Draft for the US Military is Coming

[Charlotte_native]

No, no... it's simply the supporters of the war that are ignoring it. Everyone that pays attention seems to be against it, except a few cult-like Bush followers. (which is shrinking by the day).

Oh I agree, but unfortunately it doesn't seem that enough people pay attention or give it much serious thought or plenty fall for the slogans and tirades about safety, fighting them over there, etc.

[Wordsmith]

I take it none of you have seen this:

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=...&s=lindorff

Not only is a war with Iran possible but when has Pres. Bush ever listened to reason before? His own father couldn't get him to change his mind about Rumsfeld, I certainly don't think it will happen now. Former President Bush (whom I admittedly respect) tried to intercede and fix his son's pathetic blundering only a few years ago and Bush the younger said no. But, I don't want to think about their family dynamic as it will only upset me (George II is not his father's favorite son by far.)

I agree with what's been stated above about Habeas Corpus being--for all intents and purposes--rendered null and void, ask anyone you meet for the most part if they even knew such a vote took place last week and you'll more than likely get a blank stare.

As for the draft, I'm a girl, terrifically small (5'1" and about 105 lbs.) and asthmatic, therefore, I probably wouldn't be called up and if I did have to contribute (and I think I would feel I should, for the sake of the guy next to me and not the President) I would more than likely end up in some office setting. Fine with me.

"This is the springtime of our lives..."-- Simon & Garfunkel

WS

[kayman]

I actually heard about that last year. Bush and those fools around ain't stupid because a draft would be political suicide.

[JDC]

I'm looking forward to the massive cultural war more than I am being drafted to fight in the Iraq war.

Seriously, let's get this guy out of office. Vote blue in '06 (and pray Diebold, ES&S or Sequoia aren't altering your ballot).

[MidTenn1]

I take it none of you have seen this:

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=...&s=lindorff

As for the draft, I'm a girl, terrifically small (5'1" and about 105 lbs.) and asthmatic, therefore, I probably wouldn't be called up and if I did have to contribute (and I think I would feel I should, for the sake of the guy next to me and not the President) I would more than likely end up in some office setting. Fine with me.

I'm a guy. And in 1969, at the height of the Vietnam War, I was 5'-2", 112 lbs and asthmatic. I still got drafted. I was the only one of the original 17 from my high school class who went to take our physical together, that actually received a draft notice.

They all had their 'ducks in a row' and I didn't. They had student deferments, statements from friendly Doctors, exemptions as ministers and one guy married a woman with two kids.

I did get rejected later for other totally unrelated medical issues. But, nevertheless, the draft was corrupt, unfair, racist and evil.

[Charlotteman]

metro I agree 100%--a war with Iran would be worse than Korea or Vietnam.

Surely the Bushies know a draft would be political suicide. So I think the administration actually starting a war with Iran is unlikely.

But here's what I find concerning---what if the fanatical leaders of Iran end up being even worse than Bush? What if THEY start a skirmish with the States? The ayatollahs probably think they would go to heaven for fighting the States militarily.

The inept administration wouldn't have the finesse to avert a conflict. Bush's total lack of foreign friends, as well as the current deplorable state of American foreign policy might mean we would have to go it alone.

And metro is probably right---I can see a military force of 750,000 new recruits needed to fight Iran. Plus all the war already going on....is this the begining of World War III? god save us all.....

[monsoon]

^Bush & Cheney have nothing to worry about after the 2006 election. Both are leaving office for good after 2008, so this 2 year period is the neo-Cons best chance to take down Iran. After that Iran will most likely have the bomb and the politics of the matter may make it impossible to attack Iran after 2008.

