Democrat wants to reinstate the DRAFT - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-02-2003, 06:05 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 06:36 AM
Well as far as the two front war senerio goes, lets look at some numbers.

US military intervention in Iraq at most will have 250,000 troops involved from all four services and the reserves.

Total number of US personal on active duty and in the reserves is 2.6 million. I should mention though that most of the 250,000 troops going to Iraq and most of the 2.6 million personal serving in the military are not "trigger pullers" or combat troops. Most are support personal who are vital to maintaining and supporting soldiers in combat. Without them it would be impossible to fight a war even for an hour!

War in Iraq in terms of ground combat troops will at most involve 4 US Army divisions and 1 Marine MEF.

A defensive war against North Korea will involve 3 US Army Divisions and perhaps another Marine MEF.

There are a total of 10 US Army Divisions and 3 Marine MEFS on active Duty. The US Army National Guard and Reserve have another 10 divisions in addition to non-attached smaller Brigades and Battalions. There is also 1 Marine MEF in the Marine reserve.

But remember many reserve combat units after they are mobilize often require extensive training lasting months before they are considered combat ready. But depending on the circumstances they could be deployed without that training, but that would only be done in the most extreme situations. Support personal due to the different nature of their job are ready to go help the active force at a moments notice.

The US Airforce and Navy are the largest in the world and in terms of combat aircraft dwarf the number of Aircraft that North Korea and Iraq have. Both North Korea and Iraq do not have Naval forces of significant size. Right now it looks like any war in Iraq will involve about 1,000 Airforce, Naval, and Marine Combat Aircraft. Thats only 25% of the total number of combat aircraft the USA has.

In the North Korea vs. South Korea situation, realize that while North Korea has a Military of 1.1 million that South Korea has a military of 700,000. South Korea in general has 60 to 70% of the equipment the North does and generally has better equipment and better training as well.

The problem with North Korea(besides having a couple of nuclear weapons) is the foward positioning of so many of their troops, nearly 70%, within 30 miles of the DMZ. North Korea has artillery built into the side of Mountains and protected by large concrete doors. North Korea has one of the largest inventories of Artillery in the world. With Seoul South Korea less than 30 miles from the DMZ, it is speculated that North Korea could fire up to 200,000 high explosive shells on to Seoul during the first day of combat. This is what most people worry about rather than the North Korean Military's ability to conduct a deep offensive into South Korea. Taking out that Artillery can be done, but not before there could potentially be massive loss of life in Seoul. I wish they had rebuilt Seoul further south of the DMZ after the Korean War, say 100 miles so it would be out of range of North Korean Artillery.

The USA does have enough forces to combat North Korea and Iraq, fight the war on terror, and if need be defend Tawain from a Chinese invasion. Remember, Chinese invasion of Tawain is dependent on Chinese Navy and Chinese sea lift and air lift which are small.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-02-2003, 09:36 PM   #32
us3
The Fly
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 165
Local Time: 10:36 PM
In mid-September, I got a telephone call from NumberOneFoglet. "Dad," he said, "I've decided to go in the Army when I graduate from high school next June. I've signed the papers, I go to basic in July, and I'm gonna get $50,000 for college."

When my heart started beating again, I asked a few more questions and got some answers I didn't really want to hear. My oldest son, who last Christmas was talking about being a high-school history teacher, has now decided he's not ready for college and wants to travel. He talked to the recruiters and the Army gave him what he thinks is the best deal, in exchange for four years of being a tank crewman.

"Yeah, dad, I do my basic training and AIT at Fort Knox, Kentucky, then I get to go to Korea for armored training."

In September, the word "Korea" was an ordinary word. I had a former co-worker who had been an Army Ranger and had done a couple of tours in Korea -- even married a Korean woman -- and had survived to tell some pretty rollicking stories about his time there.

But now, Korea....

The thought of my boy being a new GI in Korea this time next year is almost more than I can stand. Don't get me wrong: I'm proud of my son, of his desire to serve his country, of his obvious patriotism, and his willingness to take on a dangerous and honorable job.

Korea...

Congressman Rangel, I know you served this country bravely fifty-odd years ago in that same land. You were there with a varied bunch of guys -- some draftees, some volunteers, some older WWII vets, some career guys. You saw the hell of war up close and personal.

My boy's a volunteer. He wants to join one of, if not the best and most professional military organizations that this planet has ever seen. He wants to test himself against other proud professionals.

He's willing to risk his life for the chance to travel and for the GI educational benefits.

He wants to drive a tank someday.

