posted on November 19, 2006 12:59:43 PM new
Yep, it appears now that they're in control...things will/might be changing alright.
Old Rangel is back on his 'reinstate the draft' talk AGAIN.
And kerry, while running in '04 was talking about forcing all young people to SERVE...and they've be given some aid for college....if they either served in the military OR did two years of community service work. lol
Never know what those dems will decide to do on THIS issue.
And here the liberals were constantly trying to SCARE Americans into believing it was the republicans who were going to START A DRAFT again. lol lol lol
============
From yahoonews - today
Rep. Rangel will seek to reinstate draft
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 16 minutes ago
WASHINGTON -
Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 if the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way.
Rep. Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., said Sunday he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars and to bolster U.S. troop levels insufficient to cover potential future action in
Iran,
North Korea and
Iraq.
"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," Rangel said.
Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War who has unsuccessfully sponsored legislation on conscription in the past, said he will propose a measure early next year.
In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.
Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.
At a time when some lawmakers are urging the military to send more troops to Iraq, "I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.
"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.
Rangel, the next chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.
"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.
He said having a draft would not necessarily mean everyone called to duty would have to serve. Instead, "young people (would) commit themselves to a couple of years in service to this great republic, whether it's our seaports, our airports, in schools, in hospitals," with a promise of educational benefits at the end of service.
Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."
Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.
Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."
Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.
The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 — now about 16 million — from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.
Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS
___
So while Rumsfeld who the liberals hated wasn't calling for a DRAFT....like the liberals FALSELY said the 'right' was going to do....but we sure can see it's going to be brought up AGAIN...by a DEM.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 19, 2006 01:02 PM ]
posted on November 19, 2006 01:26:27 PM new
Ha! Old Charley is scarin' the bejeeesus outta the Repugs!
Yup, he knows damn well THEY will never vote for a draft because then their precious little babes would actually HAVE TO SERVE !!!
But he has fun pushing their buttons!LOL!
Why are you against the draft, linda....if the war keeps going on and on as you would like it too, we'll run out of boots on the ground....need to replace them with some nice young rich Republicans
posted on November 19, 2006 01:29:04 PM new
Personally, I don't see the big deal. It is about time that the rich start sacrificing their own for the cause. I'm tired of the whining you hear back and forth about this issue. The draft would put an end to it right away. What is good for one should be good for all. Then we would see how many wealthy Americans will want to go to war for the hell of it.
What's the problem Linduh? Afraid that Democrats are too wimpy when it comes to the military? Well, here you go... Everyone serves this country for two years. I'm all for it.
I've done 2 years of full time community service immediately after college that led to 4 years of paid employment recruiting volunteers for Federal Volunteer Programs (Americorps, VISTA, Foster Grandparent Program, Experience Corps, and Senior Corps). Absolutely the best 6 years of my life. I felt connected to the community, helped Seniors, helped children, helped schools. Very rewarding, and I think giving people a choice between community service and military service is perfect. Both help serve a need and are rewarding.
[ edited by shagmidmod on Nov 19, 2006 01:30 PM ]
posted on November 19, 2006 05:27:46 PM new
"It is about time that the rich start sacrificing their own for the cause. I'm tired of the whining you hear back and forth about this issue."
You know what's sickening? Listening to the ol' "da po' peeple are forced into the military along with minorities while "rich folks" buy condos" whining.
A simple examination of D of D figures will show this has NEVER been the case, even in the good old left wing fixated Viet Nam days.
posted on November 19, 2006 07:52:05 PM new
desquirrel
If you don't believe the majority of foot soldiers are middle class or poor that fight rich mens wars. Then why do the Recruiters work poor Urban areas so hard?
Again the NEW-CONS being out of touch is just another reason their politicians lost so badly.
