View Full Version : Do I have reason to be worried?
Bubbles
11-19-2006, 02:31 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061119/pl_nm/usa_politics_draft_dc
Funky time to turn 18 this Saturday and to have to register for the selective service...
46zilzal
11-19-2006, 02:49 PM
If I were you, I would study the laws as they change (they always do) and have multiple options ready to implement at a moment's notice.
Dan Montilion
11-19-2006, 03:31 PM
No. Political posturing.
Too many people, even in Congress, have far more brains than that retard.
You only to worry abut running into a cretin like him in a dark alley.
JustRalph
11-19-2006, 03:55 PM
If I were you, I would study the laws as they change (they always do) and have multiple options ready to implement at a moment's notice.
what a bunch of crap. Nice one 46. You are a something.
Bubbles, you are still in school so even if this crap happened you would probably be exempt. Good reason to get good grades though!
The worse case scenario you get to serve your country. Whether you want to or not. There are plenty of people who found a way to make it work during the last draft. And they came out just fine.
kenwoodallpromos
11-19-2006, 04:34 PM
The fact is, 46 is correct.
"http://www.sss.gov/FSconsobj.htm" Many people have moral objections to war and can do other things if called. Maybe working with the Federal Wild Horae and Burro Program.
As far as the military, it is very easy to look up the KIA numbers for the various services. The lowest casualities are in the Air Force support crews and in the Navy.
luv_america
11-19-2006, 05:01 PM
This is one of Rangel's pet projects. It gets no broad support even from his fellow Democrats. With so many brave men and women in the military despite the MM bad PR, they don't need the draft.
NoDayJob
11-19-2006, 08:01 PM
Too many people, even in Congress, have far more brains than that retard.
You only to worry abut running into a cretin like him in a dark alley.
Yeah, he may be a retard, but he's a decorated Korean Conflict, combat vet. I'd serve with him anytime. Wouldn't vote for him, though. ;)
luv_america
11-19-2006, 08:07 PM
To be a bit clearer, Rangel uses the draft issue as a way to promote his view that minorities are the greatest percentage of battlefield casualties. This has been disputed many times over with studies showing this not to be the case. Regardless of the facts, the issue plays well in Harlem where Rangel is an icon.
I love hearing him talk though. He's an old school New Yorker. A dying breed.
I love hearing him talk though. He's an old school New Yorker. A dying breed.
Too bad hs is dragging his feet. The guy is a POs and a biggot.
JustRalph
11-19-2006, 11:57 PM
"who in the hell wants to live in Mississippi"
twindouble
11-21-2006, 09:48 AM
Charles Rangel (D-NY) says that it was a mistake for Bush to go into Iraq off the flimsy Intel that was presented to "Congress". What a freaking joke, Congress approved the move off the same Intel. :lol: Talk about being a hypocrite.
Bubbles
11-21-2006, 11:11 AM
What I don't get is, this guy doesn't support the war, yet says if you do and don't support the draft, it's hypocrisy.
What does that make someone who doesn't support the war and wants to get out, yet DOES support a draft?
twindouble
11-21-2006, 11:29 AM
Charles Rangel (D-NY) says that it was a mistake for Bush to go into Iraq off the flimsy Intel that was presented to "Congress". What a freaking joke, Congress approved the move off the same Intel. :lol: Talk about being a hypocrite.
As far as I'm concerned the biggest threat the American people face now and in the future is the very people we put in power. Something for you all to think about.
T.D.
rastajenk
11-21-2006, 12:56 PM
Well if we didn't put them in power, some of them would put themselves in power, which is worse. To paraphrase Churchill, democracy sucks, but it's better than anything else. We need not fear those who face the electors at regular intervals, TD. The bigger threat remains an entrenched unelected bureaucracy with goals and motivations of its own that may not and probably do not reflect those of the general population.
twindouble
11-21-2006, 01:19 PM
Well if we didn't put them in power, some of them would put themselves in power, which is worse. To paraphrase Churchill, democracy sucks, but it's better than anything else. We need not fear those who face the electors at regular intervals, TD. The bigger threat remains an entrenched unelected bureaucracy with goals and motivations of its own that may not and probably do not reflect those of the general population.
Oh boy do I agree with that last sentence. Washington is like a huge vacume sucking up what ever power and rights the people have as time goes on. State government is no different. Just keep bending over, someday you might get to like it!
T.D.
JustRalph
11-21-2006, 02:26 PM
What I don't get is, this guy doesn't support the war, yet says if you do and don't support the draft, it's hypocrisy.
What does that make someone who doesn't support the war and wants to get out, yet DOES support a draft?
it is called hyperbole and political posturing. He is good at it. One thing you don't want to ever do is get between Rangel and a TV camera. you will get run over like an undersized linebacker............
The Judge
11-21-2006, 03:34 PM
His logic is that if politicans sons and I assume daughters, grand-children, relatives and next door neighbors and freinds,were to be drafted they would have to be more careful about picking wars. He knows that many of the well to do can get out of the draft but if someone of note pulled some strings or for that matter their son or daughter use every legal means to not serve this could be pointed out.
This would also get alot of young people off the streets and into something construtive. The military is not a bad place to be as long as there are no war goinf on. One you learn to obey orders, you don't have mama to protect you, you have to get up real early, you most have a skill, you get to eat regular,you wear the same clothes, you most interact with people different from yourself, you get to travel and see and meet other people. Your world expands from your block.
After you get out you have hospital insurance (V.A) and other benefits to give you a start in life.
The military is a great deal - if you wnat to fo in. If you don't, this is afree country, and a draft is never acceptable in my view.
I would not for one minute support this country in any way shape or form if it re-enacts a draft. It would then, not be worth fighting for. I would become....47.
NoDayJob
11-22-2006, 12:11 AM
Loved the draft... volunteered for it. Of course I'm a confirmed masochistic slave, too. Expected to do 2 years and wound up doing 4. I'm ready to volunteer again, as soon as the Washington Weasels decide to quit screwing around and NUKE some of the bad guys. :lol:
Secretariat
11-22-2006, 02:02 AM
This is one of Rangel's pet projects. It gets no broad support even from his fellow Democrats. With so many brave men and women in the military despite the MM bad PR, they don't need the draft.
Disagree luv. I'm all in favor of the draft for a number of reasons.
a. It really places pressure on politicians to go to war as a last resort.
b. It insures national service regardless of financial status or class.
To be honest, I guess I could forego the draft "IF" everyone had to serve in some way regardless of gender or orientation or poltcial affiliation or wealth. This is a huge issue, and when wealthy kids don't have to volunteer, they generally don't.
So, either a draft, OR registration requires some type of mandatory service. It can work. I beleive in Israel all youth are required to put in some type of service.
luv_america
11-22-2006, 09:44 AM
Not to deter from this point but JustRalph started a thread about who joins the military.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32604
Lets work with your quote:
Disagree luv. I'm all in favor of the draft for a number of reasons.
a. It really places pressure on politicians to go to war as a last resort.
b. It insures national service regardless of financial status or class.
In terms of pressure on politicians, currently we have an all volunteer military. One could easily assume that a volunteer army will have many more people who want to be in the military than a draft military would. I could further that opinion by stating that a draft military could weaken it by virtue of having too many soldiers who don't want to be there.
By resorting to a draft military for the purposes you suggest, you would be weakening a President's options on how and when we would go to war to defend this country. I follow you, and I understand that you want this, but for the likes of me I cannot understand why you would want to weaken the defense of this country intentionally. I hope its not because your world view us that the US is the bad guy, or by weakening the US, we fall into line with the socialist Europeans and bequeath our status as the world's only superpower.
Secondly, about insuring military service regardless of class. I know and respect the fact that you have served in Vietnam. After reading the Heritiage report in JustRalph's thread you'll be thrilled to learn that today's military is nothing like the draft military you served in. In fact, the economic and educational averages in the military exceed the averages of the general population. In short, we're attracting good people who want to be there. If we resort to the draft, we'll get soldiers who fall under those social-economic conditions just like we had in Vietnam. Of course we'll have the typical educational deferrments that will have everyone streaming into our universities to obtain, but that'll be the ones who can afford it. We'll be left with the ones who can't in the military. Also, I know you'll say that we should eliminate educational deferrments, but that's not practical. Even with a draft military, we'll need education to fuel our next bunch of bright starts in our economy, so that won't happen.
On of the things I often complain about is how the MSM doesn't let the American people understand the quality of today's military and the good people that enlist. Pay attention the next time you see solider interviews in Iraq or Afganistan and quitely listen to the tone and nature of the soldier. These are smart men and women who want to be there doing what they do. They never get the hero worship that they deserve from us and the MSM.
In this day and age, and until something happens to change this, a draft will just weaken this country and promote the exact constitution of a military that Rangel and others seem to want to avoid. He knows it, and the legislators know it, and that's why this idea has no legs.
The Judge
11-22-2006, 10:37 AM
It the war was declared "before" the President when off starting these I don't need a declaration of war fights, battles, police actions, or little tiny wars or whatever they are called these days ,then I see no problem with a draft. Even then lets face it most of the time there is no war. So whats wrong with a draft.
I thought I would never say I was in favort of the draft as I am a child from the 60's and fought to end the draft but I'm having second thoughts. I'm not 100% sold but I see some benefits.
Talk about smart ,with a draft you will get some college graduates (sooner or later) and some rich kids that went to the best private schools in the country. That will only increase the brain power of the already smart kids who volunteer and can still volunteer.
JustRalph
11-22-2006, 01:58 PM
Talk about smart ,with a draft you will get some college graduates (sooner or later) and some rich kids that went to the best private schools in the country. That will only increase the brain power of the already smart kids who volunteer and can still volunteer.
I suggest you read the report. Your comments above are out of line with what is happening today. Or in the last 3 years anyway.
you ever heard of the U.S. Military academies? How many do you think they graduate a year? "You will get some college graduates" "sooner or later"
You really think that only dumbasses join the military, don't you? You and Mr. Kerry................
JPinMaryland
11-22-2006, 02:08 PM
Well Kerry is one dumbass who joined...
The Judge
11-22-2006, 04:35 PM
I said draft college graduates join the already smart kids who volunteerd . The last I checked the graduates of West Point, Annapolis and school with ROTC programs aren't volunteers. Maybe I should have said join other "smart kids and college graduates" in the military.
No matter , you know what my point was, give the college graduates of Stanford and Harvard a chance to join those in the service of this country by way of the draft. Son's and daughters of the politicians who saw fit not to go to West Point or Annapolis or join the college ROTC program.
Oh by the way I beleive that Kerry mis-spoke as he said he did; it happens.
Disagree luv. I'm all in favor of the draft for a number of reasons.
a. It really places pressure on politicians to go to war as a last resort.
b. It insures national service regardless of financial status or class.
You would play politics with young people's lives? That is pretty sick. What if it were your sister? Oh yes, any draft HAS to inlcude woman, too.
National Service - stick a fork in that one - I pay taxes and I figure that is all I owe. National service can come out that pork money. National service my arse. National sevice is another tax - free services from people. It is also a form of slavery. Not that taxes are much beter, but it's all those elitist SOBS are getting from me.
NoDayJob
11-22-2006, 10:03 PM
Instead of the young men and women being drafted and going off to war, start with the oldest people first. Of course, they'll need leaders, so all politicians including the President, will be drafted as officers and they will take the "point" [lead their troops in the front]. Then the younger folks can stay home and screw off, until they are of draft age @ 65 and up. No 4F-ers either. Gotta wheel chair or crutches, ya better motate or face a court martial.
dylbert
11-22-2006, 11:46 PM
As son of military officer who served 25 years, I can remember my dad's delight when draft ended! Yes, ended... Draft brought unmotivated, untrainable boys that had to be "weeded out".
Whereas, volunteer force brought men and women who desired to serve and defend their country. All volunteer military increased involvement of women throughout Armed Forces. I was 18 year old when these changes began and noticed improvement in morale and performance.
The biggest loss for military when draft ended in 1973 was ability to draft medical and professional persons. Quality of health care for military and their dependents began its decline in 1975-77 time period as last drafted doctors and nurses finished their "hitches." And, has never improved!
Coolest neighbor we ever had in base housing was single plastic surgeon who lived next door to my best friend. Money - something our dads didn't have as career officers -- was no object. He drove Jaguar XKE with 12-cylinder engine! Today, Borat would term this auto as "p_ssy magnet."
Drug culture of 1960s & 1970s created another curious situation -- random drug testing. I laughed my ass off when my 44 year old dad (who didn't drink, smoke or swear) got selected 3 out of 5 months to provide sample. Also, he had to attend race relations sessions. He was raised in Mississippi and was very respectful of all people. He was shocked (and I think dismayed as well) when black airmen used n-word in referring to each other during these meetings.