I don't believe the leaders of Iran as as fanitical as they are being made out to be. If you listen closely to what they have said they highly resent the USA's meddling in their business and in what it is doing in the middle east. Remember the current leadership is there as a direct result of the people having a revolt to throw out a Western supported dictator that terrorized the people. That was followed by a USA armed and supported Saddam waging war against them for 8 years where hundreds of thousands of Iranians were killed and many are still suffering in hospitals from chemical weapons that Saddam used against them. These weapons were made possible by the USA. Despite this, I don't they they are looking to start a war with anyone but if Bush tries to bomb their nuclear facilities, that will be the end result.

Iran does not have the ability to start a war directly with the USA. Nobody does really except for possibly Russia and China, and that would only be a war to end the world.

[Charlotteman]

If Iran and the States go to war it will be a catastrophe for both sides.

In Bush's famous axis of evil speech, he named Iraq, Iran and North Korea as the three principal nations in which the West and the States should monitor closely. I guess that was his point.

Or could it have been a thinly veiled metaphor which might have softened up everyone's ideas about wars in the(then) future? North Korea took the speech as an announcement of a future attack. The paranoid nation does nightly war drills, and fully expects an attack.

metro I hope you are wrong about the neo cons having two more years left in which to attack unfriendly nations. But I fear you might be correct. The North Koreans certainly believe it.

If wars are started in several theatres, as hinted by the axis of evil speech, 750,000 new recruits (draftees) might be a small percentage of the number needed for that kind of military effort.

[monsoon]

North Korea has announced yesterday that it is going to conduct its first ever nuclear bomb test. They had suspended their nuclear bomb program because the Clinton administration was willing to negotiate with them 1994 via Jimmy Carter. Once Bush started his saber rattling and made an unprovoked attack on one of the 3 axis of evil nations (Iraq), North Korea saw that it had no choice but to resume development of the bomb in 2001. BTW, the United States is technically still at a state of war with North Korea. The Korean war ended with a ceasefire, and the two countries have been staring down each other at the DMZ for the last 50+ years. Until Iraq, it was the most dangerous place for US servicemen to serve.

[dimebag1980]

I thought the draft cut-off was 36, not 26?

Either way, there will be no draft. But if there were, I'd volunteer to re-up. I don't mean I'd wait for my name to be called... I mean if they reinstated the draft, it means things have gotten extremely bad and I'd volunteer. I would be able to get right in having been a Reserve Soldier in the past, and I'd have no problem suiting back up.

The only problem is, they won't take me because of the physical shape I've allowed myself to get into. I once passed the physical with flying colors, but I can no longer pass the rigorous military physical. Their physical is much more thorough than the physical you have to play high school football, and their mental evaluations are strenuous as well. I probably wouldn't pass that either, but I have a better chance of passing the mental than the physical.

I urge North Korea to bring on their nuclear war... physical condition or not, I'll suit up for that. We need more people in this country who aren't afraid to fight, not more people who want to "talk" and who will back down to a threat from another nation. The United States of America does not back down. I don't care how many innocent lives have to be lost in nuclear war, we will prevail. There are casualties to every war.

There is part of me that hopes the draft is reinstated, and that draft dodgers are hunted down and forced to serve. I think it would serve everyone right. Every American citizen of sound mind and body should have to serve in our Armed Forces at some point in his/her life.

[Gusterfell]

I urge North Korea to bring on their nuclear war... physical condition or not, I'll suit up for that. We need more people in this country who aren't afraid to fight, not more people who want to "talk" and who will back down to a threat from another nation. The United States of America does not back down. I don't care how many innocent lives have to be lost in nuclear war, we will prevail. There are casualties to every war.

So why aren't you in Iraq now? They're allowing willing recruits in their forties and even fifties to sign up, so I'm sure they wouldn't let your condition stop you.

It is not worth going to war to stop threats created by our own belligerent administration. Actually calling for that war, saying "bring it on," is fascism. War is peace, and who cares how many innocent children have to die.

[monsoon]

^The maximum age for for someone to be elegible to join the army was just raised to 42.

[Gusterfell]

^The maximum age for for someone to be elegible to join the army was just raised to 42.

