Can we start a campaign from DU that gets the word out about the DRAFT?

We could have literature that could be downloaded and have all the facts on the draft. People could pass out the lit, hang it up, etc.


- Dems Will Win

is there a draft now? I'm under the impression that a draft would be political suicide for anyone who tried to impliment it. is this one of the things DUers worry about?

for Chuck Rangel yet, and he proposed it in '03.

someone who's represented an over 80% Democratic district for over 30 years probably could't lose if he tried.

of course suggesting something isnt suicide. implementing it is what i meant, and only implementing it would be worth worrying about.

to bring it back.

but like I said, he represents a district that's over 80% Democratic that he's been in for more than 30 years.

it was only to draw attention to the fact that our troops - particularly those in Iraq - overwhelmingly come from poor and working class backgrounds. That being the case, our government can send them off to war secure in the knowledge that their sons and daughters, and those of their corporate sponsors, will never be put in harm's way.

A lot of us think that if Bush is "re"elected the draft will return in '05. After all, if he's going to continue with his military adventurism he's going to have to get cannon fodder from somewhere. :mad:

all the stop-loss orders (40,000)

Calling up the inactive REady Reserve (17,000)

Hunting down the rest of the 280,000 Individual Ready Reserve through the IRS

PLUS 30,000 "Private Contractors" in Iraq!

But Bush needs more to invade Syria, Iran and hold Iraq and lots of Central Asia. Maybe millions more, if Russia and China butt in--and you can bet they will. They already have moved their MOBILE NUCLEAR LAUNCHERS near our bases there.

Because so far the only people that have proposed it are Democrats.

Check this link out.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=499006

Also be aware that the motives of the Democrats who have proposed the draft, however misguided they are, are not what drives the Republicans on this issue. Believe me, they will subvert any existing legislation proposed by Democrats for the purposes of PNAC global domination. And any massive protests against this by the populace will be dismissed as the piddling whinings of a "focus group". It's not Democrats who are rotating 3,600 troops from South Korea to Iraq and calling up the inactive reserve, which is the last step before a draft. It's the BFEE.

By the way, here is a great info page fro David Wiggins:

http://www.duckdaotsu.org/resist.html

How to Stay Out of the Military

It has links to lots of other sites. I'm going to try some of them to see if I can find any sample psychological tests. In the sequence of events of what would occur if a draft was implemented, step 4 is:

4. PHYSICAL, MENTAL, AND MORAL EVALUATION OF REGISTRANTS
Registrants with low lottery numbers are ordered to report for a physical, mental, and moral evaluation at a Military Entrance Processing Station to determine whether they are fit for military service. Once he is notified of the results of the evaluation, a registrant will be given 10 days to file a claim for exemption, postponement, or deferment. See also Classifications.

If I can find a sample psychological test, I can figure out the best way to fail. I know Andy Kaufman got a 4-F reclassification because he scored a zero on his psychological exam. Of course, I could just fail the moral evaluation. Thanks a lot, Dems Will Win. I'm bookmarking all your posts in case catastrophe strikes.

Fair enough. So you have one Republican law maker (Hagel) and one Democrat lawmaker (Rangel) who have talked about bringing back the draft--and the Democrat mentioned it first. Now how exactly do you plan to pin this on Bush, who hasn't even mentioned it?

Answer: Not in any way that will stick.

I am a member of that previously mentioned "focus group" that Bush dismisses with his cavalier smirkiness. He doesn't have to be as slick as Willie, nothing sticks when your party controls all three branches of the government. Barring Sistani declaring intifada before the election, or some other unforeseen disaster, Bush will avoid bringing back the draft until after November.

At that point, he can pretend that the thought never crossed his mind until then. I think we both know that's a bunch of bullshit. Bush doesn't have to say a damn thing, his actions (rotating 3,600 troops from South Korea to Iraq, reactivating the inactive reserve) speak louder than words. He is setting up for the draft and it's not a question of if, but when.

seeing as how Kerry suports that effort too.

Agreed. Christian Science Monitor has some KILLER info on the Neocons and the PNAC!

http://search.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/index.html

We need as many facts about the draft as possible circulated here so that we can circulate the facts about the draft among the general populace. Facts about when it might happen, who would qualify for a draft. Most especially I am interested in factual information on the most effective means of legally avoiding the draft or how to fail the draft exam. I'm sure there are many people who are interested in the various forms of civil disobedience to protest against the draft.