Its sounds like desquirrel doesn't realize one can be very wealthy,classy and really smart with out having money wealth.
posted on November 20, 2006 08:50:23 AM new
You know what's even worse? There is morons like bigdopa out there that actually think the demomorons will keep control of things come 2008. With all of the goof ups they already have had since the election, one has to wonder how badly they will screw up when truely in power.
.
.
.
"Unfortunately there are levels of Stupid that just can't be cured!!" The new Demomoron motto.
posted on November 20, 2006 10:27:50 AM new
Can this subject be discussed without partisan politics and who brings the draft forward, be it Repubs or Dems? After all it would affect all Americans in one way or another.
First I'd like to say I have always been against the draft. But, I think in times of peace many enlist in the military because of promises of education and good careers. Yes, they understand they might be called for duty in a war zone, and I believe they are committed when called to do so.
Of course in an all volunteer military, numbers are down in actual bodies. Is it fair that during war time those that volunteer should carry the burden alone serving multiple tours, or using the National Guard to such an extent they aren't at home in cases of emergencies?
Can there be a draft only during war time, but what happens if the war never ends? Do we need all those bases and troops in countries that really don't require our presence? Should we utilize them more in the war zones? Do we need more or less troops in Iraq? Would it be better to have a military rather than a civilian as Sec of Defense.
Those of us that were against the war from the beginning find no joy, or we told you so, in what has happened in Iraq. But, what do we do now to end this thing, get out with some feeling of accomplishment and respect? But, most of all to get our troops out of harms way, and to end the killing of innocent civilians.
We can argue, place blame, and continue the divide of our nation, but that has worked as well as stay the course. We need a new direction, is reinstating the draft one path to be considered? What about my other suggestions?
posted on November 20, 2006 10:47:27 AM new
I agree with desquirrel.
======
As usual, it's those who LACK knowledge of the ACTUAL facts that say what they do.
Rich peoples children DO serve. Even members of our Congress have children serving.
And this garbage about joining for college benefits....LOL....yes, like most people accept jobs ALSO because of their BENEFITS they are offered.
And what SOME fail to grasp is many of our soldiers still in our Armed Services have either joined SINCE the war began....re-enlisted SINCE as the war continues...and that they ALL volunteered.
Try and let THEM make THEIR OWN life choices. TRY to give them the RESPECT that they deserve for CHOOSING to serve our Nation. We need more good men and women like them...rather than the anti-military crowd not willing to FIGHT for anything....even their own survival.
On it being a partisan issue - Yes, since it has ALWAYS been the DEMS screaming that it would be the republicans that were working to re-start the draft....WHEN THEY WEREN'T. And this nonsense was talking about for a considerable length of time. Around the time we went into BOTH Afghanistan AND before going into Iraq. So the DEMS MADE it a partisan issue....using it AGAINST this administration. Boy...some people sure have extremely SHORT memories.
[Mostly liberals it appears]
So it IS funny to me to see it AGAIN be a dem. who wants to WASTE our tax dollars and the working time of our Congress by bringing up this subject once again.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 20, 2006 10:53 AM ]
posted on November 20, 2006 11:12:52 AM new
PROVE those statements peepa....several are WRONG...as usual.
And the other issue is funding. Oh...they were screaming the republicans were spending TOO much money....but then how would THEY have paid for that list of things they want changed????
AND it will be even harder for them to actually accomplish AS they SAY they won't INCREASE spending.
LOL....yea, I'm gonna LOVE seeing how they pull that one off.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 20, 2006 11:13:20 AM new
Damn Linda must you always be on the defensive and so Republican? Do you have any honest opinions just as an American? My questions weren't asked in a way to provoke discourse. You always say you want to discuss things in a civilized manner. But there you you go with, "lack of knowledge, actual facts, grasp, Dems."
I said "many" join the service in peace time for benefits, and incentives. Even now during war time the government has commercials on TV pushing education. People join for different reasons that is one of them.