Correct, but there are people much older than that in Iraq, working for civilian contractors, and doing jobs that would have been handled by military personnel until very recently. Just about anyone who wants to be there can be, and anyone who supports the war, especially to the point of hoping for a draft and expansion of war, should be there.

[Snowguy716]

Afraid to fight, or refuse to fight?

Again, I ask you... what are we fighting for? The right to torture those we accuse of being terrorists? The removal of habeus corpus? Non-existent WMDs? To keep the rich rich and the poor poor? Ensuring that our children and grandchildren are around pay for our debts? Making sure that Halliburton and ExxonMobile have good profits. (I mean, your'e from Louisiana... ExxonMobile has some real power down there... my aunt is a lawyer for them.)

No. I won't fight for that. We shouldn't even be having this conversation. If the Bush administration had actually done their job from the beginning, 9/11 may never have happened and we wouldn't be in this position to begin with.

But instead, we have the most incompetent, stubborn idiot that we've ever had for president that ignores intelligence and then uses national tragedies to garner public support and then start wars based on lies and deceptions. Screw that... this country deserves better... and we'll get it beginning in November.

[Pillsbury]

I thought the draft cut-off was 36, not 26?

Either way, there will be no draft. But if there were, I'd volunteer to re-up. I don't mean I'd wait for my name to be called... I mean if they reinstated the draft, it means things have gotten extremely bad and I'd volunteer. I would be able to get right in having been a Reserve Soldier in the past, and I'd have no problem suiting back up.

The only problem is, they won't take me because of the physical shape I've allowed myself to get into. I once passed the physical with flying colors, but I can no longer pass the rigorous military physical. Their physical is much more thorough than the physical you have to play high school football, and their mental evaluations are strenuous as well. I probably wouldn't pass that either, but I have a better chance of passing the mental than the physical.

I urge North Korea to bring on their nuclear war... physical condition or not, I'll suit up for that. We need more people in this country who aren't afraid to fight, not more people who want to "talk" and who will back down to a threat from another nation. The United States of America does not back down. I don't care how many innocent lives have to be lost in nuclear war, we will prevail. There are casualties to every war.

There is part of me that hopes the draft is reinstated, and that draft dodgers are hunted down and forced to serve. I think it would serve everyone right. Every American citizen of sound mind and body should have to serve in our Armed Forces at some point in his/her life.

Not trying to attack your post, but why is that everyone who has actually been to war wants to shield their children and grandchildren from that part of life? Why is that we're being a lead by a bunch of draft dodgers into a war that no one in this country wants to start. It's not cowardice---it's simply analyzing the situation and determining what is best for the United States and for the world. Sometimes war is necessary and in those cases it is the duty of all Americans to stand up for our country. This is not one of those necessary scenarios.

War is bad. My grandfather still wakes up in the middle of the night after having nightmares of Vietnam. War changes you and I'm sure anyone who was ever been in combat would agree with me. I have respect for the men and women we have serving. They form the greatest military in the world and I'm proud of them (and secretly wonder how I would do in combat). But these wars now are different. There is such hositility in the world directed toward this country. It's been building for the last 25 years or so--and no George Bush is not the cause of it but he hasn't exactly made any new friends since he's been leading us--and for that reason we lack the moral leadership in the eyes of the world that we once commanded. Gone are the days when America could take action and at least know that the world was on our side. We are at our lowest power in a century.

Futhermore, I still say it: let everyone who is gunning for this war send one of their kids or, better yet, go themselves to the trenches of war. Let them come back with missing limbs; let them make life or death choices that will alter their lives forever; let them fight this war. I hereby make a call that every true patriotic American (i.e., Republican Americans, because Democrats are really flag-burning Communists) enlist in the military to fight the evil-doers of the world.

[runawayjim]

Futhermore, I still say it: let everyone who is gunning for this war send one of their kids or, better yet, go themselves to the trenches of war. Let them come back with missing limbs; let them make life or death choices that will alter their lives forever; let them fight this war. I hereby make a call that every true patriotic American (i.e., Republican Americans, because Democrats are really flag-burning Communists) enlist in the military to fight the evil-doers of the world.

here here!

