Bush Lied About the Draft

Originally posted by deeprivergal

Lies, in fact there is a "Back Door Draft" going on right now, how can he say the all-volunteer army works when he isn't using it? Soldiers are being forced to stay in the military or face a court martial. They don't have a choice to leave when their tour is over when there is a Stop-Loss order on them.

On a personal note. Staff Sergeant Matthew Kuster. Was packed and ready to leave his home base of Germany and come home to America 14 days before Bush's Back Door Draft forced him to deploy to Iraq. He now doing a tour in Tikrit, Iraq.

How can you say there is no draft when a Stop-Loss order is just that, it just has a nicer tone to it.

When people who have no idea about the military try to discuss it. There will be no Draft now, or any time in the future, regardless of who is President. There is a simple reason why is it doesn�t work. Modern militaries rely on intelligence, initiative, and motivation; conscription makes the first quality hit or miss, and the other two moot.

There is no �Back Door Draft�, current members of the military are not being extended beyond their enlistment contracts, they are being kept on Active Duty longer, but that is well within the terms of this contract, perhaps you should read it.

usmilitary.about.com...

*This is a small PDF.

Please review section "C", Partial Statement Of United States Law.

Please note that an enlistment contract is for Eight Years.

All the discussion about reinstating the Draft has come from the Democrats, Charlie Rangel authored the recent bill voted down (including a �No� vote by Charlie himself� That old fakir). The Draft is the Democrats answer to the so called Republican scare tactic of terrorist attack; a reason to fear President Bush, the awful fate that will befall the male voters age 18-26. The real truth is that the military has faltered under Democrat Presidents going back to Harry Truman (Chosin Resevoir anyone?), and have enjoyed leadership that recognized the value of their service to their country (somebody please bring up Richard Nixon and Viet Nam, it will be too easy). The truth is, if you want your sons and daughters lives thrown away frivolously (Mogadishu anyone?) on foreign lands, John Kerry is your man (there will be just as many or more troops deployed overseas under Kerry as there is now); if you want a proactive response to the dangers currently besetting the world, and you want your sons and daughters serving under a President who will Protect our country and the lives of those in military service then President George Bush is the obvious choice.

Oh ok its ok if Clinton did it but its not ok when bush does it come on dispense with the rhetoric already. The point made by introducing Clintons use of Stop Loss was to show that this is nothing new and has been used in the past by other presidents IMHO not used by Clinton for the right purposes.

But like any other criticism leveled at Bush when there are parallels to past action the democratic brain goes numb with revisionism and refers to the incumbant in a godlike fashion.

Phoenix, are you going to go thru the Bush transcript from the last debate and point out what substantive, concrete plans he has for the future? If not, or if you simply can't find where he mentioned specific plans, just let me know so I won't keep checking this thread, k?

Check this out and tell me there wont be a draft:
[the nation must be prepared to conduct a draft"


--Lewis C. Brodsky, director of public and congressional affairs with the Selective Service System

Many people have been wondering if our President has secret plans to reinstate the draft. This website will provide absolute proof that Bush is making plans to reinstate the draft by the middle of 2005.

In the last few months Bush has launched a recruiting drive for people to work on the draft boards around the country, the DefendAmerica government site posted an advert looking for volunteers, but when someone brought this to the attention of the press it was promptly removed, fueling rumours about the possibility of a draft.

There are also CURRENTLY bills in the Senate and in the house that, if passed, will make military service a requirement for all men, women (including college students) between the age of 18 and 25.

Senate Bill - House Bill

Articles about the recruitment drive for draft board workers can be found here

A Copy of the DefendAmerica page

url=http://www.bushdraft.com/proof.html]Draft[/url] You can say whatever you want but he's a damn liar

Originally posted by dgtempe
Check this out and tell me there wont be a draft:
*SNIP*

No there won't be a Draft, please end the histrionics now.

There were two Bills in Congress that were created to instill the fear (and ignorance) that is being instilled here. Get a grip. Both bills were introduced by Democrats, and only one Bill is still alive (Senate Bill 89), House Bill 163 was defeated by a vote of 402-2 (Good old Charlie Rangel himself voted against his own Bill).

H.R. 163 Sponsored by Charlie Rangel, NY-D

S. 89 Sponsored by Ernest Hollings SC-D

Please review the Bill sponsors, and in the case of the House Bill the cosponsors, all Democrats. Why with this evidence does anyone continue to assert President Bush is trying to reinstitute the Draft? There is only one current Bill regarding the Draft, and it's current status is "Read twice, and referred to the Committee on Armed Services". The Senate Bill has no cosponsors.

A news story that "Liberals" can trust, i.e. it's from the CBS website.

The same story for the "rest of us".

Two final notes.

1. There will not be a Draft, it just doesn't work with a modern military structure.

2. Historical perspective: The Draft as we know it was instituted by the Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt in peacetime (1940), the Draft is not a Republican apparatus.