Save the anti-war politicking for another time, Congressman

I want to know that, if my boy has to put his butt on the line for this country, he's going to be accompanied by other brave men like him. Brave men who believe in the mission and who believe in each other.

Highly trained men. Professionals.

All of them.

Sons and brothers, daughters and sisters of families who support them and pray for them to return safely home.

They are not bargaining chips in your cheap, rhetorical, political game.

One of them is my kid.

I'll give him to my country, even for tawdry and divisive people like you have become in the past fifty years, Congressman, because this country is worth fighting for and dying for.

But I'll never forgive your efforts to cheapen the value of that gift, Congressman.

posted by TRFogey at Tabacco Road fogey
__________________

__________________
us3 is offline  
Old 01-05-2003, 10:01 AM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 01:36 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha


Your vocabulary alone would scare the shit out of them.

Except for the fact that Melon keeps writing "mute point" when he means "moot point."
__________________
speedracer is offline  
Old 01-05-2003, 12:00 PM   #34
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 11:36 PM
Wow, speedracer, you really ought to consider dropping the pedantic behavior. It got old a long time ago.
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 01-06-2003, 09:54 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 12:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by pub crawler
Wow, speedracer, you really ought to consider dropping the pedantic behavior. It got old a long time ago.
Poo-poo on speedracer for pointing out the grievous error of a "leftist intellectual;" he should be ashamed (if not banned).

~U2Alabama


----------------

"I don't want to fade away."
--Eric Clapton, in "Bell Bottom Blues"
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 01-06-2003, 10:51 PM   #36
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 11:36 PM
Has nothing to do with the left or the right. I'm simply pointing out speedracer's silliness. *shrug*
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 01-07-2003, 03:12 AM   #37
War Child
 
Cow of the Seas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Njosnavelin
Posts: 834
Local Time: 12:36 AM
i will fight as a partisan for america when they invade canada.
__________________
those evil natured robots
theyre programed to destroy us
she gotta be strong to fight them
so shes taking lots of vitamins
cause she knows that
it be tragic
if those evil robots win
Cow of the Seas is offline  
Old 01-07-2003, 08:15 PM   #38
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:36 AM
One week later...LOL This made the news tonight on ABC and then I found this.


Some Democrats Urge Broad U.S. Military Draft

Reuters
Tuesday, January 7, 2003; 6:57 PM



By Vicki Allen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two leading House of Representatives Democrats called on Tuesday for bringing back the military draft, saying political leaders would be more wary of sending troops to Iraq if their children were going to help do the fighting.

The Bush administration quickly dismissed the idea as unnecessary and unwise, and it was expected to gain little traction in the Republican-led Congress.

Reps. Charles Rangel of New York and John Conyers of Michigan, both Korean War veterans, said the nation must debate whether it should continue with a fighting force comprised disproportionately of people from low-income families and minorities.

Their bill would require military or national service for men and women, ages 18 to 26, without exemptions for college or graduate studies.

"I believe that if those calling for war knew that their children were likely to be required to serve -- and to be placed in harm's way -- there would be more caution and greater willingness to work with the international community in dealing with Iraq," Rangel said at a news conference.

"It has unfortunately become the duty of someone else's child to go to war and die as the privileged evade the tragic consequences of war," Conyers said in a statement.

The draft was in place from 1948 to 1973 when the United States converted to an all-volunteer army. But almost all men living in the United States -- including most male noncitizens -- are required to register with the Selective Service on reaching age 18, and federal benefits, including financial aid for college studies, are contingent on registration.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the administration had no plan to resume the draft, saying, "There is no need for it at all," and that it would prompt an inefficient "churning" of personnel who were trained and then left the military.

REQUIREMENT TO SERVE

Rangel, top Ways and Means Committee Democrat, and Conyers, top Judiciary Committee Democrat, both oppose Bush's plans for a possible attack on Iraq if it does not meet U.N. requirements to disarm.

Rangel, who was general counsel to the National Advisory Commission on Selective Service during the administration of President Lyndon Johnson and the Vietnam War, said he would call for bringing back a draft even if he supported Bush on Iraq.

The bill would give the president authority to set the number of people required for military service and would require those not selected for the military to serve at least two years in a civilian post. Military service would be selected by lottery, he said.

The lawmakers said they had picked up several Democratic co-sponsors.

In their regular press briefing, Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, said the current volunteer force was working well.

Rumsfeld said that under the draft people were "sucked into the intake, trained for a period of months, and then went out, adding no value, no advantage, really, to the United States armed services over any sustained period of time."

