revive the draft?? Are they looking to 'kill the best Gentiles' AGAIN!! Didn't we, of the European race, give enough already to these plutocrats and zionists!!??

MadScienceType

2003-10-09 23:08 | User Profile

Perhaps Jorge will talk his twins into enlisting or serving.

I was thinking the same thing myself.

While we're at it, let's grab Noelle Bush too. :tank:

Just make sure she's not anywhere near the morhpine.

far82sight

2003-10-11 06:57 | User Profile

LOL, they are running out of whites to fight. All they can get is the people who want to be in the rear with the gear.

Faust

2003-10-11 08:14 | User Profile

They are Scum!

[QUOTE]"The legislation would re-institute a draft to compulsory military or alternative national service for men and women between the ages of 18 and 26 who are U.S. citizens or residents." [/QUOTE]

The Neocons will have to give up on the War or starting drafting in order to keep it going.

[QUOTE]Neocons Admit They’ve Blown It – Is The Draft Next?

By Paul Craig Roberts

Do you remember the ridicule neocons heaped on critics who predicted a quagmire in Iraq?

Now neocons William Kristol and Robert Kagan are calling for more troops and more money - two more army divisions and another $60 billion to be exact.

“Next spring, if disaster looms,” they write, “it may be too late.” [Do What It Takes in Iraq Weekly Standard, by William Kristol and Robert Kagan, September 01, 2003]

John McCain, who experienced, but has forgotten, the Vietnam quagmire has taken the bait and is urging Bush to send more troops.

But there are no troops to send. The Pentagon doesn’t know where it is going to get the troops to carry on the occupation of Iraq at the present level of troop strength. The Associated Press reports that our combat troops are going to be saddled with back-to-back assignments to overseas hotspots.

Army officials are concerned that they are going to begin losing many sergeants and junior officers. Officers in infantry divisions are scrambling to find other military jobs that are not subject to overseas deployment.

Meanwhile, the handful of neocons who got our country into this growing mess are still talking about the U.S. invading other Middle Eastern countries as part of their program to deracinate Islam.

On top of it all, neocons want to take on North Korea, whose army outnumbers ours two to one.

Bush is trying to get other countries to send their soldiers to occupy Iraq. So far success has eluded him. Other countries don’t like to tell us “no” repeatedly. They say they have to have the cover of the UN, which the neocons intended to keep out. The UN would likely get in the way of the neocons’ plan to use Iraq as a staging ground for invading Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

Bush, however, is getting desperate. As our soldiers are pushed off the streets of Iraq and congregate behind hopefully impenetrable barricades, Bush might have to let the UN rescue him on its own terms.

The UN should not do so, however, without a firm understanding that it is not freeing up US troops for an attack on another Middle Eastern country.

If you think about it, you will realize that the neocons’ war plans are taking us back to the draft. There’s no way around it. Lacking sufficient military forces to occupy Iraq with its small population of 25 million, what would we do once neocons get us mired down in Iran or Egypt with their large populations?

Somebody needs to call a halt to this. It will not be the neocon press or Fox News that does it. These folks hide behind superpatriotism, but their real motive is to make the Middle East safe for Israel.

The alliance of neocons with white southern evangelicals is not enough to control US foreign policy. Sooner or later even the brain-dead are going to realize that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, was not a threat to us (until neocons got us mired down there), and had nothing to do with the events of September 11.

We spent a fortune attacking a country that had done us no harm, killing tens of thousands of its people, and giving the US a black eye as an aggressor that starts wars on the basis of lies and disinformation.

In the process, we also wrecked the political standing of our best ally, British PM Tony Blair. Two-thirds of the British people now believe that Blair intentionally made a false case for invading Iraq.

When the public tires of flag-waving and war propaganda, how will the Bush administration carry on with its pretense that we have made the world safe from terrorists by overthrowing Saddam Hussein?

Voters will begin to wonder why Bush doesn’t sack the neocons who have brought him such deep embarrassment. The longer Bush waits before sacking the neocons, the more voters will wonder why they voted for Bush.

Our situation in Iraq is already bad. It will become untenable if the Shiite majority decides to join in the effort to drive us out.

It doesn’t appear we will be able to buy off our adversaries with our money. Will we as a proud nation respond to Iraqi resistance by conscripting our sons and grandsons as targets for terrorists and guerillas?

While we are bogged down, what happens if something hits the fan in another part of the world?

Will we be forced to resort to nuclear weapons?

Many people much smarter than neocons gave these warnings in response to the neocons’ promise of “cakewalk.”

It is time Bush replaced his delusional neocon advisors with wise people of integrity.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Paul Craig Roberts is the author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

[url]http://www.vdare.com/roberts/blown_it.htm[/url]

[url]http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=10108[/url][/QUOTE]

Avalanche

2003-10-11 23:57 | User Profile

[QUOTE]EDUMAKATEDMOFO: but until we hear news of inactive reservists being called up en masse I don't think a draft is imminent.[/QUOTE]

Does growth from 27,025 in Oct. 2001 to 168,083 in March 2003 to 219,692 in May 2003 qualify as en masse? I think so!

