When the troops are relly needed... Well be short...

When the troops are needed, you can be sure this will be pushed through again...It would probably be part of any future resolution for war bill.

Look for that bill to be reworded and resubmitted after Bush wins....as early as the day after everything is official and fully counted or should I say miscounted.

GTWill,

I agree with you, this is just to pull voters is not garantee that will not be push again if the Republicans win, after all if bush win it will be his last four years so he can do anything because he will not be coming back.

And that is a scary thought.

BUSH does not want a draft! Cant you understand that a conscript Army is NOT a good thing. We have a professional Army, there is a BIG difference.


It is a scare tactic.....just like them nasty Republicans will take away your social security...

And in all fairness, the proposal was put forward and cospnsored by 2 DEMOCRATS!

Let's see... a Republican President and A Republican SoD (Rumsfeld, no less), did away with the draft, and no Republican President or SoD is going to reinstate the draft, unlike Kerry, who, just a few months ago, and several times during his Senate record, stated support for the draft.

I remember a particular time in 1980, when he actually advised the president to reinstate the draft...

I could very easily imagine Kerry being for the draft since he was drafted himself I believe for Vietnam. I mean how many people are there that if something happens to them, they see no problem with the same thing happening to other people? Like it or not, if they served for their country, they might believe others should do the same thing. Of course Kerry would be politically correct right now and not try to upset anyone and most likely say he is against a compulsory draft. I wonder if that's why he says he will wait for terrorists to strike here again before he does anything. Oh well, if that's what the people want, that is what they shall get. I personally believe going after terrorists around the world works better than waiting for them to strike here.

Originally posted by orionthehunter
I could very easily imagine Kerry being for the draft since he was drafted himself I believe for Vietnam. I mean how many people are there that if something happens to them, they see no problem with the same thing happening to other people? Like it or not, if they served for their country, they might believe others should do the same thing. Of course Kerry would be politically correct right now and not try to upset anyone and most likely say he is against a compulsory draft. I wonder if that's why he says he will wait for terrorists to strike here again before he does anything. Oh well, if that's what the people want, that is what they shall get. I personally believe going after terrorists around the world works better than waiting for them to strike here.

Well wether he was drafted or not, he signed up for a NON-Comabt position, but 6 weeks later it became a combat one. In 4 months he had 3 purple hearts and was on his way home. That is faster than Audie Murphy .


I didnt just mention those two in the same sentence did I? Damn I am sorry.

With the alarmist attitudes rampant around here it seems like people want the draft to happen simply to justify their alarmism.

Mark my words: I will eat my keyboard if the draft is reinstated. It simply won't happen.

402 to 2 is not a slim margin. Where will that be made up?

Also, something people seem to overlook is the fact that draft-age individuals are much more disillusioned and much less patriotic then during WWII and Vietnam. Even though many protested the draft in the 60's and 70's, many had parents, neighbors, aunts and uncles that served in WWII. Growing up hearing those stories surely effected many that were drafted enough that they'd serve - like it or not. This influence doesn't exist in todays youth. Anti-Draft protests now would make protests then look like a "Shakespeare in the Park" event. Not to mention the number of draft-dodgers.

The power is still in the "proles" - believe it or not. Luckily those in charge know it and won't do something to ignite the fires of change in a generation that doesn't care. It would be suicide.

Originally posted by everlastingnoitall
And in all fairness, the proposal was put forward and cospnsored by 2 DEMOCRATS!

More accurately, the House Bill (H.B.163) was introduced by Democrat Charles Rangel and was cosponsored by 13 other Democrats (Zero republicans).

The twin Senate Bill was introduced by Democrat Ernest Hollings. No cosponsors signed on.

Democrap Rangel wound up voting against his own Bill. The only two who voted for it were... ummm.... DEMOCRATS!

A statement later issued by President Bush said that he would have vetoed it if it had passed.

Enough with the Lieberal nonsense. Stop drinking that koolaid, folks. Next you'll be believing Michael Moore-on and Dan Blather.

Originally posted by Outland


More accurately, the House Bill (H.B.163) was introduced by Democrat Charles Rangel and was cosponsored by 13 other Democrats (Zero republicans).

The twin Senate Bill was introduced by Democrat Ernest Hollings. No cosponsors signed on.

Democrap Rangel wound up voting against his own Bill. The only two who voted for it were... ummm.... DEMOCRATS!

A statement later issued by President Bush said that he would have vetoed it if it had passed.

Enough with the Lieberal nonsense. Stop drinking that koolaid, folks. Next you'll be believing Michael Moore-on and Dan Blather.

yes, but I don't think they shot down HR 163, according to the news story, it was bill 402-2......which if you go into the thomas registry, doesn't seem to be a bill concerning a draft, at least I couldn't find anything about the draft with that number. Maybe the news media made a mistake? Or, maybe it was a different bill that was put forth, and those two are still sitting in committee, waiting.....

If anyone can find the bill that they shot down, I'd be interested in tracking it down...also it's a "-2", does that mean it was attached to some other legislation, if so, what was it? Maybe the dems just didn't like what it was attached to and found this to be an easy way to kill it??

If another terrorist attack were to occur, and the government needed more men to respond, would the general population be for the draft?

Please. Do you people even know the origins and the truth aboth this draft rumor? For a nice, in 100 words-or-less explanation, look no further than Outland's succinct response:

More accurately, the House Bill (H.B.163) was introduced by Democrat Charles Rangel and was cosponsored by 13 other Democrats (Zero republicans).

The twin Senate Bill was introduced by Democrat Ernest Hollings. No cosponsors signed on.

Democrap Rangel wound up voting against his own Bill. The only two who voted for it were... ummm.... DEMOCRATS!

Emphasis added by me.

PS: Nice summary, Outland.

And Charles Rangle voted AGAINST his own bill. What does that tell you? It tells you that it was submitted by democrats for NO other reason than to give liberal special interest groups a sound bite about a "draft reinstatement" happening under Bush, knowing most people wouldn't do their homework and see that a democrat was the origin. Typical fear tactics when you know you can't win on the issues.

Originally posted by AF1
If another terrorist attack were to occur, and the government needed more men to respond, would the general population be for the draft?

I would assume the same thing would happen as did during 9-11. Major terrorist attack, thousands dead. Enlsitment would shoot through the roof.

Originally posted by Esoterica
I would assume the same thing would happen as did during 9-11. Major terrorist attack, thousands dead. Enlsitment would shoot through the roof.

I agree with you is called patriotism and even my Marine retired husband go it and was ready to go back.

But then again after seen the truth of the "Iraqi invasion" now they are having problems getting the reservist to show up for duty, funny how people react after the facts.

Even though I'm a republican, a small part of me wishes that the Demon-crats would take back the White House, Senate, and House, just to shut them the heck up.

Sorta like giving in to a child....

If you hate it so much, go win the darn election and quit whining!!!

But, another part of me shudders to think of the damage to my wallet if they do...

[edit on 10/6/2004 by soulforge]

Originally posted by dawnstar
yes, but I don't think they shot down HR 163, according to the news story, it was bill 402-2......which if you go into the thomas registry, doesn't seem to be a bill concerning a draft

402 people voted against the bill, two for it. It wasn't Bill 402-2.

Originally posted by marg6043
...But then again after seen the truth of the "Iraqi invasion" now they are having problems getting the reservist to show up for duty, funny how people react after the facts.

I think the quotation marks in that sentence should have been around the part that says, "the truth".

Stop drinking the koolaid.