It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Obama to Reinstate the Draft?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 07:40 PM
Could announcing the reinstatement of the Draft what Obama has in mind concerning the request for more troops in Afghanistan?

Could this be his way of "creating jobs" for the multitude of unemployed,those not served by his famous stimulus bill?

We may have given clues about this last year,when Biden said:

“I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, “Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough? We’re gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I’m asking you now, I’m asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us.”

Biden warned that whatever this incident may be, Barack Obama’s reaction and response to it will be disastrous and wildly unpopular. Bill Whittle at NRO wondered what the heck Joe was hinting at.


Anyone damnfool enough to think the man behind O-Blam-Blam (mad dog Zbigniew Brzezinski) would allow peace under his protegé, is in for a rude and maybe deadly awakening, as the article below, "Obama calls for US military mobilization" will show :

READ these excerpts :

"There was that sense of sacred obligation that, frankly, we have lost during

these last two wars," Obama said. "I want to restore that."

"But it's also important that a president speaks to military service as an

OBLIGATION not just of some, but of many. You know, I traveled, obviously, a lot over the last 19 months. And if you go to small towns, throughout the Midwest or the Southwest or the South, every town has tons of young people who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's not always the case in other parts of the country, in more urban centers. And I think it's important for the president to say, this is an important obligation. If we are going into war, then ALL of us go, not just SOME."

H.R.393 - Draft Reinstate bill
To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the favorable treatment afforded combat pay under the earned income tax credit, and for other purposes

This isn't the Civilian Army he was referring to,was it? Because that's meant for here in the states...

H.R. 1388 entitled the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act (GIVE ACT) is before the House of Representatives Rules Committee today.

“Does anyone know anything about HR 1388 and exactly what it is?? It will create a Uniformed Force of 250,000 members, that’s a force greater than the number of troops we now have in Iraq, a virtual army. A force of 5,000 per state if evenly divided, more realistically the force will be deployed according to the size and population of each state. It talks about a volunteer force, yet speaks of 3 year obligations as in a Draft, and a pay scale of from $17,000 to $22,000.

The bill mentions but does not elaborate in any detail exactly what its mission is or what authority it may have over any community in which it is deployed. It would apparently be controlled from the White House through the Cabinet, and would be another layer of government with powers that might usurp State Sovereignty relative to established organizations like Education, Conservation, Health, Natural Disasters, etc and Public Safety at City, County and State levels.

Public Safety seems over broad with no specifics. What is the purpose of City Police, County Sheriffs, State Troopers and the National Guard, if not Public Safety? Just What would this Uniformed Public Safety Force be responsible for? Would it have the power to usurp local agencies?

None of this is news to those who have been following along from the beginning.

It might be something to think about if you're spending time with loved ones over this Thanksgiving holiday. Be especially grateful for perhaps only the calm before the storm.

Without trying to sound inflammatory,it looks to me like while Obama sends one group of soldiers overseas (men and women alike),he has another army here at home,answerable only to him and his Czars,to handle the coming unrest.

For Obama to have been given the Peace Prize doesn't mean much when you look at it through another perspective...

“The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.” Karl Marx quotes (German political Philosopher and revolutionary, 1818-1883) ...

Wish I could have put this thread together a little better,but I don't have much time. Sorry about the added "gloom and doom" as well,but these days it's hard to see the bright spots.

Just wanted to say I hope you all make the most of the time you have to spend with friends and family,because we really don't know what's going to happen next,but be prepared for the worst.

May God be with you.

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:05 PM
There should be a sense of obligation but it should not be forced on the youth of America. I served my country in the USN and I am proud of it though I hated every moment of my enlistment. I made the choice and I want my children to have the choice of service as well. If I had to do it all over again I would have enlisted but it would have been in the coast guard.

There should be a choice of service. It is more effective for moral and the combat effectiveness of all forces. PROVEN! I doubt that the draft will occur in current times.

[edit on 25-11-2009 by badmoviefan]

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:05 PM
reply to post by On the Edge

H.R.393 - Draft Reinstate bill

Forget that bill. It's basically dead in committee. In addition, Charlie Rangel, the sponsor of the bill, is in such hot water, that anything with his name on it, is taboo.

With the spotlight this week on House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY), we have prepared this timeline of his current problems. Rangel has been involved in so much controversy that it is difficult to keep it all straight. I hope this helps.

July 11, 2008- New York Times’ David Kocieniewski reports that Rangel occupies three rent-stabilized apartments in a luxury building, and uses a fourth as a campaign office.

July 14, 2008- NLPC files Complaint with the Federal Election commission alleging use of a rent-stabilized apartment for a campaign office comprises an illegal corporate contribution from the landlord. Rangel announces he will close the office.

July 15, 2008- Christopher Lee of the Washington Post reports that Rangel solicited donations on Congressional letterhead to the so-called Charles B. Rangel School of Public Service at City College of New York (CCNY), in violation of House rules.

August 2008- NLPC staff reviews Rangel’s financial disclosure forms and notices that he has a home in the Dominican Republic, but reports little or no rent. NLPC sends an investigator to Dominican Republic who finds that the beachfront “villa" is continuously rented out.