So, for the moderators or anyone else reading this, I propose creating a forum to deal specifically with this issue here at DU.

And thank you, Dems Will Win, for keeping this issue at the front burner on this site.

been totally ignored on DU. Just check out the Selective Service website and the draft plans are patently obvious. Kerry should be using this against AWOL day and night.

I posted this same proposal in the General Discussion forum. Guess how many responses I've had to this idea? Zero! Sometimes I feel like a cabaret performer in the Weimar Republic watching our government piss this country away.

WHEN WILL EVERYBODY WAKE THE FUCK UP???!!!

I've got 2, potentially, draft age kids and this is a HUGE issue for me! There's millions of me's across this country. There are also millions who might be drafted into cannon fodder status for *'s imperialistic goals themselves. WHAT THE HELL IS MORE RELEVANT??

of what the hell is going on!!!!!!!!!!1

I didn't raise my son to be a soldier,
I brought him up to be my pride and joy
There would be no wars today;
if every mother would say,
I didn't raise my son to be a soldier!!!!!

Oh yeah!!!!!!!!!!

Just look around in the posts on this thread (as I'm sure you already have) and you'll see plenty of ostriches.

I was a conscientious objector in Vietnam. I'm not fond of the idea of a draft, but seeing as how there are so many ostriches, sometimes I think a rude awakening is what some of these folk deserve.

That sucks, but people will just dismiss it out of hand at this point.

Previous discussion at DU: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1611896

Article referenced:
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/171522_draft01.html

> Selective Service eyes women's draft
> The proposal would also require registration of critical skills
> Saturday, May 1, 2004
> By ERIC ROSENBERG
> SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER WASHINGTON BUREAU
>
> WASHINGTON -- The chief of the Selective Service System has proposed registering women for the military draft and requiring that young Americans regularly inform the government about whether they have training in niche specialties needed in the armed services.
>
> The proposal, which the agency's acting Director Lewis Brodsky presented to senior Pentagon officials just before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, also seeks to extend the age of draft registration to 34 years old, up from 25.
>
>The Selective Service System plan, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, highlights the extent to which agency officials have planned for an expanded military draft in case the administration and Congress would authorize one in the future.
>
> "In line with today's needs, the Selective Service System's structure, programs and activities should be re-engineered toward maintaining a national inventory of American men and, for the first time, women, ages 18 through 34, with an added focus on identifying individuals with critical skills," the agency said in a Feb. 11, 2003, proposal presented to senior Pentagon officials. (end excerpt)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have a son and a daughter, age 26 and 28, well within the new proposed limits for collecting personal data to track people and skills. I am taking this seriously enough that I have forwarded the entire article and url to everyone on my list and to every list I am on.

Neither my kids nor I are opposed to using force to defend our nation should it be attacked (and they both almost joined up right after 9-11), BUT I personally am vehemently opposed to allowing the Pentagon Axis of Evil to use them or any one else's kids as further cannon fodder in this mindless exercise in Iraq. As I told my son, I don't trust this bunch as far as I could throw them.

Get the word out, DUers. There's sources online through the Quakers/Friends, Conscientious Objectors, and support groups for military.

At the very least, get involved at your local high school board and see that parents and students are notified that (1) the DoD requires schools to send personal info about boys to them or lose funding under the No Child Left Behind Act, and (2) there is an opt-out provision that may be exercised by either parent or child, but that it must be in writing and must be every year. ROTC is already there as a recruitment tool, and recruiters come on campus every Career Day if not more frequently.

Your local chapter of Veterans for Peace may already be active in counter-recruitment on the college campus -- you might check with them. My friend simply calls it "truth in recruitment," and has a table on campus once a week. He can't go to high school campuses unless a teacher asks him to come as part of a class presentation. Ditto Conscientious Objectors.

Hekate
who WILL hold a family council soon

(edited to clarify end of citation)

...especially since he proposes "enlarging" the armed forces by 40,000 to "take the pressure off" the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

With re-enlistment rates declining daily, that leaves little doubt as to where we'll get those 40,000. That is one job that we won't be able to export overseas, unfortunately.

If you truly want to prevent a draft, contact Kerry's campaign and tell them that we can't afford to stay in Iraq as an occupying army. Tell them the US needs to relinquish ALL CONTROL of Iraq: financial, political and military.

That is the only way we'll prevent a draft.

