There are NO plans for a draft

www.gopusa.com...

Once again, CBS is guilty of spinning against the Republicans.
They are pushing the 'OH MY GOD THERE IS GOING TO BE A DRAFT'
panic. Snopes.com has debunked the Republican Draft -

Excerpt -
Talon News
Sept 30, 2004
By Bobby Eberle


"However, both these bills were introduced not by legislators genuinely seeking to reinstate the draft, but by Democrats seeking to make an anti-war statement," Snopes.com reports.

Senate Bill S.89 was introduced in January 2003 by Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) and had no Republican co-sponsors. A companion bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in January 2003. It was sponsored by Democrats Charlie Rangel (D-NY), Jim McDermott (D-WA), John Lewis (D-GA), Pete Stark (D-CA), and Neil Abercrombie (D-HI).

Neither bill was passed out of committee, and these Democratic bills were not mentioned by either Schlesinger or Rather.

"You�d think that in the midst of the terrible publicity he is getting for working closely with a partisan Democrat -- bent on bringing down President Bush -- that Dan Rather would have the good sense to lay off the liberal bias for a while, especially since just three weeks ago, the 72-year-old CBSer denounced the Internet as 'filled with rumors,'" said RatherGate.com owner Mike Krempasky.

Paul Rodriguez, the managing editor of Insight Magazine, said in an online column, "Frankly, I'm beginning to wonder if CBS News is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic National Committee -- or at least a satellite office for John Kerry's campaign committee."


[edit on 9/30/2004 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by esdad71
When you enlist in the milatary, wheter you are a cook or a spec-op soldier, you are an asset of the milatary to use. If you signed up to join the National Guard, I feel for you and your family, but there was a risk. Suddenly the extra 700 dollars a month means # when you are knee deep in some city can't even pronounce miles from home. HOwever, BUsh did not make that decision for you.

esdad I have been waiting for someone to say this, I fully agree. Our soldiers are heroes however their purpose is to go to war. We give soldiers money to do a job tuition reimbursement and the like. I went to college in Dover DE only minutes from the DAFB. This resulted in many of our soldiers sharing a classroom with me. Upon 9/11 the face on many of these individuals changed they were no longer happy with the military because of their impending shipping out. Please don�t read this and be confused many were willing to accept this fate however there was individuals that were not necessarily discussed with the war but instead with the notion of them actually being there. I hear the same thing from civilians they support the war but don�t think our soldiers should be fighting it. Seriously people "we" with our tax money pay these individuals salary for this exact purpose and then we don�t like it when they are used. Honestly if we can be in the military and never have the threat of war were do I sign.

It's been proven over and over again in history that a conscripted or drafted military creates a force of the lowest common denominator. Low quality, low will, and low morale. Modern combat requires highly trained personell, not a grunt with a rifle, as in WW2 or Viet Nam. There is simply no room for an unwilling participant, they create a danger to themselves and others. Unless there is a full scale attack by another nation on the U.S. soil, you will never see a draft in the United States. We simply have outgrown the need for a buck private.

Personally, I'd like to see the militia system brought back. Sort of a combination of the Civil Defense Force and the Colonial Militia. Let the military fight the wars, and let the militia protect the country and help out in natural disasters. There are PLENTY of people in the U.S> Heartland around here that would jump at a chance to perform military maneuvers and use military weaponry on a monthly basis. It'd give them sonething to do when it's not huntin' season.

Well put, Flyers Fan. There is so much mistruth out there regarding this issue that it is amazing:

o Democrats sponsor bills to reinstate the draft
o Rumors spread that Bush has a plan to bring back the draft
o Dan Rather gets in on the action
o MTV has begun a mass emailing campaign to mothers of draft-age kids, stating that Bush plans to bring back the draft (this I heard on the radio this afternoon, will look up details).

Why? One theory is to keep the young people from registering to vote (they have been turning out in record numbers to register) with the scare tactic that this will put them on the draft-able list. The real reason is that many of these young people are registering as Repulicans, and this is a desperate Democratic tactic to keep them from voting.

I hope that a reputable media person exposes this in prime time.

Here's a link that mentions MTV's Choose or Lose tactic:

Scare Tatic

I think bush Senior used READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES as his platform for inaugeration. Ironically, it was all BS. Ever here the word like father like son. I hope those who buy into the draft not being reinstated are prepared when they are let down and their sons, daughters, nephews and neices are being called up to serve.................

This is a last ditch politcial tactic to scare voters into voting for Kerry. What the Kerry camp is attempting to do is make it seem that a vote for Bush is like gift wrapping your children or yourself for the grim reaper. However, the facts of the matter are simple H.R. 163 and S 89 both introduced January 7, 2003 were sponsored, as many have pointed out, by democrats.

