[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Draft will start in June 2005 (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 5/23/2004 5:03:26 AM EDT
|
Link to article Pending Draft Legislation Targeted for Spring 2005 The Draft will Start in June 2005 There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately. $28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website: www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004. The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft. Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year, www.hslda.org/legislation/na...s89/default.asp entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services. Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era. College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year. Even those voters who currently support US actions abroad may still object to this move, knowing their own children or grandchildren will not have a say about whether to fight. Not that it should make a difference, but this plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft. The public has a right to air their opinions about such an important decision. |
|
Fact is the Dems are proposing the draft to add a little fear to the mix before the election. If they really need more recruits just raise the pay scale so some of us slightly older guys (I'm 30) can volunteer and not have our houses foreclosed while we're gone. |
|
They were giving them out. I think they were also on the website, but I am not sure. They seemed really concerned about community activities. edit- www.sss.gov/fslocal.htm |
| I hope this is only alarmist crap as well. I have a major problem with having a draft. I have an even bigger problem if the draft includes women, there is something very wrong with that. Not that I think that women are inferior to men on the battlefield, but the fact that they are forcing mothers and daughters to fight, the thought makes me ill |
Thanks. Sent off for an application. www.sss.gov/fslocal.htm |
|
Well lets see. Anyone who votes for it, thier political opponents (who are pretty smart usually and check voting records) will trot it out for the whole world to see. There is no way to covertly vote for a draft, and that is political suicide. Although, if they let you finish the semester of school that you're in, I would be finishing my double BAs, which I guess would mean I would be an officer candidate? |
|
Gonna be interesting as the military does not want a draft that only compels two years of service. Simply not enough time to train for the military of today. If a draft does happen, and with only two years of service required, we may see a real (formal) divide between 'support' personnel and warriors. 5sub |
|
this is bull shit....I think? Who are the bill sponsors? I think there is a difference between this "draft" which indicates Military OR Civilian service and the type of draft we saw in previous periods. My understanding is that DoD only wants volunteers. EDITED WITH MORE INFO: Link to Sen bill status (S.89): thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.89: Senate Bill was introduced by Hollings (D) SC--bill was introduced in Jan 2003. It has been read twice to the Armed Services Committee. No action has been taken. Consider that bill DEAD. Link to House bill status (HR.163): thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR00163 House Bill was introduced by RANGLE (D) NY (one of the biggest liberal asshole jackasses in the house)--bill was introduced in Jan 2003. Status--referred to Armed Services Committe; requested DoD comment in Feb2003 (and this is when DoD said "no thank you"); then it was referred to Subcommittee on Total Force... no action since... consider than one DEAD in committee too. The only way these bills will see the light of day is if there is GOP loss of control in either chamber of Congress or if DoD wants it. |
If the draft does happen and the compulsory service is only two years, may mean that you won't see an AR-15 (or M-16) after bootcamp. (Excepting the yearly quals maybe.) 5sub |
repeat post... 'cause I don't want you guys to miss this. Thanks.
|
|
I may be wrong here but my impression is that *democrats* have been pushing for a draft. I suspect they are doing that in order to subtly swing voters away from supporting the war and away from supporting Bush. A lot of potential swing voters who support Bush now will most likely have second thoughts if they think their sons or daughters would actually be drafted and sent to the sandbox. Am I being cynical here guys? |
|
Good fir them... military service should be mandatory at 18 anyway... it would whip a lot of shitheads into shape and into more respectable human beings instead of trouble making fuck-ups. I don't see it happening though. Moral would take a nose dive when real soldiers are paired up with snot nosed draftees who don't gived a shit about anything but themselves. It would put more unneeded stress on the leaders and possibly create more situtions like that one scumbag that tossed the grenade into the tent... Plus we'd have the same sort of faggot fuck hippy revolution as we did during Vietnam... Increasing re-enlistment incentives would be far more effective... why train someone new right off the street when you have seasoned soldiers who are just bitter because their pay/bonus does not reflect their service to the country. 1.) Tax free re enlistment bonuses. Not only would this be an incentive to re-enlist but would also entice people to re-up for longer terms, as the longer they re-up for the more bonus they get. 2.) No cap onl re-enlistment bonuses... I think it's $20k for Army... whihc is shit since a guy gets capped at $20k and then Uncle Sugar takes 26% of that so they don't even get the 20K... and thwey would have gotten more if there was no cap... such bullshit. 3.) If they can't afford to fund the bonuses, re-allocate some money from somewhere else... I'm sure some congressman and senators are getting overpaid for sitting on their fat asses... 4.) Speed up some of the Future Lad Warrior Projects that would bring in some more of the younger generation soldiers who are turned on by high-tech. 5.) INcrease clothing allowances. How many troops get short changed when they have to use their paltry annual clothing allowance to fund all of the stupid, non-sense uniform changes on top of the replacment of clothing that is worn out to the point of bein unwearable. That or changes the DRMO system so that they can just do uniform exchanges... DRMO can always sell off old raggedy BDU's to civlians... 6.) Higher incentive-/pro- pay for critical, high risk MOS'es like EOD... this issue always starts out as somethign every soldier would easily accept their time to get, but after it goes through te ringer it's reduced to somethign that is more of an insult than an incentive. 7.) Choice of assignments on all re-enlistments... this would also serve as a way to determine which bases are the most desriable which would help choose future base closings. The draft is a terrible idea... and obviously something thatwould be appealing to some shit bird congressman who has no chance of bein affected by it. Instead of always making military cut backs we should start making some Congress/House cutbacks... and put a damned time limit on their terms... |
I am re-posting AGAIN... since some of you guys appeared to have missed it... 
