Draft Looms

Discussion in 'America Attacks!' started by Pressed_Rat, Jan 29, 2005.

  1. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/draft_looms.html



    DRAFT LOOMS​



    Now That Election Is Over, Expect to See Conscription​




    By Greg Szymanski​





    Within a matter of weeks, Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), plans to try and re-institute the military draft, saying the present voluntary system places an unfair burden of war among lower- and middle-class Americans while giving the rich a free ride from military service.

    Rangel’s statements are unpopular among most lawmakers and government watchdog groups. But they came on one of the bloodiest days of the Iraq war with over 35 Marines killed, bringing the total military casualties to more than 1,400 with over 10,000 injured or maimed.

    Although the liberal Democrat has been an outspoken critic of President Bush’s war policies, he said this week “the burden of war should be shared among all social groups,” including the children of the wealthy and privileged.

    “Sometime soon Rep. Rangel is preparing to reintroduce legislation to reinstitute the military draft since he strongly feels everyone should share the burden of war,” said Emile Milne, Rangel’s press representative and legislative director Wednesday from his Washington office. “He is essentially reintroducing legislation that failed to gain support last session. However, this time around, I think, it has a better chance of passing.”

    Milne was referring to H.R. 163, Rangel’s previous pro-draft piece of legislation, which became a Democratic embarrassment and a political football during the 2004 presidential campaign. When charges started flying that Bush would bring back the draft if elected, Rangel’s bill became an obvious political liability for Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), who was taking a strong anti-draft position.


    OBVIOUS POLITICAL REASONS


    In a political move, Democrats quickly rushed the bill to the House floor, where it was summarily rejected by an overwhelming majority. Rangel even voted against his own legislation, for obvious tactical political reasons.

    With the election now over, opponents of the draft claim the path is now clear for politicians from both sides of the aisle to get behind the draft, with Rangel obviously leading the charge.

    In the face of strong criticism, Rangel still strongly supports a nationwide military draft, saying it is both a deterrent to war and a mechanism to force privileged Americans to share the war’s burden.

    However, Bill Galvin, head of a group called the Center of Conscience and War, said both arguments are totally wrong since the draft has never made the Armed Services more equitable, racially or economically.

    “The affluent had and still have the means to gain medical deferments or to serve soft, safe positions,” Galvin said, referring to people like President Bush, who served stateside in the National Guard and Vice President Cheney who avoided service completely in Vietnam by obtaining a deferment. “If Rep. Rangel and other pro-draft progressives really wanted to fix social and racial inequities, they’d be advocating for jobs, education and opportunity, not equal opportunity war making.”

    Whether the draft becomes a reality is still in political limbo. However, no one would argue that Bush’s aggressive foreign military policies need more warm bodies and boots on the ground.

    In a recent Los Angeles Times article, former security advisors Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski were quoted as saying the U.S. requires at least 500,000 more troops to sustain the war in Iraq and reinstatement of the draft may be unpopular but necessary.

    “At best, Rangel’s bill merely plays into Bush’s hands,” said Galvin. “At worst, it’s a stealth measure intended to supply progressive political cover for pro-draft Democrats.”

    A White House spokesman this week refused to comment on Rangel’s initiative, but said Bush has publicly opposed any legislation to reinstitute the draft. Privately, however, Galvin and others fear Bush is just waiting for the right moment “to spring the draft back on the American people” since he no longer has to worry about getting re-elected.



    Greg Szymanski is a freelance investigative journalist and feature writer based in Ventura California. A law school graduate from Glendale University College of Law, he also specializes in constitutional issues as well as judicial indiscretion and injustice. Visit Szymanski’s news web site at arcticbeacon.citymaker.com.




    Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
     
  2. ImmortalDissident

    ImmortalDissident Senior Member

    It's is/going to be LBJ all over again. Hoorah!
     
  3. ImmortalDissident

    ImmortalDissident Senior Member

    That's true, but what kind of excuse is that? They've openly targeted middle to lower class kids for decades. It just doesn't make sense.
     
  4. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Of course! They're all puppets. Democrats and Republicans are all part of the same game, even though I am sure many of them don't even realize it.
     
  5. Angel_Headed_Hipster

    Angel_Headed_Hipster Senior Member

    It won't Matter anyway because there is no constitutional way for them to draft you, when you are drafted they tell you to step forward and take the oath, and everyone assumes they have to because they are being drafted, if you don't step forward and don't take the oath, they can harass you and maybe they will even assault you, but you can never be put in the army until you take the oath.

    Peace and Love,
    Dan
     
  6. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Well, maybe as it stands at the moment. But what does the Constitution matter to these people? After a couple more terrorist attacks, I can guarantee you there will be no Constitution. At least not as we know it (or once knew it).
     
  7. keowyn

    keowyn Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Bush will not instate a draft unless it is handed to him on a gold platter. It is too much of a political liability. He would lose too much popular support which the GOP needs to take 2008. Short of getting the Democrats to pass the draft that is (D'oh!).

