Well, it seems my previous post has gotten people riled up. Good, that was the idea. Now let's look at the
a little more closely. Here are some of the more, shall we say, interesting facets of this lovely entity vis-a-vis the current situation:
- The circumstances under which a draft may occur: "A crisis occurs which requires more troops than the volunteer military can supply. Congress passes and the President signs legislation which starts a draft." Well now, more troops, huh? Who gets to decide that one? Seems to me we are already scraping the bottom of the barrel with the so-called back-door draft, in which tours are being involuntarily extended for National Guardspeople. Only a matter of time before it becomes a military necessity, seems to me.
- Undocumented (illegal) aliens are required to register. And let's not forget the permanent resident aliens and special (seasonal) agricultural workers! That's right, we want you migrants and undocumented types to bend over for us one more time. It's not enough that we deny you fair wages, health insurance, etc., that our economy sucks you dry while we all look the other way. Now go lose a limb for us, dammit! Give us your tired and your poor...so we can send them to Iraq! (And of course, I don't know about you, but if I were an illegal, I sure as heck wouldn't be contacting the U.S. government for any reason.)
- Refugee, parolee, and asylee aliens must also register. So I guess if you are running from a fascist dictator and have taken refuge here, we may just send you back there in the uniform of the fabulous U.S. of A. Righteous!
- If you are physically or mentally handicapped but "able to function in public with or without assistance", you must register. Hmm, I suppose that's an ADA thing, but honestly, if I were handicapped, serving in the military wouldn't be high on my list.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - DrPat
On October 5, 2004, the House of Representatives voted 402 - 2 to defeat H.R. 163, the bill cited as proof that the Selective Service was preparing to reinstate a military draft. The vote made official what has been a reality since January 7, 2003, when H.R. 163 was introduced despite nearly total opposition in Congress to restoring the draft. Without Congressional support, the draft cannot be reinstated. A similar bill languishes in the Senate.
This must be contrasted with registration, a totally different (though related) issue: Almost all male U.S. citizens, and male aliens living in the U.S., who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. It's important to know that even though he is registered, a man will not automatically be inducted into the military. In a crisis requiring a draft, men would be called in sequence determined by random lottery number and year of birth. Then, they would be examined for mental, physical and moral fitness by the military before being deferred or exempted from military service or inducted into the Armed Forces.
Here's my link, Lisa -- where's yours?
2 - SFC Ski
Males have been required to register for Selective Service since the end of conscription, if you were a male, you'd probably have known this.
The threat of a draft is much more a political tool than a reality.
3 - Dave Nalle
>>Males have been required to register for Selective Service since the end of conscription, if you were a male, you'd probably have known this.<<
Not strictly true. There was a 5 year period from the end of the draft to the start of registration during which people who turned 18 were not required to register. Hence, I missed Vietnam by 3 years and missed having to register for the draft by 2 years, having turned 18 in 1977.
Dave
4 - DrPat
When six months have gone by with no draft, she'd have to re-evaluate her panic, and acknowledge that this is nothing more than the kind of contingency planning that goes on all the time in bureaucracies everywhere, under every administration, in peacetime and wartime.
Unfortunately, by that time, I expect Lisa will have moved on to another Chicken Little topic...
5 - KOB
If you visit the Selective Service Web Site, you can easily get the impression that the draft will begin any day now. This site is very much alive, with subject headings, such as "What Happens During a Draft."
Regardless, you can sign up to serve on a local draft board.
Good post.
6 - Phillip Winn
If you visit that site and aren't dissuaded by the long explanation on the first page, excerpted by DrPat above, then nothing will convince you.
7 - Lisa Iannucci
I am aware that Congress has to approve reinstitution of the draft. But being as they're pretty much a rubber stamp of whatever comes out of the White House these days, especially if it benefits corporations and/or oil companies (see: ANWR, bankruptcy legislation), I wouldn't put anything past these fools.
I don't think I'm being a chicken little. I DO live in Washington...
I also find it interesting that no one has mentioned the fact that women are as yet undraftable. Wonder what that's all about...
8 - Dave Nalle
>>When six months have gone by with no draft<<
By my count it's 26 years with no draft. You'd think that in all that time the clue would have been received.