Mirthful: You must be of draftable age but denying this is a real possibility is only lying to yourself.

If I were you I wouldnt say "never".

Truth is, you dont know whats going to happen anymore than the rest of us. There are many stories circulating that this is coming.
Do you think Bush is going to tell you he's planning to draft?
I dont think so.

Originally posted by Indy
Not only are people being forced to stay in beyond their commitment (meaning no longer voluntary) but from what I've heard people were being forced back in to service after they had already met their obligation and left. Again that isn't voluntary.

Listen up folks. There is NO 'backdoor draft'. The military procedures
have been explained to all you civilians, but it looks like it will have to
be explained again.

When a person enlists, they enlist for 6 years. They may agree to
two, three, four, five, or six years active duty.... but they know when
they sign on the dotted line that ANY TIME during that six years, the
government can hold them in the military or recall them to active duty.

I'm talking enlisted here ... not officer ... that's a whole other story
about recall back into active duty.

This is NOT a 'back door draft'. Every one of us who signed up in
the military agreed to these terms. For anyone in the military, or
any of their families to whine about being kept in on active duty
for longer than they thought they'd be active ... well ... that's
just too darn bad. We knew it could happen when we signed
the papers.

Originally posted by dgtempe
Senate Bill - House Bill

Authored by .... DEMOCRATS.

Authored by Democrats and to be conviniently used very soon by his Excellency.

Im sure the Democrats whipped thisone up under duress.

Originally posted by dgtempe
Mirthful: You must be of draftable age but denying this is a real possibility is only lying to yourself.

Please click on my profile so that you can plainly see that I am 40 years old (an incredibly well preserved 40, but well past Draft eligibility). Another point I would like to make is that I served Eight years on active duty in the U.S. Navy (powdering Marine's butts as a Corpsman) so the fear of military service does not exist within me.

If you doubt this information, please u2u JamesTheLesser who has met me in person, and is decidedly not in the Bush camp.

Cranky Old Monkeys, not just for the rocking chair on the porch anymore...

Originally posted by Phoenix
Hah, clinton did stop loss and nodody called it a back door draft then, this just goes to show ya its all political and expediant when democrats want it both ways

American Forces Press Service


WASHINGTON -- When President Clinton mobilized 33,102 reservists
April 27, he also quietly gave the services the little-used
right to keep members in uniform past their normal separation or
retirement dates.

The presidential authority, called the Stop Loss program,
suspends laws related to military retirements, separations and
promotions. The president delegates it downward to the service
secretaries through Defense Secretary William S. Cohen.

www.defense.gov...

Whats worse is Clinton did this for "Monica's" war led by the infamous Gen. Clark. At least Bush who has two large theater wars and one smaller African operation underway as well as counter-terror activities, has much more of a reason to preserve unit cohesion than Clintons "operation look the other way" did.

Which would you rather have - a president that uses stop loss because there is demonstratable need or a president who uses stop loss for political gain.

Demonstrable need? please dont make me laugh. Well, too late, you already did.

And correction, as well. I got out of the army, from active duty, in 1996. i was stationed in germany. As I was getting out, the Bosnia situation ahd already heated up, and loads of people were getting sent there. There was a stop loss. But it only applied to persons, who still had time left on their enlistments, who were getting ready to leave Europe to be stationed stateside. THOSE people were retained in Europe, because they still had time left on their enlistment, and were only held for remaining in Europe. Those of us who had done our time, they tried to keep us from leaving, but most of us left active duty anyway. We were not prevented from getting out. We had fulfilled our enlistment for active duty terms, and were allowed to go home and be part of IRR or active reserves. But we werent held indefinitely if we were all done. Not like now.

Later, as Kosovo got ugly, there was a very small and localized stoploss, and it was only extended for a few months, not indefinitely.

So dont feed me this BS that Clinton did a stop loss like Bush did. It wasnt anywhere NEAR what is going on right now.

Mind you, I hated Clinton, as did most military at the time. But we hated his guts for different reasons.

Bush is going to create the need for a draft with this stoploss BS. When kids see this, they are going to be less willing to sign up for voluntary military service, when they realize they could be held forever.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Bush is going to create the need for a draft with this stoploss BS. When kids see this, they are going to be less willing to sign up for voluntary military service, when they realize they could be held forever.

usmilitary.about.com...

This is a year old. I will see if I can find something newer. However,
this says that recruitment is at, or above, necessary levels. This ...
even after we went into Iraq, pulled down the statue, and were
five months into restructuring.

No .... Enlisted US Military personell can't be held 'forever'.
Just until the end of their commitment.

They can be held "indefinately" They don't have a choice of whether they can leave the military when their time is up, not with a stop loss order in place.

