Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/21/2006 12:30:17 PM EDT
March 27, 2006

Draft talk still alive

Rep. Charles B. Rangel, D-N.Y., has reintroduced his bill calling for a return to a military draft but has raised the enlistment age limit to 42 to line up with a new military policy. “With volunteers now being accepted up to the age of 42, it makes sense to cap the age of draftees at 42,” Rangel said of the bill he introduced Feb. 14. It requires military service for men and women between the ages of 18 and 42, with deferments for completion of high school, for medical reasons and for issues of conscience or religious beliefs. Those not needed by the military would do one year of civilian service.

WHAT’S NEXT: Rangel is pressing the issue not because he really wants a return of the draft but because he wants the Bush administration to think about the consequences of foreign policy decisions. “If the military is already having trouble getting the recruits they need, what can we do to fill the ranks if the war spreads from Iraq to other countries? We may have no other choice but a draft,” Rangel said.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:35:54 PM EDT
Wouldn't it be funny if it passed, millions got drafted AND Bush blamed it all on the Dems, and it stuck. There is limitless irony in this bill...
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:36:21 PM EDT
Draft = war over. That is the point, not the draft.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:38:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AROptics:
Draft = war over. That is the point, not the draft.



Exactly.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:42:13 PM EDT
i think there SHOULD be a civil service draft....


but don't punish the military with a bunch of flunkie draftees! the military wants a draft as much as the people getting drafted do.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:45:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AROptics:
Draft = war over. That is the point, not the draft.



Oh, I get the point. I also see the irony. It would require Bush to call his bluff for it to actually work, though.

And yeah, a draft would ruin the fighting efficiency of the US army. You could use it to free up volunteers at home to fight in the front line though. Lots of problems with that also...
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:47:43 PM EDT
Everyone 18-42. Well who is going to be left to work and grow the economy. Any forced work sucks, whether it is the draft or civil service.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:50:38 PM EDT
The anti-war protests would get 60's style in a week. The draft and simple fear of dying, or being maimed, was what motivated the protests then and it is what would motivate the protests now.

Kinda makes it clear how much your volunteer service is appreciated. "Better you than me" is the operative phrase for Americans today. Most Americans aren't even paying attention to the war. It is nothing but irritating background noise.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:51:27 PM EDT
Maybe they would draft me, then I could serve....
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:52:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Lert:

Originally Posted By AROptics:
Draft = war over. That is the point, not the draft.



Oh, I get the point. I also see the irony. It would require Bush to call his bluff for it to actually work, though.

And yeah, a draft would ruin the fighting efficiency of the US army. You could use it to free up volunteers at home to fight in the front line though. Lots of problems with that also...



We almost lost WWII because all those lame-o draftees...
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:53:47 PM EDT
Charles Rangel is a douchebag...nothing more.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:54:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/21/2006 12:56:47 PM EDT by iknownothingiforgot]
I think they should have a mercenary program instead.

They pay a company to train civilians to complete duties in Iraq. It is volunteer and doesnt come with any other commitments besides a year in Iraq and 6 months of training.

If there was something like that I would sign up. 6 months of training, 1 year deployment. 50K salary.

I think alot of people would jump on that deal. I would do it both to help my country (I dont want to commit 2-4 years in the Military) and second for the money. Would probably be cheap for the DOD and bring in alot more personnel that can be used in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sort of like Blackwater but for Non Ex Military.

6 months of training I think could bring competant people into Iraq specializing in some sort of specific task such as intel or security.

To me it sounds like a good idea. As long as it was run by the Military while in Iraq/Afghanistan.

Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:54:59 PM EDT
COOL!
So when does my bad hearing 36 yr old self get to go??

I am going in the USMC, any other branch is a groups of sissys

toys , lots and lots of toys
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 12:56:54 PM EDT
Friggin Dumocrats
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 1:01:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Everyone 18-42. Well who is going to be left to work and grow the economy. Any forced work sucks, whether it is the draft or civil service.




Illegal immigrants who will be granted "emergency amnesty".



-K
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 1:04:55 PM EDT
If this had a 0.001% chance of taking one step forward I might get riled up about it.

It does not have a 0.001% chance of doing anything other than dying an unnoticed death so I'm not going to bother.

I will say that Charles Rangle is a worthless piece of shit who makes his living by creating and then exploiting misery for his constituants.
Top Top