August 31, 2008- New York Post runs front-page story by Isabel Vincent and Susan Edelman with an unflattering photo of Rangel in beach chair, following Vincent’s trip to Dominican Republic.

September 5, 2008- Rangel admits to not disclosing, or paying taxes on, rental income of $75,000. He claims that he did not know that he had a no-interest mortgage. Rangel blames his wife and a language barrier. NLPC files Complaints with the IRS and U.S. Attorney alleging Rangel’s $75,000 figure is low.

September 24, 2008- At Rangel’s request, House Ethics Committee votes to investigate rent-stabilized apartments; using Congressional stationery to solicit donations for Rangel School; and failing to disclose or report Dominican Republic rental income. Pelosi predicts the probe will conclude by January 3, 2009.

November 6-9, 2008- Rangel leads Citigroup-funded Congressional junket to Caribbean island of St. Maarten. NLPC President Peter Flaherty attends and documents violations of House Rules, leading to New York Post feature story.

November 24, 2008- New York Times’ David Kocieniewski reports that Rangel helped preserve a lucrative tax break for Nabors Industries at the same time Nabors’ CEO Eugene Isenberg pledged $1 million to the Rangel School at CCNY.

November 26, 2008- NLPC files a Complaint with the House Ethics Committee alleging that Rangel violated House Rules by cheating on his taxes by improperly claiming a homestead exemption on a D. C. property.

December 9, 2008- House Ethics Committee expands investigation to include Rangels’ efforts to preserve a tax break for Nabors Industries at the same time Nabors’ CEO Eugene Isenberg pledged $1 million to the Rangel School.

January 28, 2009- Rep. John Carter (R-TX) introduces “Rangel Rule” bill to eliminate all IRS penalties and interest for paying taxes past due.

February 1, 2009- on CSPAN Newsmakers program Rangel predicts that “soon as the Ethics Committee organizes they ought to be able to dismiss this.” Rangel also accuses journalists as being “an arm of this organization (NLPC).” In a letter to supporters, Rangel says reporters do NLPC’s “dirty work.”

February 4, 2009- Sunlight Foundation issues report showing Rangel failed to report purchases, sales or his ownership of assets at least 28 times since 1978 on his personal financial disclosure forms. Assets worth between $239,026 and $831,000 appeared and disappeared with no disclosure of when they were acquired, how long they were held, or when they were sold, as House Rules require.

May 22, 2009- House Ethics Committee asks NLPC President Peter Flaherty to provide photographs, recordings and other materials from the St. Maartens junket.

May 29, 2009- About the Ethics Committee probe, Rangel tells Dow Jones Newswires, "I am optimistic that this very soon will be wrapped up."

June 2, 2009- NLPC President Peter Flaherty directly confronts Nabors Industries CEO Eugene Isenberg at the Nabors’ annual meeting in Houston. Isenberg denies a “quid pro quo” and claims the New York Times is “full of malarkey.”

June 24, 2009- House Ethics Committee confirms probe of Caribbean junkets in 2008 and 2007. Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) objects to investigation. CBC member Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-NC) is appointed to head probe. Butterfield took part in the trip in previous year.

August 12, 2009- Rangel files amended financial disclosure forms for 2002 to 2006. As a result, his reported net worth roughly doubled. The originals were signed under penalty of the False Statements Act.

September 3, 2009- The Washington Post calls on Rangel to resign his Chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee. The Post calls Rangel’s revised filings “a treasure trove of outrage.”

September 16, 2009- NLPC files Complaint with the House Ethics Committee alleging that Rangel disclosed little or no rental income for eight years (1993-2001) on a six-unit Harlem brownstone, even though public records show tenants were living there.

October 8, 2009- The House Ethics Committee announces that it is expanding Rangel investigation into “all Financial Disclosure Statements and all amendments filed in the calendar year 2009.”

Because NLPC is willing to provide information to the Ethics Committee, it should not be considered an endorsement of the process. As NLPC Chairman Ken Boehm puts it, “I’m not surprised that Rangel asked to be investigated by the Ethics committee. He can claim that he is being investigated, but he can look forward to a slap on the wrist. The Ethics Committee might as well be called the Cover-up Committee.”

Pelosi’s handpicked chairperson is Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA). The ranking Republican is Rep. Jo Bonner (R-AL). Since the probe began, Rangel has made campaign contributions to three of the five Democrats on the committee, with only one of them, Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), returning the money.

The 79-year-old Rangel has done Pelosi no favors with his increasingly erratic behavior. Rangel urged President Obama to “watch his back” when visiting Harlem, in the wake of a May shooting of a black off-duty cop by a white colleague. After revising his filings, Rangel told reporters that they were “not smart enough” to ask him questions. At a health care town hall meeting in Harlem, he blamed opposition to Obama’s health plan on racism, and said there was no reason to “negotiate with white Southerners.”