Linda from your rant above I see you are against a draft. I also stated I have always been against the draft. Yes, this has been discussed before but Iraq has gotten even worse since that time. What other suggestions do you have, are any of the ones I posted viable? Should we send more troops?
posted on November 20, 2006 11:26:13 AM new
It's a shame that pointing our when anti-military people don't know what they're talking about....seems to bother you so much. But I speak the TRUTH. Many don't have a CLUE as to what and how our military functions.
And that SHOWS in their statements.
I haven't called anyone names....I haven't played YOUR GAME. I said and will say what I want to.
Imo, it should be the military leaders decision on whether or not we send more troops.
THEY have been the ones saying they DIDN'T WANT MORE sent. If they've changed their mind....fine.
Imo, the politicans should stay OUT OF IT. Period. Let them do what they do best.
On the draft...NO, I do NOT support a draft. I have stated several times that when this Nation doesn't have enough young men and women who WANT to....who CHOOSE to serve in our Armed Forces....then that will have been the peoples choice. To be as many Nations now are....weak...with little or no military to protect them or their interest in the global scheme of things.
But I DO, however, VERY MUCH RESENT the liberals who BAR recruiting from our high schools, who BAR recruiting from our colleges and who have recently voted AGAINST the ROTC programs.
Yes, liberals - the far left - to me do seem VERY anti-military...and it usually shows in what they don't support...and what they refuse to vote for.
Now do you have any other complaints?
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 20, 2006 11:49:01 AM new
Our country and our troops are stuck in Iraq right now, some decisions are going to have to be made, and soon.
Neither you nor I have the facts, I was just asking for opinions without the caps and dismissal from you. There were other suggestions I made besides having a draft, you could have discussed those or suggested something you think might be appropriate to overcome the mess we're in.
Discussion was what I was looking for, not yelling in caps or dismissal from you. How many times have you said you want to discuss issues, but when given the opportunity you post in your usual combative way?
posted on November 20, 2006 11:54:40 AM new
Let me be PERFECTLY clear.
I have NO interest in carrying on a 'conversation with you'. Period.
At times I will chose to address something you post. That is NOT meaning I have ANY interest in discussing ANYTHING with you. I took about as much from you on otwa as I care to...enough to last a lifetime.
IF you really came here to discuss the isssues THEN DO THAT WITH THE OTHERS HERE....not me.
I have never cared for how off the wall far left you are....I have never like people that want to overthow our gov. and I have never like people that protest as you did against ANY war our congress and President decides WE need to be involved in.
So....tell someone else how to post...what you want to 'discuss' with them....but LEAVE ME OUT OF IT.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 20, 2006 12:09:23 PM new
So you LIED to me when you said if I started a thread about the war you would discuss it with me? I didn't get a chance to that but figured this thread that you started would do.
Linda you use every excuse not to have discussions. This excuse just happens to be because of my views, and objection to the war. You would have used different ones with individual posters.
It doesn't take many posts to show how ignorant you are about subjects. You don't have any educational or valid opinions about anything, that's why you hide behind excuses of why you won't discuss anything. Can you GRASP that Linda?
posted on November 20, 2006 12:22:05 PM new
No, I did NOT lie. IF you had done so...since you've been able to make SEVERAL posts since I suggestion that...I would have joined in discussing it with you.
But what I see...if your oh so slowly sliding into the 'bossy' don't do this don't do that CRAP that you focused on at otwa....RATHER than discussing the issues.
That's one of the things I'm sick and tired of. So...there are plenty here who agree with your positions....TALK TO THEM.
Until then:
Let me be PERFECTLY clear.
I have NO interest in carrying on a 'conversation with you'. Period.
At times I will chose to address something you post. That is NOT meaning I have ANY interest in discussing ANYTHING with you. I took about as much from you on otwa as I care to...enough to last a lifetime.
IF you really came here to discuss the isssues THEN DO THAT WITH THE OTHERS HERE....not me.
I have never cared for how off the wall far left you are....I have never like people that want to overthow our gov. and I have never like people that protest as you did against ANY war our congress and President decides WE need to be involved in.