Dave
9 - gonzo marx
now i'm certain that i will be corrected if i am mistaken...
but doesn't the Law on this clearly state that the only circumstance that the Draft may be instituted is during a War?
and according to the War Powers Act...which is still the Law of the Land at this moment...only Congress can declare War?
so, for all the rhetoric about the "war on this" and the "war on that"...we are not..legally...in a state of War as defined by Law and thus , no Draft may be instituted?
now, personally, as a veteran myself..i believe back door military actions, and unDeclared Wars , such as what the U.S. is currently involved in, are anathema to our Troops...certain pay considerations and benefits packages are ONLY triggered during Wartime..and actions such as the current military Operation remain undeclared for financial and political reasons...yet our military personnel toil under the same duress and dangers or being in a hostile warzone for all intents and purposes
i also remain disgusted by the use of National Guard Troops in overseas operations..it has always been my understanding that the Guard was the "well regulated militia" mentioned in the Second Amendment, whose primary duty was defense of American soil ON American soil...and thus, under current circumstances, should probably be under the province of the Dept. of Homeland Security providing internal support, guarding our Borders from unlawful penetration and responding to National emergencies as needed...
just my one sixth billionths of the world's Opinion...what's yours?
Excelsior!
10 - Dave Nalle
Yes, Gonzo. I agree that the National Guard should never be mobilized outside our borders. That's not what they're for, and I think the states ought to have the right to not allow their guardsmen to serve overseas at the very least. But then I think we should dissolve the federal army and just rely on the National Guard. And if we did set up a situation where the guard was our only military I wouldn't have a problem with them serving overseas at the discretion of the individual states. That's what the founding fathers originally had in mind.
As for instituting a peacetime draft, I believe that an act of congress authorizing full use of mimilary force like the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution allows Congress to also pass a bill authorizing a peacetime draft. No real technical reason why they can't do it. The bit about drafts only in wartime is just what sounds right, I don't think it has any real legal meaning.
As for the Iraq war being undeclared, that's not clear either. The bill that authorized the use of the military in Iraq might not be a formal declaration of war, but it's identical to one in all legal, technical respects - in everything but name.
Dave
11 - gonzo marx
good points Dave..
but when it comes to Benefits for active duty Military serving during such Operations, the Name of the Thing becomes crucial
especially to those wounded or killed during such Operations..
and THAT is my primary concern..i do NOT consider our Troops to be "pawns" that are expendible to pursue political Agenda's (i am not implying that YOU do here, just making the Point)
i am loathe to see us expend our "Blood and Treasure" for any purpose outside of a "clear and present danger" to National Security...and when it is needed, then our Troops should be cared for both during and after any Incident to the fullest extent possible by our Society..
and it appears that such petty semantic differences, while politically meaningless on the surface...can make a world of difference to those actively on the Battlefield in our Names...
9 billion of our dollars just gone missing...some Guardsmen and Reservists having to pay "deductibles" for their care when they return home..their Families footing the bill so they can be near their loved Ones while they rehab from amputations and more...the number Two military Force there after our Troops being from Kellog, Brown and Root (the military arm of Haliburton)...the current Inquiries into overcharging by the "no bid" Contractor involved...
i am NOT even going to get into the "where are the WMD" Questions...
i am all for Freedom and Democracy for every living human being
i merely remain uncomfortable with it being the American Taxpayer that must spend the Treasure (which remains outside the Federal Budget...why?) and our Troops shedding their Blood..
Bog willing, it will all work out for the best...but i remain a Skeptic..
Excelsior!
12 - Dave Nalle
>>but when it comes to Benefits for active duty Military serving during such Operations, the Name of the Thing becomes crucial
especially to those wounded or killed during such Operations..<<
It's not clear to me that our troops are being treated any differently than they would be if there were a declared war today. We haven't had an actual declared war since 1945. I don't think we have meaningful grounds for extrapolating the care troops got then into the modern era.
>>and THAT is my primary concern..i do NOT consider our Troops to be "pawns" that are expendible to pursue political Agenda's (i am not implying that YOU do here, just making the Point)<<
Sadly, in the most abstract sense, that's what they are. The army is an instrument of policy and troops can die when it's used. It's not a happy thought, but it's reality.
>>i am loathe to see us expend our "Blood and Treasure" for any purpose outside of a "clear and present danger" to National Security...and when it is needed, then our Troops should be cared for both during and after any Incident to the fullest extent possible by our Society..<<
The theory here is that stabilizing the situation in the middle east is vital to our national security. It's hard to argue that this is not correct after the 9/11 attack. It's not yet proven that invading Iraq will solve the problem, but so far it does look like some sort of progress is being made. We can never be sure it was worth the loss of life, because we will never know how much worse things might have been had we not taken action.
That said, I do think veterans should get all the healthcare and support they need with no stinting at all.
>>9 billion of our dollars just gone missing...some Guardsmen and Reservists having to pay "deductibles" for their care when they return home..their Families footing the bill so they can be near their loved Ones while they rehab from amputations and more...<<
There's really no relationship between the missing money and healthcare for veterans. It's pretty bogus to try to connect the two.
