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/Armed Forces Question

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
What do you want? More personal info so that you can pick it apart with disrespect like dz does? Why don't you post your own personal info?

Get it through your head...it isn't about me. Its about dz. It doesn't matter whether I was a Rambo or a milk-toast- dz. It's about dz.


Hey friends, I know this is the political mud pit, and I know I'm guilty of same, but this isn't about dz, or jsobecky, this is about the subject.

jsobecky - Why would you post more information about your past in the other thread (where we'd had it out), and then decide here, when that past is brought into question, that it's none of anyone's business? I'd thought of quoting it, but that's unnecessary mud slinging in my eyes. Btw- If your past is truly as detailed as you'd mentioned in that other thread, it would do nothing but help solidify your credibility here.



dz

posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
What do you want? More personal info so that you can pick it apart with disrespect like dz does? Why don't you post your own personal info?

Get it through your head...it isn't about me. Its about dz. It doesn't matter whether I was a Rambo or a milk-toast- dz. It's about dz.


haha, you of all people is talking about disrespect. please go back through the thread and see who started flaming who for absolutely no reason. i tried to keep it to the point at hand, but you brought in the stupidity.



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 07:39 AM
link   
Gee, I'm glad I posted the fundamental question.



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Alot of interesting points 'becky'. Please don't forget to answer them now. Wouldn't want to *gasp* nullify our credibility now would we?

[Edited on 30-4-2004 by xenophanes85]



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I have recently acquired some pretty ... interesting ... information regarding the draft that I'd like to share with you anti-War people. But it wouldn't be smart to provide it in the forum for ALL (the members, government employees OR not) to see; U2U me if you wan't to know (you may already).



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Firstly: The chances of there being a draft in the future are slim to none. Go ahead, inundate me with your conspiracy theories
Fact is, they saw how poorly soldier morale was in Vietnam and frankly, if a soldier isn't willing to fight (or there by choice), they are not going to make a good soldier.

Secondly: Drill sergeants are not allowed to touch you at all during boot camp. They can make you do ridiculous things, verbally abuse you, et cetera. But they cannot touch you. There was an act passed about that, off the top of my head, I can't recall.

Thirdly: I know people who think they've got the system "figured out." If, in the unlikely circumstance there was a draft, they'd object - "conscientous objectors." Do you know what happens then?
You're a medic. They put you in battle anyway, just without a weapon. Have fun feeding M&Ms to dying soldiers minus a weapon, should the instance ever arise.

Fourthly: If you flat out refuse to fight, or even show up, you'll be jailed. They find out. So make a break for Canada, if that's the goal.

Fifthly: The military is in need of "grunts" and of skilled servicemen. You can be an officer and an engineer, which means they won't be rushing you off to get blown up in some foreign land. If you're a "grunt," then you get the dirty work, so to speak.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by mauskov
Firstly: The chances of there being a draft in the future are slim to none. Go ahead, inundate me with your conspiracy theories
Fact is, they saw how poorly soldier morale was in Vietnam and frankly, if a soldier isn't willing to fight (or there by choice), they are not going to make a good soldier.


The chances of there being a draft are far more likely than you think. And this has nothing to do with conspiracy theories, it has to do with myself being in the Army, and others that are in the armed forces that share what they know with each other.



Fourthly: If you flat out refuse to fight, or even show up, you'll be jailed. They find out. So make a break for Canada, if that's the goal.


If you're going to run off to Canada, you'd have to do so before the Draft is put into effect. The gov't has made a deal with the Canadians, at which time if you've made it across the border, the mounties will come, arrest you, and transport you back to U.S. Officials.



Fifthly: The military is in need of "grunts" and of skilled servicemen. You can be an officer and an engineer, which means they won't be rushing you off to get blown up in some foreign land. If you're a "grunt," then you get the dirty work, so to speak.


The government is trying desperately to fill the 'skilled' job positions now, before the draft. In the event of the draft (this I've said before), those drafted will be forced to take whatever jobs are available-- and if you 'conciensously object', then yes, you will be forced to take some other puss position.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cappa
The chances of there being a draft are far more likely than you think. And this has nothing to do with conspiracy theories, it has to do with myself being in the Army, and others that are in the armed forces that share what they know with each other.