Of course, many of Rangel’s actions not only violate House rules, but also federal statutes. Tax evasion is a crime. Not disclosing income and assets on financial disclosure forms is a crime. Whether the Internal Revenue Service or the Justice Department under Eric Holder will act is an open question. But the Court of Public Opinion is in session. NLPC will continue to prosecute the case.

[edit on 25-11-2009 by ProfEmeritus]

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:12 PM
There will be no 'draft'.

The government won't need one. There is already a 'poverty' draft. When unemployment gets higher, people will voluntarily sign up for the armed services as they will be so desperate for money.

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:13 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Well,that's good to know.

Does that mean he can settle for an Executive Order instead?

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:14 PM
reply to post by deessell

Completely true and that's why I joined.

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:17 PM
reply to post by deessell

I know someone who recently did this and they were turned away.

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:21 PM
FYI that article is over a year old see link


[edit on 25-11-2009 by OpTiMuS_PrImE]

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:22 PM
This message sounds ominous to me though....especially the part about "CIVILIAN efforts"...??? Or does he just mean more taxes? I heard that is being considered,too!

In a press conference at the White House yesterday, President Obama vowed to "finish the job" in Afghanistan. He spoke less than 24 hours after his final meeting to determine a new strategy for the on-going war and said he will be making an announcement shortly on his plan for moving forward in Afghanistan. He did not specify when his announcement would take place, but CBS News confirmed he is planning a primetime address on December 1st. Obama said he feels confident that once the American people know the plan for Afghanistan, they will be supportive. He said in order for us to succeed in Afghanistan, the strategy must include civilian and diplomatic efforts.

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:26 PM
reply to post by OpTiMuS_PrImE

Yes,the article wasn't fresh off the presses yesterday,but what it says is still relevant!

Some of us have been watching this for over a year,wondering what he will do next!

And before you say this is just Anti-Obama talk,be sure that I distrust all politicians,and Obama is just taking orders from higher-ups anyway.

None of this "just happens"!

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:34 PM
reply to post by On the Edge

The last thing that the administration needs right now, is to anger it's primary base, namely those under 40 years of age. Reinstating the draft would be tantamount to setting a torch to the government, because that is what such an act would do. The government is worried enough over the senior citizen revolt, and the growing militia threat. They don't want to give the opposition any more allies. This country is a tinderbox right now, and all it needs is a spark for it to explode.

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:36 PM
Reinstatement of the Draft.

Just walk into the induction and proclaim that you are gay.

Or walk in and and proclaim that you are a pervert.

Or walk in and proclaim you are a marijuana user.
Walk in after eating poppy seeds for two weeks. you will fail the drug test.

There are likely 100s of ways that the draft will reject you.
then there is my favorite that is eating a bag of sugar starting about 6 hours before going in for the draft physical.

There are more then a few drugs that will do things like raise blood pressure
to a unsafe level for military training.

[edit on 25-11-2009 by ANNED]

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 08:57 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Yeah,you're right.(That's what I'm afraid of...that spark!) But it sure doesn't seem like he cares what "the people" think!

If it's true he might not seek office again in 2012,why should he care if he is popular?

Remember,it's out of chaos that the NWO will emerge!(And the civilian army is in place to deal with that?)

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 09:04 PM
reply to post by ANNED

Is that right? I thought some of those "deviances" were protected now under the Hate-Crimes bill?

I don't know much about the military requirements now. Good to think they still have some standards!

I admire anyone who is willing to serve,but what they're fighting for is another matter. And the Political-Correctness of it all,the way I understand it,is not only dangerous to our troops,but bad for moral as well. Why,aside from an income,would anyone want to fight for TBTB is beyond me.

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 12:10 AM
I don't see it happening. All branches of the military have spent the past few years getting their personnel numbers down to save money (do more with less) - it's unlikely that they suddenly want to reverse that trend.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:36 PM
draft, national service, or whatever you wanna call it, i think would be a good thing for the usukun coalition cause youd have soldiers who dont wanna be there and who dont plan to kill.

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:26 AM
reply to post by thegreatestone


But instead of randomly selecting people they government could scour the internet for comments made by young men of enlistment age which are supportive of the draft and then draft them first. It certainly would not be too difficult for the government to track down the names associated with the supportive comments.

This would ensure that the military would have a large percentage of early draftees who openly proclaim their support for the draft. This would be good PR.

*If this does happen, maybe you'll be so lucky.


I forgot - Everyone is equal now and women are liberated and such. Young women who support the draft can also be drafted.

That practically doubles the draftee pool. Sweet.

[edit on 16-7-2010 by Exuberant1]

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:25 AM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

That list you provided is counter active to what you are implying friend , if you think of it .All those listed offenses and he's still in office isn't he ? Just another protected untouchable if you ask me .Sound just like any other crook in office and he's in good company

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:27 AM
Obama's scared of you. Don't you see? He's scared of what you might become... you're getting too strong.

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:30 AM
The Draft has to be the most insane thing in a liberal democracy.

You are forced into fighting for your country to defend your freedom? How does that work? You become a slave and risk your life to be free?
How does that make any sense?

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in