Myers called the volunteer force "extremely well-trained and well-led troops. Any comparisons between today's force and the Vietnam force would be dramatic. There is no comparison."

Rep. John McHugh, a New York Republican who chairs the Armed Services military personnel subcommittee, said he did not see "a lot of enthusiasm or support" for the bill, "either within the civilian community or perhaps most importantly, from the senior military leadership."
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-07-2003, 09:05 PM   #39
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 12:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by pub crawler
Has nothing to do with the left or the right. I'm simply pointing out speedracer's silliness. *shrug*
Understood, pub crawler! I feel much safer in here knowing that the anti-silliness police are patroling this forum to make sure people are sillifying each other.

~U2Alabama
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 01-07-2003, 09:18 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 01:36 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by speedracer


Except for the fact that Melon keeps writing "mute point" when he means "moot point."
Thanks for the correction. I never said I was perfect.

Cheers!

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 01-07-2003, 09:21 PM   #41
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 11:36 PM

lol bama, I'll keep up the good work. *salute*
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 01-07-2003, 09:24 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 01:36 AM
To be quite honest, if the Democrats don't stop this utter foolishness and stop playing the race card, they may actually piss me off to the point that I will never vote for them again. It isn't our fault that a disproportionate number of minorities and poor people serve in the military; nobody held a gun to their head when they went to the recruiters' offices. It is their fucking job, for God's sake! They even get a salary.

Conyers is pissing me off too. Lucky for him that he wasn't my representative in Michigan, because he wouldn't get my vote in the future. Just when I thought we would be able to get past this race crap.

I never thought I would say this openly, but the Bush Administration officials are right: we *do* have a well-trained volunteer army, and forcing people into the military via a draft serves no purpose, except for political wrangling.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 01-07-2003, 09:32 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 12:36 AM

To the benefit of the Democrats, I do not think that this stunt by Rangel and now Conyers is reflective of the Democratic members of Congress or even the Congressional black caucus, and most people will realize this. It is simply a ploy to make people think about the sacrifice of war AND the racial balance of the volunteer standing military troops. Although I understand their concern over the issue, I strongly disagree with their tactic.

~U2Alabama
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 01-08-2003, 03:44 PM   #44
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama
Although I understand their concern over the issue, I strongly disagree with their tactic.

~U2Alabama
Ditto.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 01-08-2003, 06:38 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:36 AM
Rumsfeld: No Need for Draft; 'Disadvantages Notable'
By Kathleen T. Rhem
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 7, 2003 -- The United States is not going to implement a military draft, because there is no need for it, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said today.

Rep. Charles Rangel said last week he was planning to introduce such legislation in the New Year. Rep. John Conyers Jr. has since expressed support.

"I believe that if those calling for war knew their children were more likely to be required to serve -- and to be placed in harm's way -- there would be more caution and a greater willingness to work with the international community in dealing with Iraq," Rangel wrote in a recent commentary in the New York Times.

Rumsfeld dismissed the notion out of hand during a Pentagon press briefing. "I don't know of anyone in this building or in the administration who thinks that anyone ought to go to war lightly," he said. "I know the president doesn't, and I know I don't."

The country doesn't need a draft because the all-volunteer force works -- in fact, the United States has the most effective military in the world precisely because it is all-volunteer, Joint Chiefs Chairman Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers said.

"(The all-volunteer force is) efficient; it's effective; it's given the United States of America, the citizens of this great country, a military that is second to none," Myers said.

"The people that are in the armed services today are there because they want to be there and are ready and willing and, without any question, capable of doing whatever the president may ask," Rumsfeld added.

The secretary described "notable disadvantages" to having a conscripted force. He said people are involuntarily forced to serve, some for less than they could earn on the outside. There are many exemptions, which change all the time, thus providing for unfair situations. Troops are "churned" through training, serve the minimum amount of time and leave -- thus causing more money to be spent to churn more draftees through the system.

He also dismissed the notion that the all-volunteer force leads to a disproportionate number of blacks and other minorities being killed in battle.

"I do not know that that's historically correct," Rumsfeld said. "And I do not know that, even if it were historically correct, that it's correct today."

He and Myers kept coming back to their bottom line: America is better off for the force it has today.

"We have people serving today -- God bless 'em -- because they volunteered," Rumsfeld said. "They want to be doing what it is they're doing. And we're just lucky as a country that there are so many wonderfully talented young men and young women who each year step up and say, 'I'm ready; let me do that.'"
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com