So....tell someone else how to post...what you want to 'discuss' with them....but LEAVE ME OUT OF IT.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 20, 2006 12:36:27 PM new
Let me make this perfectly clear! Linda isn't very bright so she uses frail excuses not to talk to me or anyone else that exposes her disability.
So, I will talk around, about, and address her as I wish. Linda will do the jig, and throw tantrums just as we have always made her do.
Linda, Your behavior alone is enough to dismiss your argument before it's even considered.
When I look at the caps and threats and your efforts to slander, my conclusion is that you are disgustingly vile...and why should your opinion be any different?
posted on November 20, 2006 01:05:44 PM newIt's a shame that pointing our when anti-military people don't know what they're talking about....seems to bother you so much. But I speak the TRUTH. Many don't have a CLUE as to what and how our military functions.
No matter the topic, Linda says we don't know what we're talking about and only she speaks the truth and she will denigrate, malign, besmirch, slander, traduce, disparage, vilify anyone else who dares venture an opinion so as to cover up her own ignorance and halt any further sane dialogue. It's why most of us gave up trying to discuss anything here. To me she's just a sick joke that I read whenever I take a break because sometimes I need mindless amusement in my day.
posted on November 21, 2006 10:54:41 AM new
Linda says, "rather than the anti-military crowd not willing to FIGHT for anything"
Just curious Linduh, but what exactly did you fight for in your military service? Your rants about others who didn't serve in the military doesn't go unnoticed. You didn't serve in the military, so how can you feel justified to throw fodder at others? Who exactly is anti-military? Or is that just your typical anti-Democrat rhetoric against anyone you disagree with?
Again... is it more anti-American to speak out against government policies, or is it more anti-American to make false statements and pass judgement of Americans who disagree with you and this administration?
posted on November 21, 2006 08:53:11 PM new
Linda, you might want to chill a bit on this one. The latest word is that the Democrats are hoping this focuses the average American's attention on the stupid war over there, whether a draft is reinstated or not.
HOWEVER, what's wrong with a draft? Why shouldn't all American families feel the pain of war? How else will the voters GET IT when a president starts an ill-advised war?
AND I'd like to see the president and members of congress donate their own children to the war cause before they ask for anyone else's son or daughter.
posted on November 25, 2006 08:27:22 PM new
I hate to make you aware that you are in a very small MINORITY, roadsmith. LOL LOL LOL
Most American's like it just the way it is.
Why in the world all these young men and women who have CHOSEN to VOLUNTEER to serve their Nation bothers you so much that you want to FORCE those who don't want to serve to do so.....is way beyond my understanding.
I'd think it would be the other way around. That liberals like yourself wouldn't want to FORCE young people into serving when they don't WANT to. LOL LOL LOL
Of course, with the way the liberals don't really support our military ANYWAY......I've always figured they'd just like them to train and learn basket weaving....it really wouldn't matter anyway. lol
Oh...and there are children of our congresspeople who DO/have and are serving.
It's called having a CHOICE....something the liberals seem to only want American women to have in order to murder their own children.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 25, 2006 08:30:58 PM new
I hate to make you aware that you are in a very small MINORITY, roadsmith. LOL LOL LOL
Most American's like it just the way it is.
Why in the world all these young men and women who have CHOSEN to VOLUNTEER to serve their Nation bothers you so much that you want to FORCE those who don't want to serve to do so.....is way beyond my understanding.
I'd think it would be the other way around. That liberals like yourself wouldn't want to FORCE young people into serving when they don't WANT to. LOL LOL LOL
Of course, with the way the liberals don't really support our military ANYWAY......I've always figured they'd just like them to train and learn basket weaving....it really wouldn't matter anyway. lol
Oh...and there are children of our congresspeople who DO/have and are serving.
It's called having a CHOICE....something the liberals seem to only want American women to have in order to murder their own children.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