    Seriously though, I hate Bush and the current incarnation of our gov't but that doesn't make them stupid. There is a tendency by both sides to polarize themselves and their perceptions of the other side. The Republicans are not stupid and we cannot count on them shooting themselves in the foot by instituting a draft.

    More realistically, just stir up some raging patriotism among the young, stupid, conservative, white Americans and we will have all the volunteers we need. Especially after the next terrorist attack. And i would expect our brand of protesters and freethinkers to become the next domestic target of the Republican Spin Machine.
     
  8. AT98BooBoo

    AT98BooBoo Senior Member

    The Democratic Party should give warmongers like Rangel and backstabbers like Zell Miller the boot and tell them not the let the door hit them in the *ss on the way out.

    If you get drafted you could always show up at the Selective Service office in a pink tutu and a rainbow sash.
     
  9. TheMadcapSyd

    TheMadcapSyd Titanic's captain, yo!

    See, that idea is just further pushing partisian politics, under your logic, if they are elected and greatly popular with the people who elected them, but don't agree with everything in the party line, they should be kicked out of the party?
     
  10. Kandahar

    Kandahar Banned

    A draft is neither necessary nor desirable for the military in this day and age, and is political suicide for whomever is president at the time.

    The cost of training, supplying, housing, and feeding a soldier is simply too high for someone there against his will. He will almost certainly bring down the collective morale of the military as a whole, and decrease productivity. The military has lots of better ways to spend its money than to throw it away on soldiers who don't even want to be there.
     
  11. thespeez

    thespeez Member

    In an effort to head off any implementation of a draft, a new organization to be launched Monday (14 Feb) is being formed. Their website is: www.mothersagainstthedraft.org

    FTR, Oddly enough, I got notice of this via the Constitution party-a group noted for having an extremely 'right-wing' ideology (their beliefs are very similar to those of the John Birch Society).
     
  12. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Well, these are the TRUE conservatives I often speak of. The John Birch conservatives.

    Most people assume that everyone who is a conservative loves Bush and is a warmonger, which could not be further from the truth. Just listen to Alex Jones, for instance.
     
  13. thespeez

    thespeez Member

    Well said! FTR, I tend to split the 'conservative' movement into two distinct groups: the first being the establishment or bourgeoisie types (i.e. neocons), whose views include intervention in foreign affairs and a great deal of our personal lives; and the second being the heritage or grassroots types which consist of people like the JBS, Pat Buchanan and the Constitution Party. My only problems with these groups is that they seem to have a bit of a fascist view on civil liberties.

    Yes, I have listened to Alex Jones-very intelligent! I just wish there was a radio station (other than shortwave) that I could get him on.

    ...And then there are us libertarians...[​IMG]
     
  14. homebudz

    homebudz Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    I doubt if reinstating the draft will be political suicide as mentioned.The spin masters will ensure that.Without the news media showing american dead on a daily basis,the sheep will be content.As for the democrats wanting to reinsate the draft,the bush regime has been quitely remanning the draft boards without the dems,and long before it was brought up.No my friends,this is a well thought out plan being put in place.The machinations of war are here to stay,with no regard to who proposed what.As PR says,they ARE all the same.They all feed off the same rotten tit.
     
  15. SpliffVortex

    SpliffVortex Senior Member

    We Need A Draft And Maybe Music Well Get Bettter Again Like In The 60s
     
  16. Kandahar

    Kandahar Banned

    If anyone wants to lose $10 to their favorite charity, I'll give you 100 to 1 odds that by February 19, 2006 there is no civilian draft in effect in the United States.

    I doubt we'll ever have a draft again; it's simply obsolete and no longer practical.
     
  17. keowyn

    keowyn Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Like I said earlier, I actually agree with Kandahar on this one. We will never see a forced draft like there was for Vietnam. It is too much of a negative thing. Not to say that there won't be a huge publicity push for enlistment. A well managed publicity campaign will get them all the fresh bodies they need to persue their agenda, all with out allienating that great undecided middle. What a crock of shit.
     
  18. nimh

    nimh ~foodie~

    haha, especially if that "publicity push" includes some sort of largescale "attack" on american soil :rolleyes:
     
  19. keowyn

    keowyn Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Right, like they haven't been prepping us for this since the weeks after 9/11. "FBI warns of more attacks..." "CIA warns..." "NSA..." "MOSAD..." "The joint chiefs of staff warned congress that more attacks are imminent..."

    The american public is a puppit at the stings of the corporate controlled media. American voters will believe any sentimental garbage that is pumped into them by our modern multi-media propaganda machine.

    I seriously expect, and am preparing for, a nationally publicized and endorsed campaign to suppress every nation in the world, since they are against our righteous and godly mission to bring upstanding christian morals to the world at large. After all, if you do not embrace Jesus Christ as your lord and savior, you are by default a sinner worthy of either conversion or death. Take your pick, because the line has already been drawn in the sand.
     
  20. SpliffVortex

    SpliffVortex Senior Member

    i never belief anything the news says unless it was a natural disaster. and i look twice even.
     

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice