Restarting of the draft ?

[sarettah]

http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr163.html

$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 President 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.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/a...article5146.htm (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5146.htm) www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year, http://www.hslda.org/legislation/national/...s89/default.asp (http://www.hslda.org/legislation/national/2003/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.

[Peaches]

Here are two reasons why I don't think the draft will be reinstated any time soon:

1) All branches are meeting their recruitment goals in record time as well as having high reinlistments. All they would have to do it lift a handful of the current restrictions and they could double the forces.
2) Historically, the draft has allowed those young men enrolled in college to get a waiver until graduation. Think of the racial demographics of those that will be left and the NAACP and Jesse Jackson will be screaming racial profiling.

I just don't see it happening, even based on #1 alone.

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Peaches@Apr 11 2004, 09:05 AM
Here are two reasons why I don't think the draft will be reinstated any time soon:

1) All branches are meeting their recruitment goals in record time as well as having high reinlistments. All they would have to do it lift a handful of the current restrictions and they could double the forces.
2) Historically, the draft has allowed those young men enrolled in college to get a waiver until graduation. Think of the racial demographics of those that will be left and the NAACP and Jesse Jackson will be screaming racial profiling.

I just don't see it happening, even based on #1 alone.
Peaches, I'm not quite certain #1 is as true as recruiters might have told you. Recruiting is making goals, but my understanding is that attrition (recruits that don't complete basic) is up somewhat; reenlistments are suffering in some critical specialties, particularly the army; and if the so-called economic recovery ever actually starts seeing job creation, recruiting and retention will suffer. A lowering of standards also leads to an increase in attrition and problems in commands subsequent to the training cycle.

Regarding #2 ... One thing a college deferment would do is increase college enrollment in all demographic groups. I'm not entirely certain that the demographics would really support your stereotype that so many white students go off to college right away that an unfair burden would be placed on blacks. If the system gets set up the way it was in it's last couple of years, then I doubt the niggers will get uppity. If the system is set up in the arbitrary way it was set up before the implementation of the birthday lottery, then they would have good reason to be concerned.

I'm pretty sure there have been more than a dozen bills calling for the reintroduction of conscription since it ended. I personally would think favorably about supporting a system that required EVERYONE physically capable of going into the military, VISTA, etc., for two years. Until the Iraq war, I've questioned the need for a military draft. The way the services are stretched with <150,000 folks on duty in Iraq, I'm wondering now ... but I don't think Congress will have the balls to do it.

[Buff]

A draft will be met with a revolt -- if you think there was resistance to the draft in the 60s wait til you see the reaction if they try one now.

[Peaches]

PD, I'm going by the DOD stats, not the recruiter's info - I wouldn't trust a recruiter if they told me I was a short plump blonde chick :awinky: I'm also going by message boards and seeing the kind of things possible recruits are being denied entry on. As you guys know, CT almost didn't get in due to a broken arm with a plate. Bad credit, ANY criminal record, admitted hard drug use, ANY medical problems, etc are ALL automatic DQ's and require a waiver. Many are NOT getting the waivers. Those who are getting in have up to a year before boot camp. CT's enlistment was finally done in 1/04 and he's not going in until tomorrow (yes, I'm weepy...). And that's going in as electronic general aptitude. Had he waited on a specific job, it could have been months longer. IMHO, releasing some of the restrictions and shipping out faster would put more in the active forces right off the bat. Of course, the option of going to jail or the military is LONG gone.

As far as education, I'm not sure how it is in YOUR neck of the woods, but here, college enrollments can't take any more. Due to the lottery funded college tuition program, a 3.0 and an 1100 SAT score is almost mandatory to get into UGA. It used to be if you could sign your name, you got into UGA. They aren't building more colleges around here, but from elementary to high school the kids are crammed into classroom trailers. Those kids are going to need to go SOMEWHERE. But the bottom line is less blacks enroll in college than whites and asians. Again, I'm basing a lot of this on what happens here and we have a large black demographic. At UGA, they decided not enough blacks were enrolling so they actively recruited them. The number applying actually went DOWN. I know that sounds horribly prejudicial, but I'm just looking at the hard numbers. :(

I just don't see a draft happening anytime soon, and if it does, it will meet with a LOT of resistance. But I've been wrong before :okthumb:

[Almighty Colin]

I'm with Buff.

[Buff]

Originally posted by Colin@Apr 11 2004, 10:14 AM
I'm with Buff.
shhh

I thought you said you were going to keep our relationship discreet!

[sarettah]

Every draft has been met by resistance, from the revolutionary war through the Vietname war. The riots during the civil war over conscription were just a fierce as anthing during the 60's ( http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2004/2_4...712/print.jhtml (http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2004/2_45/55198712/print.jhtml) http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h249.html ). If I remember my history properly, British conscription was also cited as one of the reasons for the revolutionary war. That however, did not stop George Washington from drafting soldiers to fight for the Union.

In every war in our history, with the exception of the 100hour persian gulf war and the current conflicts we have had to resort to the draft in order to man our battlefields. If the current conflicts continue as they have, with more enemy resistance and less popular support, we will undoubtedly reinstitute a draft of some sort.

[sarettah]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...-610008,00.html (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040419-610008,00.html)

We need 80,000 or more troops added to the U.S. Army."

When a grass fire first starts, you can jump right in the middle of it and stomp it out. But if you wait too long, it just becomes uncontrollable. We should immediately jump onto the opposition and end it, and then launch smart diplomatic moves to get NATO and the U.N. and other Arab forces involved in a bigger way.

There are no more U.S. troops to send to Iraq. That's why we need 80,000 or more troops added to the U.S. Army. Congress is allowing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to dig in his heels and try to maintain a foreign policy based on a grossly undermanned U.S. military. The key question isn't whether the 1st Cavalry Division is going to get run out of Baghdad—it's not. The key question is, if you've got 70% of your combat battalions in the U.S. Army deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, South Korea and elsewhere, can you maintain this kind of muscular presence in that many places? The answer is no. But if we take action now to increase the size of the Army by 80,000 soldiers, we'll be able to handle this global reach. The key would be to activate nine National Guard brigades in the next 18 months and convert them into active-duty soldiers, allowing the reservists to go back to their communities.

....................................

We need to invest two to 10 years in Iraq, and we'll have a good outcome. But if we think we're dumping this responsibility in the coming year, we're going to end up with a mess on our hands that will severely impair our international role for the coming 20 years.
— By Barry McCaffrey



http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2680-2004Apr10?language=printer)

The 620-man 2nd Battalion of the Iraqi Armed Forces refused to fight Monday after members of the unit were shot at in a Shiite Muslim neighborhood in Baghdad while en route to Fallujah, a Sunni Muslim stronghold, said U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who is overseeing the development of Iraqi security forces. The convoy then turned around and returned to the battalion's post on a former Republican Guard base in Taji, a town north of the capital.

Eaton said members of the battalion insisted during the ensuing discussions: "We did not sign up to fight Iraqis."

[Carrie]

"We did not sign up to fight Iraqis."

Grrr. Give me food, shelter, clothing. Train me in a skill it would take me thousands of dollars to learn on my own that I can turn into a career. Give me piles of free money to attend college. Give me honors, medals, accolades, and the opportunity to do this for a mere 20 years and retire with a full pension for the rest of my life.

But don't ask me to fight. I didn't sign up to the MILITARY FORCES for that.

:headwall:

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by sarettah@Apr 11 2004, 12:41 PM
Every draft has been met by resistance, from the revolutionary war through the Vietname war.
T'is true.