Democrat wants to reinstate the DRAFT

[Dreadsox]

Rangel Calls for Resuming Military Draft
Tue Dec 31, 7:15 AM ET Add Politics - U. S. Congress to My Yahoo!



NEW YORK - Rep. Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), a veteran of the Korean War, says he plans to introduce legislation to resume the military draft in the event of a war against Iraq.



In an opinion piece published in Tuesday's editions of The New York Times, the Democrat from New York said he would ask Congress next week to support his proposal.


Rangel said the prospect of a draft would make Congress less likely to support a war.


"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.


Military service should be a "shared sacrifice" asked of all able young Americans, he said, noting that minorities make up a "disproportionate number" of enlisted members of the military.


"Service in our nation's armed forces is no longer a common experience," said Rangel, who voted against the congressional resolution authorizing President Bush (news - web sites) to use force against Iraq.


Rangel said his legislation would require "alternative national service" for people who are physically unable to serve and for those who refuse to serve for "reasons of conscience."


President Bush has said he doesn't intend to revive the draft, which ended in 1973.

 

[Dreadsox]

This is the last thing anyone wants! Policitcal game-playing on the part of the congressman.

Peace

 

[melon]

Rangel is an ass; he might be trying to prove a point, but he's doing it in the wrong way. I'm sure his bill will not even make it past committee.

Melon

 

[Dreadsox]

Rangel is an ass
Melon

We know he is a Donkey...he is a Democrat!!!!!!!

 

[melon]

We know he is a Donkey...he is a Democrat!!!!!!!

Oh I know Rangel is a Democrat, but he sounds like one of those whiney "oppressed minority" types. If minority representation in the military is disproportionate, it is only because more minorities voluntarily enlisted; no one forced them to join the military!

And I'm not about to fight in any damn war; I'm thoroughly an academic, and I'm not about to be killed for some stupid personal grudge that the Bush family has festered against Saddam for the past decade. Those currently in the military are there because they chose to; did they think it would be a gravy train the entire time?

Melon

 

[pax]

Rangel said the prospect of a draft would make Congress less likely to support a war.


"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.

Great way to make a point. People really respond to idle threats. See how well it's working in Iraq?

 

[nbcrusader]

And I'm not about to fight in any damn war; I'm thoroughly an academic, and I'm not about to be killed for some stupid personal grudge that the Bush family has festered against Saddam for the past decade. Those currently in the military are there because they chose to; did they think it would be a gravy train the entire time?

Melon

Good thing we live in the near perfect comfort of never having to respond to a call to arms.

I wonder who bought and paid for that priviledge?

 

[melon]

Good thing we live in the near perfect comfort of never having to respond to a call to arms.

I wonder who bought and paid for that priviledge?

You know, we wouldn't have this conversation if it were any other profession. There is this silly notion that every man is made to be a soldier, and I think that is utter crap, just like saying that every woman is made to be a housewife. For those who feel it is their calling to be a soldier, then good for them! Just don't get me involved.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

You know, we wouldn't have this conversation if it were any other profession. There is this silly notion that every man is made to be a soldier, and I think that is utter crap, just like saying that every woman is made to be a housewife. For those who feel it is their calling to be a soldier, then good for them! Just don't get me involved.

Melon

But we have the priviledge to follow our callings. I did not choose to be a soldier, but if they start drafting 38-year olds, I would go.

 

[BVS]

Oh I know Rangel is a Democrat, but he sounds like one of those whiney "oppressed minority" types. If minority representation in the military is disproportionate, it is only because more minorities voluntarily enlisted; no one forced them to join the military!

But what you have to remember is for a lot of people the military is a means to education or an alternative to working a job that doesn't require a college education. This is why minority representation is disproportionate, because education is disproportionate. Yes they voluntarily enlisted, but the majority enlist not because they want to fight in a war, and not even because they want to protect this country, but because it "promises" them a better life than what the statistics of their upbringing does.

 

[Dreadsox]

Melon,

I would bet my life that NO SOLDIER in the military wants to serve next to a draftee who does not wish to be there. This is a very different military from the one 30 years ago. Good grief, there were times in Boot Camp where I thought the DI was going to push-up me to death because I was a "college boy".


BonoVox,

I happen to be one of those people who joined to help put myself through college. It does not matter what reason people joined. Their first and foremost job is to be a soldier no matter what they are trained to do. They know from day one, that they may be placed in harms way for the citizens of this country. They volunteered, no one forced them and believe me they know and understand what they signed up for.


Peace

 

[BAW]

Melon,

I would bet my life that NO SOLDIER in the military wants to serve next to a draftee who does not wish to be there. This is a very different military from the one 30 years ago. Good grief, there were times in Boot Camp where I thought the DI was going to push-up me to death because I was a "college boy".

My son will be 18 in about 6 weeks...and knowing him as I do, you couldn't be more right. Unless they have a special boot camp where you wake up at 2:00 p.m. and go to be at 4:00 a.m., I don't think my kid would cut it. I'm sure if he was drafted, he would adjust and do his duty but I'd be pretty worried if our military was made up of kids like him.