My father-in-law who was career Army officer shared these same beliefs. Both of these men and thousands of others like them served throughout the world so folks like us can write freely here (and disagree openly) without fear of reprisal or intimidation. Now, that's defines liberty, freedom and the right to pursue happiness for me!
JPinMaryland
11-23-2006, 09:26 PM
Oh by the way I beleive that Kerry mis-spoke as he said he did; it happens.
You know, I think it is possible that he was misunderstood and he really was trying to make it refer to Bush's policy in Iraq. So I guess you are not the only one that feels that way, Judge.
But if he was, then it shows that Kerry really isnt quite on the ball as merely a brief proof read of that passage would reveal that it can easily be misconstrued. Or maybe he just didnt finish the passage: "...or you'll end up in Iraq, like Bush's foreign policy."
SOmething like that, either it wasnt proofread or Kerry doesnt complete his sentences. Either way, not good. ANyhow, I'm through trying to figure out Kerry. Or how in hell he won the dem. nomination. SHould have given up after he said he voted for the war before he voted against the war or whatever that was. :bang: .
Secretariat
11-24-2006, 10:50 AM
One could easily assume that a volunteer army will have many more people who want to be in the military than a draft military would. I could further that opinion by stating that a draft military could weaken it by virtue of having too many soldiers who don't want to be there.
Your comments belie the courage of those drafted in any war, whether that be the Civil War, WW 2 or Vietnam. Drafted soldiers add numbers. Abizaid says we don't have the numbers to expand beyond the current Iraq engagement. Ergo, we are limited by ill-started wars to follow-up because of current "numbers". A draft would alleviate that problem. In other words, we don't have too many soldiers regardless fo whether they want to be there or not, and we have soldiers from predominantly lower, and middle classes.
By resorting to a draft military for the purposes you suggest, you would be weakening a President's options on how and when we would go to war to defend this country. I follow you, and I understand that you want this, but for the likes of me I cannot understand why you would want to weaken the defense of this country intentionally.
Re-read my statement. I beleive I am asserting we will strengthen the country by avoiding decisions that are in the worst interest of our country such as the Iraq War. The Irq War did nothing to strengthen the defense of our country and some could argue it has made us much weaker. We have less troops and have emboldened Iran and North Korea. Our military budget is bloated causing us to have less money elsewhere exvept what we can borrrow from commie China. The draft makes the stakes quite high for "all" Americans, and not the few.
I hope its not because your world view us that the US is the bad guy, or by weakening the US, we fall into line with the socialist Europeans and bequeath our status as the world's only superpower.
We are not the bad guy. This black and white philosophy of the GW admin is what has got us into trouble. America makes bad mistakes, so do other countries. We also do great things, so do other countries.
Secondly, about insuring military service regardless of class. I know and respect the fact that you have served in Vietnam. After reading the Heritiage report in JustRalph's thread you'll be thrilled to learn that today's military is nothing like the draft military you served in. In fact, the economic and educational averages in the military exceed the averages of the general population. In short, we're attracting good people who want to be there. If we resort to the draft, we'll get soldiers who fall under those social-economic conditions just like we had in Vietnam.
While I agree with the economic argument, I disagree with the geo-poltical argument on this. I beleive when a wealth sector of the population is able to avoid serving, while others without wealth serve and are serving because of the impetus of money, it creates a mercenary aspect to war, that I find repugnant. I beleive that service is an obligation of every American, and that it puts everyone on an equal footing to begin a debate about war.
Of course we'll have the typical educational deferrments that will have everyone streaming into our universities to obtain, but that'll be the ones who can afford it. We'll be left with the ones who can't in the military. Also, I know you'll say that we should eliminate educational deferrments, but that's not practical. Even with a draft military, we'll need education to fuel our next bunch of bright starts in our economy, so that won't happen.
See, I don't belevie in any deferments. If you're committing to national service, you do it. There are soldiers in Irsaq with familes back home, who'd liek to expand their education. The Cheney-Clinton deferrment thing doesn't work for me, and I don't beleive in the deferment argument.
On of the things I often complain about is how the MSM doesn't let the American people understand the quality of today's military and the good people that enlist. Pay attention the next time you see solider interviews in Iraq or Afganistan and quitely listen to the tone and nature of the soldier. These are smart men and women who want to be there doing what they do. They never get the hero worship that they deserve from us and the MSM.
I think you're looking thorugh rose colored glasses. There are dumb soldiers, and smart soldiers. Tim McVeigh enlisted.
