It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Draft reinstated, 2005

page: 10
0
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 06:49 PM
link   
"Well, considering the number of people who have fought in Iraq and civilian contractors is between 300,000 and 500,000 and about 850 have died, I'd say even fighting in Iraq is not tantamount to a death sentence."


Are you serious??
The media is reporting 1000 soldiers killed. Have a very strong hunch the number is much, much higher.
(It's a bit odd we aren't hearing about any MIAs, no?)

There are *supposedly* 8000 casualities.

Why shouldn't you believe those figures?
Well, uh...gee.....
cuz 5600 RETIRED SERVICEMEMBERS WERE INVOLUNTARILY RECALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY OVER THE SUMMER.

Do you all have some sort of shared mental block over that reality?
That's a backdoor draft, people.
They're being recalled to fill the void in our military.

Do you honestly think 5600 people would be involuntarily recalled
if the above fatality/casuality numbers are accurate??

THINK.
Reflect upon what I just posted.
Don't skim over it...don't tune it out...THINK.





[edit on 19-9-2004 by bushblows]




posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Mandatory national service is a good thing. A populace of individuals schooled in the specialties germane national security is a very good thing. Having a population of individuals who have something invested in their own liberty is a wonderful thing.

I'm all for the draft and alternative service for conscientious objectors. Canada needs to prepare for a massive influx of US emigrants.


Draft armies suck compared to volunteer armies. You end up with the two-tier system of volunteer lifers and un-volunteers. You have to have a short enlistment period to keep the cookie of honorable discharge bigger than the stick of imprisonment. There's no incentive to keep the troops in voluntarily, because you get them anyway, so between the short enlistments and the leavers you have almost zero professionalism and the basic soldier skills are rock-bottom. The motivation, abilities, discipline, and espirit of a volunteer army is immeasurably better than what's found in a draft army. Substance abuse, a means of 'escape' is rampant in draft armies.

Making a volunteer army pays for itself in fighting ability and lack of corruption.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Draft armies suck compared to volunteer armies.

They seem to work for the Israelis and were able to defeat the nazis and japanese.
And the Revolutionary French Army, while ultimately unsuccessful, was very much effective. Draft armies can be worse than volunteer armies when the draftees have little training or motivation. An ongoing national draft would mean that the troops don't have to be rushed to a combat zone, so they could be trained extensively. That in itself will effect motivation positively, and promote camradery within units and such, so that, while people might not be particularly motivated for strategic goals, when they are put in a fire fight they'll work together for themselves and one another. I think its inacurrate to state that there is such a dichotomy between the two. Of course, at least for now, I think a volunteer army is the way to go.


You have to have a short enlistment period to keep the cookie of honorable discharge bigger than the stick of imprisonment.

easily remedied by doubling or tripling the possible imprisonment length.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

I think its inacurrate to state that there is such a dichotomy between the two. Of course, at least for now, I think a volunteer army is the way to go.


I don't have anything but anecdotes about the difference between the draft-era US military and the AFV, but every old-timer I asked about it when I was in the Marines said there was absolutely no comparison, that it was like night and day.


You have to have a short enlistment period to keep the cookie of honorable discharge bigger than the stick of imprisonment.
easily remedied by doubling or tripling the possible imprisonment length.


Desertion can already get you shot under the UCMJ, so it's kind of hard to get harsher punishment than that.



I think I can sum up my point about the difference between a draft and a volunteer army by asking you this...

How do you get a job done well?

A: Find someone who volunteers to do the job.

B: Threaten someone to do it with jail time.



[edit on 20-9-2004 by taibunsuu]



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
but every old-timer I asked

I'm not trying to dispute the idea entirely, I just want to reiterate that its not a universal law that draftees 'suck'.


keep the cookie of honorable discharge bigger than the stick of imprisonment.

easily remedied
Desertion can already get you shot
Then why would the 'stick of imprisonment' be ineffective in that case?

I think I can sum up my point

Its an interesting point, and I've already stated that I think national draft isn't a good idea anyway, but, again, just because a draft army isn't as effective as a volunteer army doesn't mean that its horribly ineffective and inept. Ceratainly historically thats not been the case.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 08:13 AM
link   
Well, you do have very valid point and that is a lot of performance is determined by motivation.