 

[diamond]

Rangel is an ass;
Melon

I agree.
An oppurtunistic ass and race baiter.


DB9

 

[BVS]

I happen to be one of those people who joined to help put myself through college. It does not matter what reason people joined. Their first and foremost job is to be a soldier no matter what they are trained to do. They know from day one, that they may be placed in harms way for the citizens of this country. They volunteered, no one forced them and believe me they know and understand what they signed up for.

I understand that, but I think that the percentage of people going into the service with the sole intent of doing something for their country and "protecting our freedom" is a lot less than it use to be. If you take away the incentives that the military offers now, we would have a much smaller military than we have right now. The idea that going into the military as something you owe your country is quickly dissapearing, due to the growing selfishness of our country's will to jump into wars which we have no reason to be in.

 

[nbcrusader]

The idea that going into the military as something you owe your country is quickly dissapearing, due to the growing selfishness of our country's will to jump into wars which we have no reason to be in.

There seems to be a conflict between the concept of OWING your country something and the individual determining in which conflicts the country should engage.

You are essentially saying, I owe service to my country, if its the right service for me. Our previous generations serve on such conditions.

If the idea of going into the military as something you owe your country is quickly disappearing, it is due to the individual's attitude (we are much fatter and sassier than previous generations).

 

[BVS]

If the idea of going into the military as something you owe your country is quickly disappearing, it is due to the individual's attitude (we are much fatter and sassier than previous generations).

Well I guess I'd rather be surrounded by fat and sassy people rather than people willing to kill for the greed of our political system. I'd take fat and sassy over greedy and warmongering anyday.

 

[nbcrusader]

Well I guess I'd rather be surrounded by fat and sassy people rather than people willing to kill for the greed of our political system. I'd take fat and sassy over greedy and warmongering anyday.

Are you sure you want to characterize people who serve in their country's military as "greedy and warmongering"?

 

[Dreadsox]

Well I guess I'd rather be surrounded by fat and sassy people rather than people willing to kill for the greed of our political system. I'd take fat and sassy over greedy and warmongering anyday.

May you get your wish!

People who join the military are greedy and warmongering? Kill for the greed of our political system?

You went from making what were some valid points to this?
Oh well....so much for intelligent dialogue.....

I would submit that many of the people who join no longer join to just serve. There are still many who do. You wrote about insentives being the reason so many join, but you know what, there were insentives in WWII. Many people benefitted from the GI Bill and came home and got themselves an education. The military also integrated much faster than society did at the time. It was not perfect, but it did integrate, and because of it, after WWI, Korea, and Vietnam, those veterans came back and helped to change society.

Good grief, name a job in todays society where people are not looking for the best benfits that they can receive.

Your statements above are nothing but insulting to anyone who has served their country (not just the USA).

 

[BVS]

Are you sure you want to characterize people who serve in their country's military as "greedy and warmongering"?

No I believe you made an extreme statement, so I made an extreme one to answer. That's all.
I believe the military is made up of a whole spectrum of individuals that range from people who just want to kill people to people who just couldn't find anything else to do with their life.

I'm just sick of people putting so much glory into the idea of "serving your country". People are still using the argument that our civil liberties are still in the hands of our soldiers. I can't believe that This argument could go on for an eternity. War has been the answer to so many issues in the past, I think it's time to evolve and find alternate solutions.

 

[melon]

Let me reiterate: I have nothing against those who are in the military. In fact, I have admiration for those who are willing to do what I find to be repulsive. I cannot kill anyone, nor can I ever submit to the essentialist ("good vs. evil") ideology that would ever make me change my mind on that. However, thank goodness that not everyone is like me!

The idea of a draft for this upcoming war, however, I think to be a mute point. I sincerely doubt that anyone will give Rangel the time of day--Democrat or Republican, let alone Bush. War *has* changed since the Vietnam War, and, as much as I hate most of Reagan's policies in the 1980s, I will give him due credit for starting to make war far more technological and less man-intensive. With the U.S.' undisputed supremacy of the skies through military jets all the way to satellite-guided long-range missiles, our smaller military should certainly be sufficient.

However, in terms of me being suitable for military service? I don't think anyone would want a skinny, disillusioned, semi-depressive gay leftist intellectual with a disdain for absolutes. I think the military is much better off without me.

Melon

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

you sound like the male version of me, lol

I don't think anyone would want a skinny, disillusioned, semi-depressive gay leftist intellectual with a disdain for absolutes. I think the military is much better off without me.

aww come on, i'm sure that's exactly what bush is looking for!

 

[Dreadsox]

However, in terms of me being suitable for military service? I don't think anyone would want a skinny, disillusioned, semi-depressive gay leftist intellectual with a disdain for absolutes. I think the military is much better off without me.

Melon

Military Intelligence could use you!!!!!

We are better off with you!

Happy New Year!

Peace

 

[martha]

However, in terms of me being suitable for military service? I don't think anyone would want a skinny, disillusioned, semi-depressive gay leftist intellectual with a disdain for absolutes. I think the military is much better off without me.

Melon

Your vocabulary alone would scare the shit out of them.



This is a fascinating discussion. Please carry on.