|
| Yeah, it's BS from start to finish. Rangle introduced it in order to undermine the war effort. He thinks that if it passes it will increase opposition to any military action. Which is aso why his lefty house co-sponsors--McDermott, etc--joined him. It has the side effect of whipping up hysteria amongst the ignorant, even if it doesn't pass, when they see articles like the one linked. |
President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940. Up until 1973 men were drafted whenever enough volunteers couldnt be had to fill vacancies. If you remember Elvis was drafted in 1958. What war were we in then? |
BINGO… The Army does not want a Draft. The Navy does not want a Draft. The Air Force does not want a Draft. All services exceeded their recruiting quotes last year and in the last quarter. Only far left Democrats and their minions want this bill. The bill is effectually DOA in Congress.
Absolutely, a draft can be put into effect anytime Congress authorizes a draft. We had a draft for decades with any declaration of war. Again this bill is DOA… this is a diversionary scare tactic only the very uninformed would put any credence in. |
Mr. Rangle was the one crying about the disproportionate amount of poor minorities in the military and screamed about a draft BEFORE the Iraq war started. He was of course proven wrong but that was kind of kept quiet by the media when the actual numbers came out from the Pentagon. He wants more "well off/rich" and "non-minority (?)" kids (trying to be PC) to be inducted into the armed forces. |
|
Not only are the only people pushing for a draft Congressional Democrats who are trying to scare the populace into voting against Bush, they are hypocrites to boot. Rangel voted against any funding for Selective Service during the last three budgets (2001-2003). It was only for 2004 that he suddenly decided it was time to propose legislation reinstating a draft. I've seen some slimey political tricks in my time; but this is a pretty bad one. As for looking for volunteers for the Selective Service board, volunteers serve 20yr terms and selective service was reactivated in 1981. The reason they need new volunteers is because most of the people serving on the boards are dead or no longer active. |
They don't draft officers. If you want a commission, you'd have to apply for one before you got drafted... As for the draft, I've allways been a fan of universal service as a policy (a/o we need more troops, let's draft), but we seem to do OK with a volunteer force, so why change it (unless you want to make apathetic people anti-war when they see their friends/relatives/kids being required to contribute)? |
|
During my time in the Marine Corps (14 years), I've seen some DAMN GOOD Marines denied re-enlistment/further service after the Cold War/Gulf War during the Clinton Administration for BS reasons (i.e. "bad" fitness reports,10 lbs. "overweight", a "DUI" etc.I'm speaking for the Corps here.I beacame a Marine back when being a Marine wasn't "COOL".There's a tremendous amount of former Marines rearing to go back to active/reserve service and ready to fight,not to mention record level highs of retention.I'm a Marine reservist that got off active duty last July, and I'll go back again without a question.We DON"T NEED THE DRAFT...A Few Good Men can handle this war. Semper Fidelis, |
|
www4.sss.gov/localboardmembers/bminquiry.asp Local Board members are volunteers appointed by the President. They play an important community role closely connected with our nation's defense. If a military draft becomes necessary, approximately 2,000 Local Boards throughout America would decide which young men in each community receive deferments, postponements, or exemptions from military service based on federal guidelines. If you are interested in receiving information on becoming a Board Member for the Selective Service System (SSS), please complete this form. When you submit the following information to the Selective Service System, you will receive an application for board membership, a business reply envelope, and a Board Member Information Booklet that gives details on Board Member responsibilities. After you have submitted your application, a Selective Service employee will contact you to schedule a personal interview. Qualifications for becoming a Local Board Member: Must be 18 years old or older Must be a citizen of the United States Men must have registered with the Selective Service, except those born from March 29, 1957 through December 31, 1959. Must not be an employee of any law enforcement organization Must not be an active or retired member of the Armed Forces Must not have been convicted of any criminal offense. I'm out.  |