June 2003 Reservists and Guard members are being deployed more frequently, and for longer periods, than ever before. As of May 28, there were 219,692 on active duty vs. just 83,746 a year ago, according to the Department of Defense. Some have been called up two or three times since the Sept. 11 attacks. And unlike Operation Desert Storm in 1991, when most returned after six months, many citizen soldiers in this war have been on duty for a year or longer. Those who have already returned home worry they'll be called up again to fight the war on terror or help with the reconstruction of Iraq. [url]http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/iraq/2003-06-08-reserve-cover_x.htm[/url]

March 2003 As of last week, 168,083 reserve and National Guard troops were on active duty, including thousands from Washington, Maryland and Virginia. They have guarded al Qaeda and Taliban detainees from Afghanistan at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and patrolled Iraq's no-fly zone. Now, area troops are getting ready to set up refugee camps in northern Iraq and to transport equipment to the front lines. In the Maryland National Guard, 3,000 of 8,000 members have been called up since Sept. 11, 2001. [url]http://george.loper.org/~george/archives/2003/Mar/987.html[/url]

As of Oct. 8, 2001, Chang is waiting to join the 27,025 reservists already called to active duty. Reservists numbers break down to the following: 9,087 called from the Army National Guard and Army Reserve; 2,250 from the Naval Reserve; 12,722 from Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve; 258 from the Marine Corps Reserve; and 2,708 from the Coast Guard Reserve. There are almost 1.3 million total active and inactive reservists and National Guard troops, according to the National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR), an agency within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs. [url]http://archive.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/10/09/011009hnreservists.xml[/url]

Conservative

2003-10-12 01:20 | User Profile

Since Bush Senior and Junior have distroyed Iraq, I believe that it is now their duty to rebuild it.

And I support the draft: since most Americans support all these foreign wars, they should be willing to have their offspring fight in them: they can't expect only OTHERS to do their dirty work.

Conservative

skemper

2003-10-12 01:32 | User Profile

[QUOTE=jesuisfier]Revive the draft?? Are they looking to 'kill the best Gentiles' AGAIN!! Didn't we, of the European race, give enough already to these plutocrats and zionists!!??[/QUOTE]

I was thinking the same thing. I say let they should round up all the illegals and tell them to serve or go home. If Bush wants them in the country, then they should do his dirty work. Or better still, why don't we send all illegals home and Bush could hire Mexicans as his mercenaries at a fraction of the cost it takes to pay Americans and let them do his dirty work in the Middle East and later build his pipeline.

I have another question. If there is a draft, what health problems does one have to have to get out of it? I have a son and daughter, both of whom I would not want to serve in these ZOG-sponsored wars. I have nothing against the military itself and consider it an honorable profession and if it was truly serving the interests of the people of the US I would have nothing against my son going into service. So, does anyone know how to act, show, or say before a draft board to convince the board that they are unfit for service?

Paragon

2003-10-12 07:37 | User Profile

Yeah right. The day they institute a levee en masse is the day there's a hauling of ass en masse to Canada. Being 18, I would be with them. I'm not fighting, killing, and dying for der ewige juden.

Sertorius

2003-10-12 07:57 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Now neocons William Kristol and Robert Kagan are calling for more troops and more money - two more army divisions and another $60 billion to be exact. [/QUOTE]

Fine. Let Billy and Bobby ask their co-tribalist to send two divisions from the I.D.F. to Iraq. Hell, why stop there? Send them as well, too.

Faust

2003-10-12 08:05 | User Profile

Paragon,

You are Right. I will pay for the gas! But I will add I think it somewhat unlikely they will re-institute a draft. But you never know!

I will have no part of our marxist government mad plans for NWO! And I will add No Father with any morals would let our soviet government take their daughter! So she can be a play-thing for the Mexicans and Negros fill the ranks of the non-fighting men of the US military.

BUSH=CLINTON=BUSH

Sertorius

2003-10-12 08:08 | User Profile

[QUOTE]I was thinking the same thing. I say let they should round up all the illegals and tell them to serve or go home. If Bush wants them in the country, then they should do his dirty work. Or better still, why don't we send all illegals home and Bush could hire Mexicans as his mercenaries at a fraction of the cost it takes to pay Americans and let them do his dirty work in the Middle East and later build his pipeline.[/QUOTE]

That's a capital idea, SKemper! That should appeal to the "capitalists" of the Wall Street Journal. I recall reading right after 9/11 that a number of illegals said they were thinking about leaving for fear of being drafted.

=========================================== On an unrelated note I understand the latest hero to the neo-cons, Schwarzenegger has a great way to solve the illegal problem in CA. Schwarzenegger's idea of dealing with the illegals is to give them U.S. citizenship, according to Fox New's Mort Kondracke. Fred Barnes' response was that Bush needed to do the same thing nationwide. They really are more concerned about Israel than the U.S.

