Ok yesterday I said I would write a post debunking what some people believe as Bush introducing the Military Draft back into society. Well here it
"Bring Back the Draft" By Charles B. Rangel
Washington -- President Bush and his administration have declared a war against terrorism that may soon involve sending thousands of American troops
into combat in Iraq. I voted against the Congressional resolution giving the president authority to carry out this war -- an engagement that would
dwarf our military efforts to find Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.
But as a combat veteran of the Korean conflict, I believe that if we are going to send our children to war, the governing principle must be that of
shared sacrifice. Throughout much of our history, Americans have been asked to shoulder the burden of war equally.
That's why I will ask Congress next week to consider and support legislation I will introduce to resume the military draft.
January 8th 2003 WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Fritz Hollings last night introduced the Universal National Service Act of 2003, a bill to reinstate the military
draft and mandate either military or civilian service for all Americans, aged 18-26. The Hollings legislation is the Senate companion to a bill
recently introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) and Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.).
Specifically, the bill mandates a national service obligation for every U.S. citizen and permanent resident, aged 18-26. To that end, the legislation
authorizes the President to establish both the number of people to be selected for military service and the means of selection. Additionally, the
measure requires those not selected specifically for military service to perform their national service obligation in a civilian capacity for at least
two years. Under the bill, deferments for education will be permitted only through high school graduation.
Key Democrats in the House and Senate will renew calls for the military draft as part of a critical barrage they are preparing to launch against
President Bush over the length of troop deployments and the heavy reliance on reservists in Iraq.
On January 7 Democratic Congressmen John Conyers and Charles Rangel introduced in the House of Representatives a bill, the Universal National
Service Act of 2003, to re-instate the draft. Senator Fritz Hollings (D., South Carolina) introduced an identical bill into the Senate the same day.
. Conyers is a liberal and a proclaimed opponent of the Iraq war. Both he and Rangel voted against Bush's original Iraq war resolution. As recently
as April 2001 Conyers co-sponsored a bill aimed at eliminating the final remnants of the Selective Service System. How is it possible for a prominent
anti-war figure to support the re-establishment of the conscription machinery for the imperialist war juggernaut?
. The answer is that Conyers -- incredibly -- portrays the resumption of the draft as an anti-war measure. Under Conyers' plan, all will serve. And
when the wealthy find themselves forced to serve, they will supposedly be less likely to call a war. Thus the resumption of the draft, since Vietnam a
hated symbol of aggressive US foreign policy, miraculously becomes an anti-war measure. Coercing hundreds of thousands of youth into the aggressive US
military somehow becomes a step toward peace.
So for everyone who keeps blaming Bush for the talks of re-instating the draft, can we please put a end to it, because it seems to me that none of you
blaming Bush for trying to re-institute the draft have done any research on the topic.
Look at the underlying theme of the people who are introducing the Bill's. The underlying theme is that they are all DEMOCRATS.
Quite natural really. The libs want EVERYONE on the dole be it military or otherwise so they can keep them in captivity, well their money more so than
their actual bodies as in this case BUT it is typical liberal hyperbole to blame GWB for their OWN distasteful maladies...
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.