Ah, yes.
Hilariously, I am also in the military. And doubly as hilarious, I seriously doubt there will be any draft anytime in the near future. We have an enormous standing, all-volunteer army. Additionally, America has a large (re: HUGE) number of untapped reservests.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by mauskov
Ah, yes.
Hilariously, I am also in the military. And doubly as hilarious, I seriously doubt there will be any draft anytime in the near future. We have an enormous standing, all-volunteer army. Additionally, America has a large (re: HUGE) number of untapped reservests.


What are you talking about? We didn't just send a few thousand reservists over to Iraq a few months ago? And, we have a fairly large military, but we're only the 3rd or 4th largest Army in the world (and none of the armies larger than ours are, in any way, involved, man-power-wise, in Iraq).

Also, perhaps you haven't read some of the other posts in this thread, friend? Where we discussed an additional 28 million going to the otherwise-useless (mostly) Selective Service, and they have been ordered to report the condition of a proposed draft to the president on March 31st 2005. Is there something I'm missing? If so, please tell me.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Just because we've sent reservists doesn't mean that there aren't a huge bulk of them whose units have not yet been activated. I didn't say NO reservests have been activated, merely that there is still a huge number of those in the reserves who are not called up. This therefore means that it is unlikely to have a draft, unless suddenly some 1 million + people are wiped out.

Right.

What is this about the March 2005 Selective Service post? I wouldn't know, as I was never required to register with the SS.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 09:23 PM
link   
if i was a soldier and joined voluntarly i wont not want to be in an army full of draftees. draftees get good soldiers who know what the # their doing killed!



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
if i was a soldier and joined voluntarly i wont not want to be in an army full of draftees. draftees get good soldiers who know what the # their doing killed!


Amen.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by mauskov
What is this about the March 2005 Selective Service post? I wouldn't know, as I was never required to register with the SS.


See my posts earlier in this thread, I posted a link that takes you to one of the SS' sites where it talks about the March 31st 2005 report to the president.

And, btw, if you are a member of the armed forces, you MUST be registered into the SS, more than likely it's done as a matter of protocol by your recruiter. But sometime, between the time you enter into the DEP program and when you leave for basic training, you recieve a mailing from the SS that thanks you for registering and gives you your SS #.

*shrug* Perhaps you just missed it.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 11:12 PM
link   
I find it unlikely that a draft will start in the immediate future and my basis is this article.


The Marines, which along with the Army have borne the brunt of combat in Iraq, said they already have fulfilled 90 percent of their retention goal for the fiscal year for getting Marines to re-up after their initial commitment. The Air Force and the Navy said they, too, are exceeding goals for getting airmen and sailors to re-enlist.

The only Army division to not meet its goal in the six-month period was the 82nd Airborne Division, whose members have been sent to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq since the Sept. 11 attacks. The division wanted to re-enlist 1,221 soldiers, but got only 1,136.

At Fort Campbell, soldiers from the 101st spent seven months in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks. The entire division of about 20,000 soldiers was sent to Iraq last year for major combat, and the last planeload returned home in March. A grueling year in Iraq claimed the lives of 61 Fort Campbell soldiers, and hundreds more were wounded.

In the six-month period ending March 31, the 101st topped its goal of re-enlisting 1,591. It got 1,737 to sign up for another tour of duty.



I have read other reports that have the services exceeding their retention rates, so if you are keeping the majority of the people that you need, for what purpose do you need a draft?

The answer, you dont and there isnt any chance of a draft in the next 5 years. And even if an emergency draft started it would only be for legit homeland defense reasons.

Link



[Edited on 2-5-2004 by Agent47]


dz

posted on May, 3 2004 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47
I find it unlikely that a draft will start in the immediate future and my basis is this article.


The Marines, which along with the Army have borne the brunt of combat in Iraq, said they already have fulfilled 90 percent of their retention goal for the fiscal year for getting Marines to re-up after their initial commitment. The Air Force and the Navy said they, too, are exceeding goals for getting airmen and sailors to re-enlist.