[JDC]

Futhermore, I still say it: let everyone who is gunning for this war send one of their kids or, better yet, go themselves to the trenches of war. Let them come back with missing limbs; let them make life or death choices that will alter their lives forever; let them fight this war. I hereby make a call that every true patriotic American (i.e., Republican Americans, because Democrats are really flag-burning Communists) enlist in the military to fight the evil-doers of the world.

...or at least get one of those "Support our Troops" ribbon things and slap it on your SUV!

[Pillsbury]

^ I like that.

[Wordsmith]

I'm a guy. And in 1969, at the height of the Vietnam War, I was 5'-2", 112 lbs and asthmatic. I still got drafted. I was the only one of the original 17 from my high school class who went to take our physical together, that actually received a draft notice.

They all had their 'ducks in a row' and I didn't. They had student deferments, statements from friendly Doctors, exemptions as ministers and one guy married a woman with two kids.

I did get rejected later for other totally unrelated medical issues. But, nevertheless, the draft was corrupt, unfair, racist and evil.

Well, at least I'm a girl. In the event of WWIII, and they brought back the WAVES (I know, highly unlikely, or perhaps just wishful thinking) I'd volunteer in a heartbeat. Though I wouldn't truly agree with such a war (as I feel we are already on the wrong side), serving in the WAVES seems like such a great opportunity.

And if the WAVES aren't available this time around, I'd go for the American Red Cross (though they really have to get a handle on all the corruption that showed up after Hurrican Katrina, sheesh.)

WS

[monsoon]

In the days of the WAVES women were not allowed to serve in the military, so they had the associated organizations such as the WAVES. These days women can directly join the Navy or any of the other branches of the military so something such as that would not be necessary. Women are not allowed to serve on submarines but can and do serve almost any other ship.

If the draft is brought back to life, most likely women would not be called up because women are not allowed to serve in combat troops which is the primary purpose of the draft. i.e. provide bodies for combat.

[dimebag1980]

So why aren't you in Iraq now? They're allowing willing recruits in their forties and even fifties to sign up, so I'm sure they wouldn't let your condition stop you.

It is not worth going to war to stop threats created by our own belligerent administration. Actually calling for that war, saying "bring it on," is fascism. War is peace, and who cares how many innocent children have to die.

Yes, they most certainly will allow my condition to stop me. They are taking people into their 40s (not 50s) who are healthy. What makes you think someone who is uinhealthy would be allowed to serve? If you fail the physical, you don't make it.

[dimebag1980]

Not trying to attack your post, but why is that everyone who has actually been to war wants to shield their children and grandchildren from that part of life? Why is that we're being a lead by a bunch of draft dodgers into a war that no one in this country wants to start. It's not cowardice---it's simply analyzing the situation and determining what is best for the United States and for the world. Sometimes war is necessary and in those cases it is the duty of all Americans to stand up for our country. This is not one of those necessary scenarios.

War is bad. My grandfather still wakes up in the middle of the night after having nightmares of Vietnam. War changes you and I'm sure anyone who was ever been in combat would agree with me. I have respect for the men and women we have serving. They form the greatest military in the world and I'm proud of them (and secretly wonder how I would do in combat). But these wars now are different. There is such hositility in the world directed toward this country. It's been building for the last 25 years or so--and no George Bush is not the cause of it but he hasn't exactly made any new friends since he's been leading us--and for that reason we lack the moral leadership in the eyes of the world that we once commanded. Gone are the days when America could take action and at least know that the world was on our side. We are at our lowest power in a century.

Futhermore, I still say it: let everyone who is gunning for this war send one of their kids or, better yet, go themselves to the trenches of war. Let them come back with missing limbs; let them make life or death choices that will alter their lives forever; let them fight this war. I hereby make a call that every true patriotic American (i.e., Republican Americans, because Democrats are really flag-burning Communists) enlist in the military to fight the evil-doers of the world.