As far as Clinton approving a stop-loss order. Well, I didn't know Clinton was still President, or even running for President. We aren't talking about Clinton right now, we are talking about Bush. Bush's decisions. Not Clinton's.

No extra pay? This man was 3 days away from going home and seeing his family. 3 DAYS!

alternet.org
Michael Hoffman, who lives outside of Philadelphia, was three days away from leaving the Marine Corps when the order came down: He was being sent to Iraq. There was no advance notice, no extra money and, of course, no guarantee that he would come back alive.

Hoffman, like thousands of others who volunteered to serve their country, are being forced to stay long after they planned on leaving, because of the "stop loss" orders authorized by statute. The orders � which have been called "back-door drafts" � allow the military to suspend all laws and regulations and force all personnel to continue serving. The orders apply to those whose tours of duty expire and to those who are eligible for retirement.

"I just thought you leave the military and you can get called back if they need you," says Hoffman. "With the 'stop loss' orders, you never leave. They extend your contract, which is something nobody really understands when they first sign-up."

There is now a lawsuit being filed against Uncle Sam... I hope Uncle Sam loses.

[edit on 10-10-2004 by deeprivergal]

Originally posted by deeprivergal
Bush stated at the Debate:

I hear there's rumors on the Internets (sic) that we're going to have a draft. We're not going to have a draft, period. The all- volunteer army works. It works particularly when we pay our troops well. It works when we make sure they've got housing, like we have done in the last military budgets.

Lies, in fact there is a "Back Door Draft" going on right now, how can he say the all-volunteer army works when he isn't using it? Soldiers are being forced to stay in the military or face a court martial. They don't have a choice to leave when their tour is over when there is a Stop-Loss order on them.
.

When you join the military, whether it is for 3 or 4 years, you have an 8 year obligation. It was democrats that introduced the draft legislation, it was only democrats that voted for the draft, no republicans voted for it.

The "back door draft" is a ploy by democrats who have firmly lost political power. The democrat party is dead and the more they whine and cry the more weaker they get.

[edit on 10-10-2004 by Carseller4]

[edit on 10-10-2004 by Carseller4]

Yeha ok a draft, possible but also suicide for the government.

Imagine the civil unrest, you really think people are going to go? Well maybe they will.. considering how many jobs have been lost under Bush some would be desperate for something.

All I know is.. if they come to my front door waiting to grab me they're going to need to deal with a force of arms.

I don't feel sorry for people who sign the papers and get shipped to Iraq and then complain... they signed the papers so deal with it.

[edit on 10-10-2004 by RedOctober90]

Fully fund the "No Child Left Behind" Act

What Kerry don't want you to know is that the senate (Kerry, Edwards, H. Clinton, etc) are the ones who control the funding, not the president.

Originally posted by dgtempe
I had to laugh when he said there would not be any draft. What a liar. Who believes this?
Many people will be deceived and vote for him only to begin the draft as soon as he's elected.
People, please dont fall for this lie.
This is a war mongering president and he needs your children.

How?
One of the "draft" bills a DEMOCRAT brought up has already been shot down?
There are maybe only two or three people in all of congress (and they are democrats) who would actually vote for a draft bill, so is Bush going to use his magical powers to get the rest to vote for it?
Both Bush and Kerry said that they do not and would not support a draft. Why is Bush lying but Kerry isn't?

Text Black

i seriously think that Bush will be having a full on draft,Bush looks like the kind of man that would without a second thought send a family's son to go and die for the needs of the country.

I am of draft age and am just wondering how a draft is not possible? Throwing the political junk out the window...For a long time the US has had a military strength goal of being able to sustain 2 simultanious wars at the same time. If you count afghanistan and iraq as being at the same time then we've been stretched quite thin against 2 weak opponents. If bush is elected again doesn't it fit his character to have another war (N korea or Iran or who knows what else will happen in the world) in accordance with the Bush/Cheney Doctrine? Both are hostile towards the US and both are enriching uranium while we're bogged down in iraq. I just don't see how Bush could go into North korea and fight the kind of gurrilla war we're in for and still be holding Iraq's hand.

On a second note...if the draft is re-instated why are college students included? (I'm very biased as a college student btw:roll Wouldn't that be economic desaster for the country in 10 or 15 years? Not only would we have a debt that most people can't even count to but a generation (2 or 3 years or however the war lasts) where there would be a severe drop in college graduates. With china, pakistan, india ect. already pumping out more grads than the US individually we'd be hard pressed in the world market.


I'm new to the site!! Just like to say hello to everyone!

edit: wow sorry about the spelling and such...result of working on a lab for 4 hours

[edit on 10-10-2004 by mr_sheldon]

MrSheldon, your head's in the right place. Bush wouldnt think twice of sending you and everyone else to die for his war. He acts on impulse and he's got a proven track record on this.
At least Kerry, the liberal, the humanitarian will THINK TWICE unlike Bush.