 

[Crzy4Bono]

It would be interesting to see the effect a draft would have in today's American society. The draft worked well in WW1 and WW2, and to some degree in Korea, because up until that time there was an expectation that everyone had a duty to serve, and people just did. I mean, Elvis left at the height of his career to serve because his # came up.

However, take a look at what happened in Vietnam. You had draft dodgers, protestors, burning draft cards, etc.. You had rampant drug abuse, dissention in the ranks, etc. and soldiers with boots on the ground who did not support the war and weren't really willing to fight with their all. People doing anything to get a deferrment (marriage, kids, college, etc.) who in previous wars would've signed right up. They were raised in a protest society, an "entitlement" society, and had difficulty adapting to the task, and greater difficulty adapting to their return home. Not all soldiers, of course, but it was certainly more prevalent than before. Much less sense of duty.

I would say that our young men (and women if it went that way) are much farther away from sense of duty to country than even during the Vietnam era. I would think it impossible to manage troops like that.

This will never ever pass, for 3 reasons. (Assuming it is a genuine suggestion rather than a publicity stunt, even though I suspect the latter) 1) We have plenty of folks available in the armed forces using a volunteer army. In fact, we have more than enough - cutting back has been the problem. 2) The way that wars are fought today requires fewer personnel. You'll always need soldiers on the ground, but a lot of the attacks are occuring from a distance. 3) The US couldn't afford to pay for the military if every young person was drafted.

I wish we didn't need an army anyway. That'll be my New Years dream.

Peace

 

[Zoomerang96]

ever since bush gained all the power he wanted from congress right after 9/11 to fight terror in whatever means possible, dont think that enlisting citizens is out of the question.

when america attacks iraq (its not even a question of if, its a question of when), they will try and blitzkrieg there way to the capitol and get the war over as fast as possible. its their word not mine. im not implying anything nazi here, but i heard it from them a while back.

america has a lot of machinery and manpower in the gulf at the moment for iraq alone. if north korea suddenly makes it a two front war, as confident as rumsfeld sounds, ....errr dont be so sure.

the north korean army has over 1 million soldiers. they have biological and chemical weapons. fighting a war in this area would be a huge strain on the american fighting machine.

remember this, a two front war never works. not at this scale.

world war 1 and 2 was decided because the aggressors believed they could. it didnt work then, and as advanced and as powerful as the americans are, dont think that if the war turns against them that they couldnt slap together a bill requiring people to fight for the "fatherland."

just my 2 cents anyway.

 

[Dreadsox]

I really do not have time to go point by point about defending the "HOMELAND".

There will be no draft. I hope STING will post some info statisically that could demonstrate what Rumsfeld has said, we can handle two fronts.

Simple reason there will be no draft......Election less than two years away.


Peace

 

[melon]

To be honest, I have my doubts that North Korea would ever start a war. North Korea is best known for its high stakes publicity stunts almost to say "I'm here, now give me things." Considering how destitute North Korea is with its long-running drought, starvation, and energy shortages, along with the fact that the U.S. really was behind in its oil shipments, North Korea is doing the one thing that will make the U.S. pay attention to them: resuming a nuclear program. North Korea offered a non-aggression pact from the start, telling me that they really are using its nuclear capabilities as a negotiating point. Now it really is a game of chicken between the U.S. and North Korea.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

To be honest, I have my doubts that North Korea would ever start a war. North Korea is best known for its high stakes publicity stunts almost to say "I'm here, now give me things." Considering how destitute North Korea is with its long-running drought, starvation, and energy shortages, along with the fact that the U.S. really was behind in its oil shipments, North Korea is doing the one thing that will make the U.S. pay attention to them: resuming a nuclear program. North Korea offered a non-aggression pact from the start, telling me that they really are using its nuclear capabilities as a negotiating point. Now it really is a game of chicken between the U.S. and North Korea.

Melon

Exactly! Look at the projected costs for a U.S. military engagement - North Korea could not sustain any action. I guess they got tired of trying to tunnel under the DMZ.

 

[nbcrusader]

It would be interesting to see the effect a draft would have in today's American society. The draft worked well in WW1 and WW2, and to some degree in Korea, because up until that time there was an expectation that everyone had a duty to serve, and people just did. I mean, Elvis left at the height of his career to serve because his # came up.

However, take a look at what happened in Vietnam. You had draft dodgers, protestors, burning draft cards, etc.. You had rampant drug abuse, dissention in the ranks, etc. and soldiers with boots on the ground who did not support the war and weren't really willing to fight with their all. People doing anything to get a deferrment (marriage, kids, college, etc.) who in previous wars would've signed right up. They were raised in a protest society, an "entitlement" society, and had difficulty adapting to the task, and greater difficulty adapting to their return home. Not all soldiers, of course, but it was certainly more prevalent than before. Much less sense of duty.

Very well said. While there were conscientious objectors during WWII, the shifting attitude toward "entitlement" and away from personal responsibility decimated the sense of duty from society at large.

There are few today who can articulate a reasonably valid conscientious objector status. Melon?s post above is an excellent example.

 

[Zoomerang96]

my grandpa and his brothers were co's during ww2.