>>the number Two military Force there after our Troops being from Kellog, Brown and Root (the military arm of Haliburton)...the current Inquiries into overcharging by the "no bid" Contractor involved...<<
As a stockholder in that contractor and someone with a close friend serving in Iraq as a paramilitary contractor I'll refrain from commenting on this one.
>>i am NOT even going to get into the "where are the WMD" Questions...<<
Good, because it's completely irrelevant.
>>i merely remain uncomfortable with it being the American Taxpayer that must spend the Treasure (which remains outside the Federal Budget...why?) and our Troops shedding their Blood..
<<
I'd rather not pay blood or money for it either. Get back to me when you find someone else willing to do the job and let us have a break.
Dave
13 - NancyGail
Wait a minute. You have a problem with illegal aliens being denied certain rights in this country? Correct me if I'm wrong, but they came in by illegal methods. The Border Patrol exists for a reason.
14 - gonzo marx
Dave sez...>
>
<
as well as...
<<>>i am NOT even going to get into the "where are the WMD" Questions...<<
Good, because it's completely irrelevant.>>
i put it to you, me boyo..IMO all of these things, and a horde of others i will be more than happy to cite for ya, add up to an overall Pattern which indicates either a willingness to prevaricate to the american public..or gross imcompetance...
i mentioned the WMD issues because it was the primary Argument for going into this conflict...this has proven to be untrue, and the Answer was "poor intelligence"...
ok..then pray tell me why, the man responsible for this Intelligence..the master of the "slam dunk" instead of being disciplined, received the highest civilian Honor the President can bestow...
as for the 9 billion dollars that has just gone missing..out of the 81 billion that had been spent up to the point in Question , that is one dollar in nine..about $35 per every man, woman and child in america...enough to buy EVERYONE in the world a hot dog and a coke at the local 7-11
that's a big thing...and we, the People, are supposed to sign off on a budget that doesn't balance as well as Trust these same people with the future retirement of our citizens vis a vis Social Security...
yeah ...right...
one last bit before i go back to work...
Dave sez..
<
I heartily applaud your Integrity by providing us with this disclosure...most especially since it may provide Insight into the formation of some of the Opinions you profess
not a bad thing in and of itself (see the ANWR thread, folks as well as some others) and does not color my high regard for your command of Facts nor my appreciation for the Intellectual Integrity you often display in our little discussions...
it just helps me to understand where yer coming from on some of these issues..
Excelsior!
15 - gonzo marx
d'oh..my first Quote messed up..it should be..
>
<
that with the next Quote help to show my point..
sorry fer the inconvenience Folks..
Excelsior!
16 - Phillip Winn
Gonzo, there is a 'preview' function that should enable you tell what will and will not work!
Generally speaking, though, don't use < and >, as those are interpreted as you trying to insert HTML. And failing, I guess. :-)
17 - Lisa Iannucci
It seems we are not the only ones concerned with this issue. I just received this email from the CAP:
"Please join the Center for American Progress and Washington Monthly for a special presentation:
The Draft: Inevitable, Avoidable or Preferable?
Featuring:
Capt. Philip Carter, U.S. Army (Ret.)
Lawrence J. Korb, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress
Moderated by:
Mark Shields, columnist for The Washington Post and Moderator, CNN's The Capitol Gang
U.S. troops are stationed abroad in Afghanistan and Iraq with no end in sight. The National Guard and Reserve are missing their recruiting targets. If the U.S. military continues to be deployed at its current pace, the all-volunteer force will break down and some kind of conscription will become necessary.
What can be done to avoid this fate? Or is mandatory national service with a military option actually the answer? The Washington Monthly has recently published an article titled "The Case for the Draft" (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0503.carter.html) arguing that the time when we could rely on an all-volunteer force has come to an end. Please join us for a discussion of this important issue."
18 - gonzo marx
heh..thanx Phillip..i am well aware of the preview function...my own damned fault...was rushing during my lunch hour and didn't take the time to check my own damned self..
now..the first Quote i tried to get in there was...
*There's really no relationship between the missing money and healthcare for veterans. It's pretty bogus to try to connect the two.*
and my last was..
*As a stockholder in that contractor and someone with a close friend serving in Iraq as a paramilitary contractor I'll refrain from commenting on this one.*
hopefully that will make things a bit more clear..
i may often be rightfully said to be quite insane...but i try not to be incoherent...
Excelsior!
19 - ElBee
If the illegals don't want to have to register for the Selective Service, then they should not come here. However, since there are so many that come over every day, it just proves that we have the best country in the world. Shouldn't we prepare in advance to defend it? Or, should we wait until all hell breaks loose and say, "Due to the fact that we are not ready yet to draft people, the enemy will be able to outmaneuver us until we get this whole thing set up in 6 months."
?
20 - .....
man shut yo whiteass up..