The only Army division to not meet its goal in the six-month period was the 82nd Airborne Division, whose members have been sent to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq since the Sept. 11 attacks. The division wanted to re-enlist 1,221 soldiers, but got only 1,136.

At Fort Campbell, soldiers from the 101st spent seven months in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks. The entire division of about 20,000 soldiers was sent to Iraq last year for major combat, and the last planeload returned home in March. A grueling year in Iraq claimed the lives of 61 Fort Campbell soldiers, and hundreds more were wounded.

In the six-month period ending March 31, the 101st topped its goal of re-enlisting 1,591. It got 1,737 to sign up for another tour of duty.



I have read other reports that have the services exceeding their retention rates, so if you are keeping the majority of the people that you need, for what purpose do you need a draft?

The answer, you dont and there isnt any chance of a draft in the next 5 years. And even if an emergency draft started it would only be for legit homeland defense reasons.

Link



[Edited on 2-5-2004 by Agent47]


Ok. So, the millions Bush just threw at Selective Services is for nothing? And the fact that they're trying to fill the 20,000+ jobs that they'd need to actually draft if they want to before next year also means nothing?

If they're not drafting, then those 20,000+ people are going to have awfully boring jobs.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47
I have read other reports that have the services exceeding their retention rates, so if you are keeping the majority of the people that you need, for what purpose do you need a draft?


And thereby you contradict your belief. "read other reports that have the services exceeding their retention rates"

I can tell you, that for the Marines, atleast, they have not. On Thursday of last week the order came down in to the Marine recruiters to begin allowing in new recruits in that have GED's-- something the Marines don't do a lot of. Now, why would they do such a thing, if they'd already met their requirements?



The answer, you dont and there isnt any chance of a draft in the next 5 years. And even if an emergency draft started it would only be for legit homeland defense reasons.


You are entitled to your opinion, but when the draft is put into motion, I'll try hard not to say I told you so.

And what, by the way, constitutes 'homeland defense' reasoning? I hope you don't think that just means that they'll keep the draftees in the U.S. and ship off all the volunteering servicemen.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I read the first 3 pages of this thread and ignored the last two figuring (and probably rightfully so) that they were just more of the same.

Here's my 2 cents:

I can't figure out why this thread has gone on as long as it has in the first place.

The entire issue (to me anyway) is that THIS IS DZ'S LIFE, not yours !!!!

This is to everyone who is slagging off this poor guy. Leave him alone, would you ?

Why should some authoritative presence have the right to just simply step into somebodies pre-planned life and tell you "Oh, sorry, dude, but you can't have what you've been mapping out your entire life. We're going to change all that, you now have to go and do something you're entire soul screams against and you may die doing it too. Too Bad."

This is nothing but Bull# as far as I'm concerned. It is HIS life. HIS !!!

Why some of you don't get that is completely beyond me.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Wow ... a third party defending somoene elses life ... now that's noble. I'm in the same boat as dz. NO killing or violence for me please. Especially in an idiots war such as this. The policy makers, NOT the soldiers, being the idiots.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cappa
And thereby you contradict your belief. "read other reports that have the services exceeding their retention rates"

And what, by the way, constitutes 'homeland defense' reasoning? I hope you don't think that just means that they'll keep the draftees in the U.S. and ship off all the volunteering servicemen.


No I did not contradict myself, I said that the services were retaining more than their quotas not burning through their retentions. Sorry if I didnt make that clear earlier.

No I did not mean that at all, I meant that a draft will only be instituted in the event some cataclysmic unforseen event occurs that the current service men would have trouble rectifying, I did not in any way intend to suggest they send the volunteers off and save the draftees.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by dz
Ok. So, the millions Bush just threw at Selective Services is for nothing? And the fact that they're trying to fill the 20,000+ jobs that they'd need to actually draft if they want to before next year also means nothing?


First of all its bad board usage to quote entire posts, edit down. what you want to debate.

Second, the millions that Bush "threw away" is for the purpose of maintaining readiness in the event of a catastrophe in which we would need a draft.

Third, no one needs to draft anything. Those 20,000 jobs are positions they need to fill with recruits, and Im sure they will.

Now unless you have some contrary links or articles, I think Ive made my point.




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join