How about the prize system? I guess it's considered obsolete, since it's cheaper to give people medals. But how about if volunteers, since they are essentially mercs, could get rewarded through booty? Say, divided up a big chunk of Iraqi oil share profits and divide them into the number of troops who saw combat in-country. That'd be a pretty good motivator for a lot of people because you'd retire when the war was done as a millionaire. Only problem is all the lawyers would end up joining the military



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 08:30 AM
link   
All those FOR joining the Forces plese do it now, go to Iraq and please "stay there" if you know what i mean.

To all those against, RESIST! Don't let those fascists get you down to their level!



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Everyone in this countries history have fought for it exept that pud ALI ... and a couple others that are too scared to fight for anthing that they believe in but they can fight for money if you gave it to them though. It is stupid ... AMERICAN ... that sais alot .. or used to now it just sais international Community.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Well, you do have very valid point and that is a lot of performance is determined by motivation.

How about the prize system? I guess it's considered obsolete, since it's cheaper to give people medals. But how about if volunteers, since they are essentially mercs, could get rewarded through booty?

According to many reports, soldiers over there are doing this anyway. I guess its that 'entrepenurial' spirit. Heck, maybe the US could just start founding 'Veterans Colonies' over there and back here, set aside some nice little suburb outside of detroit of upstate NY with half acre of tax free land and a four bedroom house with a two door garage for retiring soldiers.

Ok, maybe thats not likely to happen.



posted on Oct, 5 2004 @ 08:17 PM
link   
"In a surprise election year legislative maneuver, the House Republican
leadership is expediting consideration of a bill to resume the military
draft (HR 163). Apparently seeking both to quell widespread rumors
that the Republicans may soon resume the draft and to shift this
political hot potato to the Democrats, the Republican leadership has
decided to put the issue to a vote under a suspension of rules
whereby a bill is brought to the floor without committee hearings or a
markup. There will be a 40-minute debate; no amendments will be
allowed; and then the vote will be taken. The leadership expects the
bill to be soundly defeated. Even Rep. Rangel (NY), who originally
introduced the bill in early 2003, says he will vote against it.

Rep. Rangel (NY) and 13 other Democrats introduced the bill prior to
the war in Iraq. Rangel believes the all-voluntary military is an
unjust form of military conscription that draws primarily from the
economically disadvantaged. He also believes the U.S. would be more
cautious about going to war if everyones son or daughter had an equal
likelihood of being called upon to fight."


This is interesting this bill has just been sitting for so long, and all of a sudden they vote on it right before the election...I guess if it is finally killed, it should relieve a lot of the questions about a draft coming up.



posted on Oct, 5 2004 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Well, you do have very valid point and that is a lot of performance is determined by motivation.

How about the prize system? I guess it's considered obsolete, since it's cheaper to give people medals. But how about if volunteers, since they are essentially mercs, could get rewarded through booty?

According to many reports, soldiers over there are doing this anyway. I guess its that 'entrepenurial' spirit. Heck, maybe the US could just start founding 'Veterans Colonies' over there and back here, set aside some nice little suburb outside of detroit of upstate NY with half acre of tax free land and a four bedroom house with a two door garage for retiring soldiers.

Ok, maybe thats not likely to happen.


I think it'd be great if we could make Iraq nice enough for veterans to want to retire there. That should be the goal. Unfortunately, we're just there to jack their oil and leave them in a uranium dustbowl.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by taibunsuu]



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 08:28 PM
link   
The military is finding it harder and harder to meet recruitment quotas? So what options are available to the military?

While Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and President Bush have repeatedly said there is no need for a draft, and one of the military's top recruiters said only last week that a draft "would not improve the quality" of soldier, Delaware Online reports that several well-known conservatives and moderates sent congressional leaders a letter in January that said, "the United States military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume."

story here

Stay tuned, boys and girls....



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Well today's the day that the first draftees will be called.

I hope my number doesn't come up



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   
If soldiers continue to die and the the U.S. continues to fight this war, such as it is, why wouldn't we have a draft? As for the draft degrading our quality of soldier....I feel it would only hurt a little.