Faust

2003-10-12 09:06 | User Profile

skemper,

Yes that is something to think about. [QUOTE]If there is a draft, what health problems does one have to have to get out of it? I have a son and daughter, both of whom I would not want to serve in these ZOG-sponsored wars.[/QUOTE]

Here is some information on such:

Facts on Military Service and Conscientious Objection [url]http://www.uua.org/uuawo/issues/respond/military.html[/url]

Are you Ready to be Drafted? [url]http://usmilitary.about.com/library/weekly/aa082599.htm[/url]

Searched the web for avoid draft friends Military Service health problems. [url]http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=avoid+draft+friends+Military+Service+health+problems&btnG=Google+Search[/url]

You see if any you find this book at the Library or used book store.

[QUOTE]IV-F : a guide to medical, psychiatric, and moral unfitness standards for military induction

by David Suttler.

New York : Grove Press, c1970. Note On cover: A guide to draft exemption. Bibliog. Includes bibliographical references.

UB343 .S87 [/QUOTE]

FightinWhitey#2

2003-10-12 09:28 | User Profile

I know its wrong, but I try to avoid hearing too much about this ZOG war. Is it true that now [B]National Guard[/B] troops are over there??

[QUOTE][I]"The legislation would re-institute a draft to compulsory military or alternative national service for men and [B]women[/B] between the ages of 18 and 26 who are U.S. citizens or residents."[/I][/QUOTE]

I would like to see the angry, mean-faced feminists out there on the desert frontlines with freepers, though. :evil:

Paragon

2003-10-12 17:05 | User Profile

I would love to see all of the performers in that "I Am An American" commercial on the frontlines myself.

Unfortunately, only white boys serve as canon fodder for the great American 'Republic.'

"The notion that blacks died disproportionately in Vietnam and continue to shoulder the burden of America's defense seems perfectly plausible, a perception in part fueled by the popular media. If there was ever a perfectly nice theory mugged by a gang of facts, however, this might be the one. Evidence clearly demonstrates that minorities are not over-represented in the armed forces, especially in the combat arms, and a disproportionate number of blacks did not die in Vietnam.

During the Vietnam War, blacks of enlistment age constituted about 13.5 percent of the total U.S. population, while 12.1 percent of the men killed in action were black. Therefore, blacks were not killed at greater rates than their share of the population. The rates were less - 13.5 percent of the population, while accounting for 12.1 percent of battle deaths in Vietnam. This is not to minimize the deaths of these men in any way or to regard them as mere statistics, but the notion that blacks died in Vietnam in disproportionate numbers is patently false.

The belief that blacks bear a disproportionate share of the burden in today' s armed forces has also been proven to be at considerable odds with the evidence. It is true they are in fact over-represented in the aggregate - blacks make up 22.4 percent of all enlisted personnel, compared to 12.4 percent of the civilian population. However, according to Defense Department statistics, blacks are actually underrepresented in combat positions. They only constitute 15 percent of the combat arms, such as infantry, armor and artillery. Only 10.6 percent of the Army's enlisted combat infantrymen are black. Judging from the statistics, if there is any group that has been discriminated against, it is the poor and working class whites who occupy the mainstay of combat billets in the U.S. military - and experience the highest mortality rates."

[url]http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=7119[/url]

I propose a draft revision that would require Jews and Freemasonic lodges to not only contribute their fair share to the Imperial Legions, but to also make up for their debt in previous wars. Unfortunately, this would probably require them to breed grunts for us, as I do not think there was a single American war where Jews and Freemasons did not weasel their way out of it en masse.

Walter E Kurtz

2003-10-12 21:28 | User Profile

Well...considering ZOG's deeply rooted belief that 110 lb teenaged girls make great combat troops, I figure they can draft all of the 18 year old girls in America if this draft is instituted. If I get a draft card in the mail, I will inform ZOG that there are literally millions of "girl power" teenaged female warriors who will answer the call to defend Israel, and that they should leave me the f*ck alone.

Bardamu

2003-10-13 00:08 | User Profile

There hasn't been a righteous war in this country since Poncho Villa.

Ragnar

2003-10-13 01:40 | User Profile

It won't happen. The last time America had a draft it also had a vigorous farm and industrial sector and the dollar was worth a great deal more. The draft still almost bankrupted the country.

The America of McDonalds and Walmart just don't have the economic firepower to mobilize much of anything. That 83 billion to rebuild Iraq is peanuts next to universal conscription -- did everyone hear how Wall Street reacted to the peanuts?

It will not happen.

EDUMAKATEDMOFO

2003-10-15 16:55 | User Profile

Avalanche--

The numbers you quote are of active reservists... inactive reservists called up in large numbers will be last option exhausted before a draft is considered.

Sinclair

2003-10-16 02:04 | User Profile

I don't really think the draft would do much good. I mean, it would be, as has been stated, vastly expensive, and what would more soldiers in Iraq do? Provide more targets, far as I can tell.

Why don't we conscript the children of the oil barons? See how much they support their damn war then.