?

Log in

Destroy the Draft

> recent entries
> calendar
> friends
> profile

Wednesday, June 1st, 2005
12:56 pm

thelonewizard
Rangel resurrects bill to bring back the draft





WASHINGTON - Harlem Rep. Charles Rangel is again pushing a bill to reinstate the military draft.
Rangel, an anti-war Democrat, offered the same measure last year, only to vote against it when Republicans brought the bill quickly to the floor of the House without holding the debate on it that he had wanted.

GOP leaders were upset over growing buzz on the Internet that the Bush administration might begin drafting American citizens if Bush won reelection.

They blamed Democrats for fueling the speculation in a cynical attempt to win voters to their candidate, John Kerry.

Rangel said he is again calling for a draft because military recruitment is falling short.

"Everyone knows that we went into this war with an insufficient number of troops, but the problem now is filling the ranks of those units that are already on the ground," said Rangel.

The veteran lawmaker has railed against Bush's handling of the Iraq war and called for the removal of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

He also says the burdens of the war disproportionately have fallen on the poor and minorities.

The Associated Press

current mood: curious

(comment on this)

Thursday, September 30th, 2004
12:53 pm - Bush is NOT trying to reinstate the draft!!!!!!

conservative67
H.R. 163 and S. 89 were both introduced by Democrats Charles Rangel (NY) and Ernest Hollings (SC)


The bills were introduced in January 2003 and would require both men and women to either perform mandatory military or civilian service. Both of these pieces of legislation are currently stalled and there's no indication that they are going anywhere anytime soon.

(11 comments | comment on this)

Sunday, July 18th, 2004
1:29 pm

menoareno
I know that some of you are saying there will not be a draft (And God-willing, this is the case)... I am unsure as to whether or not there will be one in the future...

But figuratively speaking, say there was to be one. I understand that due to the Smart Border Declaration, Canada is not an option to escape it.

I am confused as to how the Smart Border Declaration works... If one was to move to Canada before the draft was announced, would that be a way to avoid the Draft? Or would that SBD still somehow come into effect once a draft was declared?

(8 comments | comment on this)

Monday, July 5th, 2004
1:58 pm - Hi everyone.
scorpio_bitch I found this on www.military.com


Resumption Of Draft Gets Little Support
Miami Herald
July 2, 2004


Ignore all those Internet rumors. Despite the U.S. military's desperate need for more troops, there is no chance that the Bush administration or Congress will resurrect the draft, short of a new Pearl Harbor.
It's just too unpopular politically. Moreover, military experts say that conscription would hurt the quality and morale of the armed forces.

Instead, the Pentagon is examining other options, such as calling up more members of the National Guard and reserves, extending tours of active duty, shifting manpower within divisions, and moving troops from Europe and Asia to meet the urgent needs in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, the Army announced Wednesday that it would call up 5,600 former active-duty personnel for another round of service.

"A draft? It's just not going to happen," said Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services personnel subcommittee, agreed: "There is very little support in Congress for reinstating the draft."

MISLEADING E-MAIL

Perhaps those comments will help steady the nerves of many Americans apparently rattled by an e-mail that is circulating nationwide. It says that legislation is pending in Congress that would reinstitute the draft for the first time since 1973, starting as early as next spring. It also says that the administration is "quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections."

There is a kernel of truth to the allegation -- there is a bill pending that would restart the draft. But the Bush administration opposes it, as do Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and the leadership of both the Democratic and Republican parties in Congress. Everyone remotely in a position to know is quite sure that the bill is going nowhere.

"I don't know anyone in the executive branch of the government who believes that it would be appropriate or necessary to reinstitute the draft," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in April.

The bill's primary sponsor is Rep. Charles Rangel, a liberal Democrat from New York who represents Harlem. Even he admitted that his bill won't pass. He said he introduced it to get people to discuss who is doing the fighting in Iraq.

"The burdens of war should be fairly shared across all segments of our society and not fall disproportionately on poor communities as they do now," Rangel said in a written statement Wednesday.

The Selective Service System even posted a message to debunk the new-draft myth on its website, www.sss.gov.

MANPOWER STRETCHED

Fueling fear of a draft is a concern that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have strained military manpower dangerously. The House of Representatives and the Senate have voted this year to increase the number of active-duty personnel.

But the Bush administration opposes a permanent increase, contending that the current spike in active-duty personnel is temporary. Instead, the Pentagon is looking to ease manpower shortages by outsourcing noncombat operations to private contractors, extending tours, and integrating National Guard units and reserves into active-duty forces. Already, the National Guard and reserves make up about 40 percent of U.S. forces in Iraq.

In addition, the Army announced this week that it will call up 5,600 people who recently left the military but still have obligations as reservists. Army officials admitted that these are involuntary recruits, but they said the reservists were aware of the obligation when they signed up.

That is a long way from reviving the draft.

"It ain't going to happen," said Lawrence Korb, a former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration who is now with the Center for American Progress, a liberal Washington think tank.

"It's an urban legend, and urban legends die hard," said Rep. Ed Schrock, R-Va., a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Sound Off...What do you think? Join the discussion.
http://forums.military.com/1/OpenTopic?q=Y&a=frm&s=78919038&f=409192893

current mood: contemplative

(8 comments | comment on this)

Thursday, June 10th, 2004
3:05 pm - training extensions?

odiamo
Greetings, I'm a 16-year old female resident. I've been doing research on the draft bill, in hopes to get any letters to the editor, etc. published. Upon rereading the actual bill to check a certain fact, I realized the following little catch:

"SEC. 3. TWO-YEAR PERIOD OF NATIONAL SERVICE.

(a) GENERAL RULE- Except as otherwise provided in this section, the period of national service performed by a person under this Act shall be two years.

(b) GROUNDS FOR EXTENSION- At the discretion of the President, the period of military service for a member of the uniformed services under this Act may be extended--

(1) with the consent of the member, for the purpose of furnishing hospitalization, medical, or surgical care for injury or illness incurred in line of duty; or

(2) for the purpose of requiring the member to compensate for any time lost to training for any cause."

How is this to be interpreted? Could you be required to stay longer if you had to undergo some kind of training (including basic military training??) beforehand? Or is this only applicable to situations where you volunteered to perform some non-standard funtion and had to undergo extra training? Yet another loophole out of the situation.

(11 comments | comment on this)

Wednesday, May 26th, 2004
11:59 am - Welcome.
calic0jack I've created this community to give people who are eligible for the draft, and oppose it a place to discuss it, and start getting organized to take action against it. I want people all around the country to join this community. If you join this community, get people from your area to join it too. That way you can keep in touch with them about this subject.

First I'd like to give you this website. Notice it says that there is NO intention of starting a military draft whatsoever.
http://www.sss.gov/

Now read this.
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=5834001&content_dir=ua_congressorg

Note the difference. We are being lied to.

The major news broadcasters aren't covering this story. I feel lucky that I found out about it, so I could start doing something about it.

My aim for this community is to have it bring about the end of the draft, before it starts. Hence the journal title "Destroy the Draft, before it destroys us".

Lets get on it.

(49 comments | comment on this)


> top of page
LiveJournal.com