Volunteer or not, when a person is thrust in a battle zone I doubt they care as to what purpose brought them there. I don't see how a volunteer will fight harder than a draftee when all of them are just trying to escape with their lives. I do agree that the draftees are likely to be more problematic and might not train as hard. In that sense, it will degrade our military and possibly the effectiveness of the fighter. If the military does their job training our troops and weeding out the weak, our military could indeed be vast and powerful despite the draft. Many people have also brought up an important point: not everyone will have to fight and die! There are other services. Overall I do feel that having to go overseas and fight is a fair assumption.
As for me, I'm 27 but the new draft proposal may include my age group. If it happens I'm not dodging the draft. I hate this war...I hate ALL wars. But they happen all the time. Besides, I have a little girl to think about...and my family. If I run, she grows up without a father. If I fight and die, she still grows up without a father but at least she gets SOME compensation from my absence. Oh well....gets me out of the office!



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by theshadowknows

Originally posted by Tetsuo-51
1) Move to a different country (I wouldnt want you here anyway, we dont need pussies)


I don't want to fight because of religious reasons...Not because im a "pussy".



What religion? I bet we can find a crusade somewhere in your religions history...


Peace



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeThinking1
If soldiers continue to die and the the U.S. continues to fight this war, such as it is, why wouldn't we have a draft?

Because it wouldn't be necessary.

As said in another thread, the death count is



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
Keep in mind, though, it's a bit hypocritical to be against killing, but to have absolutely no problem to let other people do the killing for you.


I don't see how this is hypocritical. This is like saying if I am opposed to gun ownership, its hypocritical to let other people own guns. If I didn't go to war and did a non-combat role I don't see why the government's choice to send someone in my place would be on my hands. Now if I paid some poor immigrant to get a fake ID and pretend he was me, then that would be hypocritical.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by FreeThinking1
If soldiers continue to die and the the U.S. continues to fight this war, such as it is, why wouldn't we have a draft?

Because it wouldn't be necessary.

As said in another thread, the death count is



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 04:14 PM
link   
If any politician tries to re-institute the draft, the american public is going to go absolutely nuts! If fact, some politicians who are anti-Iraq war, are pushing the draft because they know that the draft might be the only thing that will motivate the American people to stop Involvement in the Iraq war and further conflicts. Americans have some problems sending someone else's child to fight and die, but the fact that most fighting now are volunteers, reduces the guilt. But wait till they might have to send their own son or Daughter. The draft will motivate average Americans more than almost anything else.

Defend our Country...no problem...all americans will volunteer to fight.

Fight for the "rights" of Iraqi women, oil, etc......not if my children might die.
But if you can get volunteers to go...I think with most Americans will sadly accept that.

The only way you can re-instate the draft is to get Americans believing that it is neccessary for this defence of our country. And I can only think of one way to do that......another terrorist attacK on American soil must first occur.

Then and only then, can the politician's SELL the draft to the American people.

My prediction is that this is exactly waht will occur.

1) Americans oppose draft and war in Iraq, but are pretty much apathetic.
2) Large scale Terrorist Attack on American Soil.
3) Americans motivated both by the attack and by the retoric of politicains
that we must go to full scale attack and war.
4) Politicians Hound the American people with fear.
5) Politicians define who the enemy is. Might not be true enemy.
6) American people get motivated to fight back.
7) Draft gets reinstituted.

Gee this sounds familiar.....doesn't it?



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   
4 Miles in 20 - 25 miles is an average of 5:05 - 5:15 minutes per mile. That's should be easy for a fit person.

Secondly, I don't know if this is true, but uh, it's June 15th already, and I don't see a draft.


Also, there are not 8,000 U.S. casualties in Iraq. I have direct knowledge straight from the 'sandbox' as it is referred to as.

The number lies between 1650 - 1710, plus around 20 MIA.

It's not a death sentence, and definitely not enough to recall a draft, considering there are 150,000 soldiers there.

Finally:

Talibansuu:
You are incorrect in saying that the best way to get a job done is to threaten people into doing that job. Examples? Soviet Union.

Secondly, it's known fact that the best soldiers in the world are the volunteers, because they are not drafted, it means they are more willing to fight. Examples? The 101st and 82nd AirBorne Rangers in WW2. Another example? The U.S. volunteer military.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but forced military service only turns out in chaos, problems, and more hassle than the upper brass wants. Examples? Vietnam.

-wD

[edit on 15-6-2005 by WeBDeviL]




top topics



 
0
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join