Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Draft Lotteries set for June 15

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I'm aware this subject has been touched upon before. I read in several places that there are "1,980 draft board offices around the country" and they are to "be ready to operate lotteries by June 15th." While I feel at this current point in time that the draft is still unlikely, I still have to wonder. If there were no plans to draft anyone, why set all this up? I realize many people don't feel it will ever happen but June 15 is not too far off.

Here is a headline I read from Democrats.com
It is an older article but I still felt was relevent to the post.

Bush's Abuse of Troops Drives Away Recruits as ''Reserves Fall 45% Short Of Goal, While Gap Is 30% in Regular Force''
27-Oct-04
Military Draft

Wall St. Journal: "For the second straight year, U.S. Army recruiters fell short of their goal for signing up enlistees in the first month of a new recruiting cycle. For the first 30-day period in its new recruiting year, the Army was 30% shy of its goal of signing up 7,274 recruits. The Army had a particularly hard time recruiting for the Army Reserve, on which the Pentagon has relied heavily in Iraq and Afghanistan. Enlistments for the reserves were 45% below the target. In the same period last year, the Army came up 25% short in its goal in the first month for enlisting 6,220 regular recruits and 40% short of its reserve enlistment goal." More reason to fear a draft is on the way with Bush.

Another interesting post taken from theBlatantTruth.com states:

The proposed changes discussed in this meeting(Feb '03) include:

* Allow a non-combat draft for shortages in critical skills, without calling a combat draft. This non-combat Skills Draft would induct men and women ages 18 to 34.

* Fill labor shortages of all kinds throughout not only DoD but the Dept. of Homeland Security and other agencies as well, especially high-paying professional positions like computer networking specialist or linguist. However, truck drivers, cooks, and several hundred other skills are also considered “critical.”

* Create a single-point, all-inclusive database, in which every young person would be forced to send in a “self-declaration”—like an IRS form—of all of their critical skills, chosen from a long list of several hundred occupations, similar to the Air Force Specialty Code with Skills Identifier. The usual penalties of imprisonment and/or a $250,000 fine would apply to all non-registrants.

* Upgrade the Medical Draft so that it collects data on skill sets and other information in the same way the Skills Draft would.

* Reduce induction time from being able to deliver all inductees in 193 days down to just 90 days for skills and medical inductees.


I haven't found anything on the current status of this besides the June 15 lottery deadline. My questions are:

Given the current direction the US government appears to be heading (from your point of view), do you feel it likely or unlikely to be instituted?

If it is unlikely, what sort of events do you feel might have to occur to make this a reality?


P.S. Another article regarding this topic: Daily Kos




posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I think the current status of it is dead. There was a bill introduced before the election by democrats to start the draft, but it didn't get very far.



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skibum
I think the current status of it is dead. There was a bill introduced before the election by democrats to start the draft, but it didn't get very far.


I actually wrote Durbin a letter (my senator, Fitzgerald never replied to my inquiry
) about this before it came to the media's light (I have a post somewhere on here about those bills before the house and senate). His response was a standard form letter that didn't even address the draft, but talked about violence in Iraq. After that, I started digging deeper to find out what was going on with the bills. I contacted someone who made a few calls to representatives and senators he knows, and they said it never even got off the floor. It was proposed, and died because no one wanted to address it.

That hasn't changed.



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Amusing

FreeThinking1, if what your articles insinuate is/are even remotely accurate, concise, valid, and true, then there would be no need for the Democrat Congressman, Charles Rangel, to reassert, re-push, or resurrect a bill to reinstate the draft, now would there?

From 5/28/05:
Rangel resurrects bill to bring back the draft

Here was his last failed attempt in Jan. 05, which was voted down 402 against to only 2 for:
Rangel To Reintroduce Draft Bill

This past topic thread may be of some importance to you and others, as well:
There are NO plans for a draft


Amounts to nothing but more false propaganda scare-tactics and Democratic spew.





seekerof

[edit on 3-6-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 05:30 PM
link   
The congressman's 'spew' has been quite sensible to my ears.

He sees that the burden of war has been shouldered in greatest part by the minorities and impoverished in this country. He wants to change that, and I agree wholeheartedly with him on the issue.

Why should those who benefit least from wealth have to die to preserve it? I think the man's argument is sound, at least in its estimation of the lopsided system. However, there is a catch...

The rich won't fight, even if there is a draft. They'll buy their way out of it, which leaves who else, the poor and minorities to pick up the slack.

All that a draft will bring is more misery to those who the bill promised to protect.

This is classic Washington.



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Aiee, so a draft is good if it's proposed by a democrat, but if Bush were to reinstitute the draft: Rebellion!

That stuff cracks me up!



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
The congressman's 'spew' has been quite sensible to my ears.

He sees that the burden of war has been shouldered in greatest part by the minorities and impoverished in this country. He wants to change that, and I agree wholeheartedly with him on the issue.

Why should those who benefit least from wealth have to die to preserve it? I think the man's argument is sound, at least in its estimation of the lopsided system. However, there is a catch...

The rich won't fight, even if there is a draft. They'll buy their way out of it, which leaves who else, the poor and minorities to pick up the slack.

All that a draft will bring is more misery to those who the bill promised to protect.

This is classic Washington.



Your whole argument is skewed, because it leaves out the important fact that everyone in the U.S. military is a volunteer. And if your contention that "The rich won't fight, even if there is a draft. They'll buy their way out of it" is true, how does the draft solve the 'problem' as you see it? Oh, it doesn't? Then why are you for it? This is just another lame democrat attempt to embarass the administration and that's your sole reason for saying you support it.



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   


Your whole argument is skewed, because it leaves out the important fact that everyone in the U.S. military is a volunteer. And if your contention that "The rich won't fight, even if there is a draft. They'll buy their way out of it" is true, how does the draft solve the 'problem' as you see it? Oh, it doesn't? Then why are you for it? This is just another lame democrat attempt to embarass the administration and that's your sole reason for saying you support it


I said the man's argument is sound in its estimation of the lopsided system.

I would support any draft that money couldn't grant immunity to.

My sole reason for supporting it is because I like Democrats? There's a really big flaw in your logic there buddy...

I don't like Democrats.
I don't like Republicans.
I don't like anyone who likes them.
That means I don't like you.


Not everyone is a partisan stooge yaknow...



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Aiee, so a draft is good if it's proposed by a democrat, but if Bush were to reinstitute the draft: Rebellion!

That stuff cracks me up!


Yes!!!


Thank you for that...so true!!



posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Partisan weenies..BEGONE from ATS!

And take the black band with you...

This stuff is ridiculous..the entire country is in the cook's pot, and half the carrots are blaming the other half for the situation...



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 04:10 AM
link   
The Military will eventual have to institute a draft.

Since the military is all volunteer, besides the ones who believe it is their duty to serve, who would join knowing full well that they will end up in the Middle East fighting a war, with no true enemy.

I guess we could consider the terrorist our enemy. But could you pick them out of crowd, when walking down the street?

Although the draft may be dead in congress, sooner or later (probably sooner) it will come up again, especially if the number of people joing keep declining.

Cheers



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Well, it looks like this never happened, unless I missed some really big news somehow! Y'all who believed, you can let out a sigh of relief now






top topics



 
0

log in

join