All this fodder about Bush bringing back the draft is hogwash. Bush cannot bring back the draft just as no president can. It takes Congress to vote in the draft and in particular 60 votes from the Senate. There is no way that 60 Senators will vote for the draft its political suicide. So first rule of business is that the draft will not pass. Second rule of business is that the only people wanting to support the draft now are DEMOCRATS!!!! Doesn't that seem suspicious to you?

Will there be a draft you bet you a** there will be a Draft
Don't be nieve
An appropriation of $28 million has been provided in the current defense budget to bring the nation�s Selective Service System up to speed, which many people believe will likely lead to a national draft of young men and women by June 15, 2005.The Pentagon has begun a program to fill 10,350 local draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board posts as soon as possible.
www.americanfreepress.net...


Hidden Agenda: A National Draft in the Future? By Howard Dean

www.yubanet.com...

Absolutely no deferments of any kind" in forthcoming draft
www.tbrnews.org...

some people who happen to be democrats have introduce draft bills they know will fail and they wont vote for, Why you ask " to bring the issue to public light"" and wake up some of the sheep. They know this administration doesthings in secret and you will not see their draft bill until its passed, so if they didn't do that you would not be talking about a draft.

something to think about ,
if a a terrorist attack happens and bush declares martial law
does congress still have to pass the draft?????


[edit on 30-9-2004 by shadowmirror]

[edit on 30-9-2004 by shadowmirror]

Originally posted by waroftheworlds
READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES

Entirely differnt situation. If Bush the elder didn't raise taxes, the gov would've been short on money and what not. The repurcussions of not rasing taxes were too much for the admin (and note that all he did was not veto the taxes presented to him by congress) to not allow it too pass.

A draft would be extremely disruptive for the republicans, and would not be worth the effort. There are defintiely other ways that they can ramp up voluntary enlistment and not suffer the political consequnces of a draft. Look at how much the vietnam era protests affect the United States today, and thats more than 30 years later!

blackjackal
the facts of the matter are simple H.R. 163 and S 89 both introduced January 7, 2003 were sponsored, as many have pointed out, by democrats.

You'd think that the 'bush is going to start a draft man!" people here would at least address these issues rather than ignore them.

which many people believe will likely lead to a national draft

Many people beleive a lot of things. With the democrats advancing a draft, perhaps its possible that it will start, but, apparently, the republicans are the ones trying to prevent it.

Ok so there will be a draft will there? Then let me point something out to you maybe you overlooked. The president does not have the power to institute a draft on his own he can only sign it into law after it passes the Senate with 60 votes. Well if it passes the senate with 60 votes that means at the very least 8 democrats had to vote for the measure. How do I know this because the Senates breaks down like this

• Republicans- 51
  
• Democrats- 48
  
• Independents- 1
  

www.senate.gov...

So if the draft does pass it will have to be a bi-partisan action.

[edit on 30-9-2004 by BlackJackal]

I dont get your point,
are you saying that bush can't get 60 votes to pass a draft because you think all democrats don't support a draft?
not all senators support a draft and not all senators are against a draft
democrat or republican it doesn't matter
But this administration has proven they can get bills past that are unpopular and even unconstitutional "patriot act"
if bush is re-selected and wants a draft there will be a draft ,he wants to start a war with iran and syria, were do you think he will get the troops from??



[edit on 30-9-2004 by shadowmirror]

[edit on 30-9-2004 by shadowmirror]

By your logic I can deduce that the next administration can persuade some republicans to vote for the draft. The office of the President must have some special ability to persuade senators to vote just the way it wants them to vote. The way it stands now if a Democrat is elected the draft would be more likely to succede since all the draft bills currently in Congress are supported by DEMOCRATS not REPUBLICANS.

Explain to me how the president is controlling the democrats who authored HR 163 and S89. Somehow the president must be controlling their actions from the Oval Office. Do you seriously believe this?

[edit on 30-9-2004 by BlackJackal]

Just to put a little Icing on the cake did you here is Bush's Closing statement that the military will be a voluntary only force.

Sorry
I think I May be confusing you
I don't believe I said the president is controlling the democrats.
I believe some senators got wise to the administrations plan for a draft and tried to introduce a ridiculous draft bill to bring the subject to peoples awarness. they can't just go on tv and say bush is lying and I have the bush administration draft proposal on my desk which will be introduce as a bill after the election .

but if bush says their will be no draft, I guess he must be right
Its not like bush would lie !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


[edit on 30-9-2004 by shadowmirror]

Ok so the democrats got wise and introduced the bogus bills to bring awareness to the evil Bush administration plan to institute a draft. Ok so why did they introduce the bills at the beginning of 2003 and just now bring it up claiming it was all Bush's idea? Quite simple, its the democrats way of trying to get some dirt on Bush to take him down. Plain and simple.