In this day and age, and until something happens to change this, a draft will just weaken this country and promote the exact constitution of a military that Rangel and others seem to want to avoid. He knows it, and the legislators know it, and that's why this idea has no legs.
We disagree. A dradft would strengthen this coutnry albeit with pain because now the stakes affect almost all familes, not a select few. It goes to Pa's post about having the "balls to do it". My guess is that legislators aren't going to want conscription for their kids, so it won't happen.
As to the necessity of the draft, you only need to look at the 2006 QDRR Reports by this admisntration to realize the numbers won't be their for a "Long War".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_War_(21st_century)
A draft is a stupid idea. It almost tore the coutnry about in the 60's and 70's.
Sec is using the fraft as a political tool - which is about as digusting and low life as one can get.
JPinMaryland
11-24-2006, 11:53 AM
Isnt the army a political tool anyhow, regardless of draft or no draft?
so.cal.fan
11-25-2006, 12:57 PM
:) you write:
Reinstitute The Draft---
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of the young men and women being drafted and going off to war, start with the oldest people first. Of course, they'll need leaders, so all politicians including the President, will be drafted as officers and they will take the "point" [lead their troops in the front]. Then the younger folks can stay home and screw off, until they are of draft age @ 65 and up. No 4F-ers either. Gotta wheel chair or crutches, ya better motate or face a court martial.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we ever have to have suicide bombers.....this would work well.
:rolleyes:
Another benefit would be, so many old people would perish in wars, there would be no need to worry about the Social Security program....anyone who makes it home safe.......mininum $10K a month SS. Hmmmm, maybe I will volunteer. :lol:
SoCal.....:eek::eek::eek:
so.cal.fan
11-25-2006, 03:33 PM
Tom!
NDJ has a good idea.
Please write Charlie R. and suggest this.
It will solve SS crisis, and no enemy is going to want to face hundreds of thousands of angry senior citizens with guns! :eek: :eek: :eek:
46zilzal
11-25-2006, 03:37 PM
cerebrovascular atherosclerotic men CREATE these wars, Let THEM fight them.
Indulto
11-25-2006, 04:06 PM
Tom!
NDJ has a good idea.
Please write Charlie R. and suggest this.
It will solve SS crisis, and no enemy is going to want to face hundreds of thousands of angry senior citizens with guns! :eek: :eek: :eek:Or cars ...
At least two posters here have made the point that volunteers are less difficult to lead than draftees. Shouldn't an enemy with ageless animosity be more afraid of angry citizens at any age? ;)
An advancing army of senior citizens might violate the Geneva Conventions, the part about not using gas in wartime? :lol:
Indulto
11-25-2006, 04:18 PM
An advancing army of senior citizens might violate the Geneva Conventions, the part about not using gas in wartime? :lol:Farrrrrrrrrrrrr Ouuuuuuuut!:D
NoDayJob
11-25-2006, 06:05 PM
:) you write:
Reinstitute The Draft---
Another benefit would be, so many old people would perish in wars, there would be no need to worry about the Social Security program....anyone who makes it home safe.......mininum $10K a month SS. Hmmmm, maybe I will volunteer. :lol:
:D If this were to take place, you realize I'd be one of the draftees, I'm 75. Damn, there goes my S.S., but you won't hear me complaining. After surviving 30 below in N. Korea, anything else would be a lark. :D
NoDayJob
11-25-2006, 07:20 PM
cerebrovascular atherosclerotic men CREATE these wars, Let THEM fight them.
:jump: Good Idea... Put 'em all on a barge... Tow 'em out to sea, 500 miles off of Halifax, Nova Scotia... Arm 'em with knives and brass knuckles and have 'em fight to the last man standing. Then take the winner and give him a concrete overcoat and dump his sorry A$$ into the ocean. Tell him if he's able to swim to the nearest shore he'll become ruler of the world. Otherwise, be prepared for a few hundred atmospheres at the bottom of the sea. :jump:
PlanB
11-25-2006, 07:27 PM
LOL. That's better than my idea to have the real software know-it-alls pick winners. "I AM THE BEST. MY PROGRAM IS GREAT. AFTER THE LEARNING CURVE YOU WILL BE A WINNER, trust me." --------------- Okay, but would you post some picks BEFORE THE RACES ARE OVER? "Oh no, that wouldn't do justice to the beauty of my system, why can't you understand that?" LOL.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.