Congress is Considering Re-enacting the Draft

DeMiNe0

Congress is Considering Re-enacting the Draft

I decided to post this, just because I think it is a very important issue that will in fact change the way we live our lives.
The United States Congress is considering re-enacting the Draft. It would require all persons age's 18-27 to serve in some capacity for the armed forces. Both men and women will be required to serve. Running to Canada, o attending college will not be options. The United States also has an agreement with Canada to return people who try to dodge the draft by moving to Canada. College students will not be exempt. The Draft will start in June 2005.
You can find the article here:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=5834001&content_dir=ua_congressorg

codemastr · Idler Joined: 05 Feb 2004 Posts: 353

Those bills will pass only under one condition. If the rumors of an attack in the US sometime this summer come true. And if there is another attack, I don't think most people would complain about a draft. I'd have no problem serving.

But, if, God willing, there is no attack, it will never pass. It's simple politics. That's like Bush coming out and saying, "I want to ensure we have Democrats in office for the next 20 years." And he isn't going to do that. Very few people want the draft, there is no need for a draft (the standing army is large enough for current operations). The bill wasn't even introduced as a defense issue. It was introduced by Charles Rengel for two reasons, to try and remove support for the war in Iraq, and to remove what he believes is "discrimination" in the military. If people are forced to go to Iraq, then people will be calling for an end to the war. And Rengel is upset that the majority of people in the military are minorities. Somehow, he believes that the fact that more blacks/hispanics signup *voluntarily* means the military is discriminating. It was a completely political stunt, it has nothing to do with fighting terrorism, and it has nothing to do with making the US a safer place. It has to do with Rengel hating Bush. He is willing to put the lives of the American youth on the line just to make a political statement that he doesn't like the war in Iraq. I personally find that dispicable, but that's a subject for another debate.

Anyway, to comment on that article, it seems like a joke to me. They make it sound like these bills were just introduced yesterday. S 89 and HR 163 were both introduced on January 7, 2003. That's a year and a half ago, and nothing has been done about it. HR 163 was referred to the DoD for comments in Feb 2003, that's the last action that bill has seen. S 89 was referred to the Armed Services Committee on Jan 7, 2003, and has not received any further action since then. It would take something massive, like another attack, for these bills to ever get through.

But also, the article outright lies. The bill does NOT require military service. S 89 clearly states that civilian services are acceptable as well. For example, working in the Dept of Homeland Security. It also says the administration is trying to get it passed, both of the bills were introduced by Democrats, and the 12 cosponsors of HR 163 are also Democrats. President Bush is a Republican. The administration has no intention of moving this forward, it's a campaign stunt by the Democrats to try and erode support for the war on terror. It's a very biased article that manipulates the facts.

But, it wouldn't bother me one bit if the draft were reinstated. I'd serve, no questions asked, and I'd hope most Americans would do the same.

Oh, btw, I just looked at that site a bit more. I'd consider everything on there junk.
You have one guy who says September 11th was a "manufactured" attack. I'm sure my friends who are now dead would be glad to know it was manufactured.

You have an article titled "IMPOSSIBLE FOR BUSH TO BE REELECTED" Could that be any more biased?

This site is a "free speech gone wrong" site. It presents itself as respectable source, but in reality acts as a left-wing liberal propaganda engine.