Bush is not going to institute a draft. Their are more people enlisted in the Armed Forces today than before 9/11. This draft poppycock is nothing but partisan politics.

Originally posted by shadowmirror
Sorry
I think I May be confusing you
I don't believe I said the president is controlling the democrats.
I believe some senators got wise to the administrations plan for a draft and tried to introduce a ridiculous draft bill to bring the subject to peoples awarness.

And this from a previous post..

some people who happen to be democrats have introduce draft bills they know will fail and they wont vote for, Why you ask " to bring the issue to public light"" and wake up some of the sheep. They know this administration doesthings in secret and you will not see their draft bill until its passed, so if they didn't do that you would not be talking about a draft.

Ohmigod.

they can't just go on tv and say bush is lying and I have the bush administration draft proposal on my desk which will be introduce as a bill after the election .
[edit on 30-9-2004 by shadowmirror]

Please, tell me: why can't they "just go on tv" and expose this sinister plot you subscribe to? Ted Kennedy calls George Bush a liar every day. Don't you think he would be in the forefront screaming and yelling, if this were true?

:shk:

Isn't Kerry (the democrat, mind you) the one last night who said he wants to create additional US force groups? He suggests we up our troops in the middle east all together... where do you think he is going to find the troops? Where is he pulling the money to fund them, give benefits for the next 60 years and get new equipment for all?!?

Just from watching them, it looked to me like Kerry fully intends to draft people while Bush was getting so frustrated because he knows from doing the job you can't just pull troops out of thin air and he isn't going to force people into it in the first place. Then again, he can't just go on national TV and say "well, we don't have enough troops" -

Just like he had to make sure Poland got credit because only a complete moron would in front of the whole world make our country look that weak and pathetic or give our allies a slap in the face. Kerry showed no respect for this, and so if we elected that particular individual, I would almost garantee a draft just to cover the attacks soon to follow from opportunists seeing his total lack of confidence!

All of this military crap is just reinforcing my original urge to run like hell and vote another party in before it's too late to fix... I don't see any Green's or Libertarians suggesting a draft... whether or not it's just to scare us. They still shouldn't do that.

In perhaps the ONLY intelligent remark he made last night...Bush plainly said that the military would remain a volunteer army...

Or am I the only one who caught that???

I'm no Bush fan, not by a long shot....but from the horse's mouth, he said no draft....case closed in my book.

BTW, he still lost and got owned by Kerry, hehe...

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Is he saying internet rumors are false??
Can't be! But...but...it's the internet, so it has to be true! I mean, if the fwds and chain e-mails people recieve are false, then how will we survive??

I can careless what they "tell" us. My brother-in-law, is a top trainer at fort DIX, he has been working 7 days a week for going on 3 years now. He just got a three week leave, because he had a baby.

He has said there is for sure going to be a draft, And we are for sure not coming out of the middle east, untill atleast 2006.




[edit on 1-10-2004 by SpittinCobra]

I think I was the one who posted the first thing relating to the draft hysteria...many people are saying if Bush is elected we will have a draft. At the debate however, he clearly said the military will remain all volunteer.

One fact is, in Iraq, we simply don't have enough troops to safely occupy the entire area. Those troops will have to be filled in somehow, whether it be foreign governments helping out (which is unlikely), or even a draft. They have already been calling up many reserves, national guard, even ROTC students are being sent over there, so they are very desperate it seems.

I doubt we will actually have a draft if Bush is elected...first off, the war is too controversial for the american public to support any kind of draft. Yea, they did it in vietnam too...but I don't really see any support for a draft. The main difference between now and vietnam, is back then a draft meant the poor and uneducated were shipped over...nobody cared about them. Especially conservatives who had plenty of money and whos kids were all going off to ivy league colleges and getting exemptions. If we have a draft now, that wouldn't be acceptable. The only way they could pull it off and have support for it, is if there are no exemptions based on education or income. Everybody would be eligible, and have to go. Including rich upper class college bound boys AND girls. This wouldn't go over very well at all with Bush supporters.

Anyway, if the draft is reinstated, just remember my original thread "Draft reinstated, 2005". That would be the greatest prediction of ATS history!! But I wouldn't be online to gloat about it, I would probably be in Canada or on a transport to Iraq.