There is only one reason why I never fought in a war, and that is because there was no war going on while I was in. And I beg your pardon, but "everyone who has actually been to war wants to shield their children and grandchildren from that part of life" is not true at all. Most of my superiors in both the military and the corporate world have fought in one war or another, and most of them would send their own children into war. I knew many officers in the military who had served in wartime and still urged their sons and daughters to enlist. Why wouldn't they? If someone can serve in the United States Armed Forces to defend their country, they should. And they should urge their children and grandchildren to do so. There are so many families in this country where the men, their fathers and grandfathers, and their children have served. Just because some people were screwed up in Vietnam doesn't mean that people who have fought in other wars wouldn't want their children or grandchildren to fight. Vietnam was unlike any other war... and that generation was different than other wartime generations as well. Of course many of those people wouldn't push war on their worst enemies, but many veterans of other wars would.

[monsoon]

..... Just because some people were screwed up in Vietnam doesn't mean that people who have fought in other wars wouldn't want their children or grandchildren to fight. Vietnam was unlike any other war... and that generation was different than other wartime generations as well. Of course many of those people wouldn't push war on their worst enemies, but many veterans of other wars would.

65,000 dead and 250,000 injured isn't just a few people. The average age of the Vietnam soldier was 19 and most faced combat and the spector of death every day. What happened in that war should not be dismissed so easily and my experience with the families that I knew that went off to that war is they would never want a loved one to be put into the same circumstances.

Likewise the people that I knew that fought in the Korean war including my father, my uncles who fought in WWII and my grandfather who was in the trenches of Europe during WWI all have said many many times that war is an unrelenting hell and they would never ever wish for anyone to be faced with the same situation, not their enemies, not their friends, and certainly not their loved ones. The only ones that I have ever heard advocate for war are ones who have never been in one.

[runawayjim]

There is only one reason why I never fought in a war, and that is because there was no war going on while I was in. And I beg your pardon, but "everyone who has actually been to war wants to shield their children and grandchildren from that part of life" is not true at all. Most of my superiors in both the military and the corporate world have fought in one war or another, and most of them would send their own children into war. I knew many officers in the military who had served in wartime and still urged their sons and daughters to enlist. Why wouldn't they? If someone can serve in the United States Armed Forces to defend their country, they should. And they should urge their children and grandchildren to do so. There are so many families in this country where the men, their fathers and grandfathers, and their children have served. Just because some people were screwed up in Vietnam doesn't mean that people who have fought in other wars wouldn't want their children or grandchildren to fight. Vietnam was unlike any other war... and that generation was different than other wartime generations as well. Of course many of those people wouldn't push war on their worst enemies, but many veterans of other wars would.

so if vietnam was different... the current war is quite similar. a war against iran would be teh same thing as the war against iraq. they've done nothing to us. they have a right to nuclear weapons if we do. end of story. the president over there is pretty looney, but he's not stupid.

EDIT: i should add that my grandfather was in WWII. while he was alive, i had not once heard him speak of his service. i didn't know much about it until after he died and i learned that from my grandmother. he shared other aspects of his life... like working for a liquor distributor, but never his time in the army.

[Wordsmith]

In the days of the WAVES women were not allowed to serve in the military, so they had the associated organizations such as the WAVES. These days women can directly join the Navy or any of the other branches of the military so something such as that would not be necessary. Women are not allowed to serve on submarines but can and do serve almost any other ship.

If the draft is brought back to life, most likely women would not be called up because women are not allowed to serve in combat troops which is the primary purpose of the draft. i.e. provide bodies for combat.

I think of what you stated whenever I reason to myself that they aren't coming back. But, then, I reason, the main cause for building up the female service branches was to release their male counterparts from domestic duties and make them available to serve overseas. While the actual WAVES probably wouldn't come back, women might still be recruited primarily to serve that purpose.

WS