Bush is spending $28 million this year to reactivate the draft by June 15, 2005. Only a "trigger resolution" next year is necessary so no new laws are needed by Dems or anybody so those Draft bills are totally irrelevant. Besides filling all the Draft boards and gearing up the CO process for the first time in 30 years, even creating the agreements for CO employment, Bush is having the SSS "design procedures" this year so next year, all men and women under the age of 35 will have to register for the DRAFT and list their occupation for a non-combat skills DRAFT with no med deferments.

Kerry's NO-DRAFT plan is to raise 40,000 additional troops and avoid reinstatement of the draft is added up this way:

1. Move some paper-pushers to combat (lots of potential there)
2. Increase enlistment with real scholarships and pay raises
3. Let troops know Special Ops will hunt al-Queda, no more invasions needed, so re-up rate goes up. "Primarily a law enforcement effort, not a full military effort", say JK.
4. Start a "Civilian Stability Corps" that would help in reconstructing Afghanistan and Iraq and relieve military pressure.
5. GET FOREIGN TROOPS TO COME INTO INSTEAD OF LEAVE IRAQ!!

http://www.candidatemap.com

"...I propose that we enlist thousands of them in a Civilian Stability Corps, a reserve organization of volunteers ready to help win the peace in troubled places. Like military reservists, they will have peacetime jobs; but in times of national need, they will be called into service to restore roads, renovate schools, open hospitals, repair power systems, draft a constitution, or build a police force. A Civilian Stability Corps can bring the best of America to the worst of the world—and reduce pressure on the military."
< Source: Kerry, John. "Protecting Our Military Families in Times of War: A Military Family Bill of Rights." March 17, 2004. http://johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0317.html >

With this NO-DRAFT PLAN, Kerry will not have to resort to conscription, even after Bush screwed the whole thing up.

From STOPTHEDRAFT.COM

http://technologyreports.net/stopthedraft/?articleID=2550

What do a former fighter pilot in the National Guard and a former officer in the Navy have in common? Both have promised not to reinstate the military draft if elected president.

Senator John Kerry has promised that if elected president he will not reinstate the military draft, but will increase troop numbers by 40,000.

President Bush and his staff have also promised the American public that there are no plans to reinstate the military draft.

-snip-

John Kerry wants to deploy 40,000 more troops to Iraq and finish the job quickly. Yet when asked how he would do it, he said that a draft is not needed and people will enlist. This approach seems rather naïve and overly optimistic.

To his advantage, however, Senator Kerry was an anti-war activist after serving his duties as a Navy officer in the Vietnam War and knows first-hand the pitfalls of the military draft.

-snip-

BUSH '04 = DRAFT '05
KERRY '04 = PNAC OUT THE DOOR!

John Kerry wants to deploy 40,000 more troops to Iraq and finish the job quickly.

Do you honestly think it is possible to "temporarily enlarge" the size of the armed forces by 40,000 WITHOUT resorting to a draft? Honestly?

John Kerry also promised he would fight GeeDubya on the IRW resolution if he didn't enlist the UN before invading Iraq. When Dubya invaded, where was John Kerry?

And what exactly does "finish the job" mean? Is it finished when we impose the "right" kind of government on the country? Or when we put "our kind of people" in power in Iraq? Or when we've "eliminated all resistance"?

That's the root of the problem: the "job" was NEVER DEFINED. Nor is it being defined by ANYONE now-- Republican or Democrat. All we have is more specious rhetoric about "doing it right" and "winning the peace" and "we broke it, we fix it". And, since Kerry has become the defacto nominee, the ENTIRE issue of the occupation quagmire will now be removed from the table.

Invading Iraq was WRONG. Staying in Iraq does not "fix" anything, it only makes a very bad situation even worse. We've been waging war on this country for the last 13 years in one way or another-- our continued presense WILL NOT "finish the job". The people of Iraq want us OUT-- NOW.

Kerry may not have announced a "plan", but he doesn't need one: the Bush plan will already be in place, and it will become Kerry's plan, just like the war will become Kerry's war.

Changing the guy in charge won't do a hell of a lot to change the war this year, I'm afraid. The Democrats have a worse war record than the Repubs over the past 100 years. I doubt this one will be much different.

Thousands from the 1 million in logistics in the Armed Services who are not currently part of the 500,000 active duty troops.

Thousands from increased enlistment and re-up rates once the troops know that a Silver Star Winner is president and not AWOL

Thousands from increased enlistment and re-up rates once the troops are given Kerry's pay and benefit raises along with real scholarships and full medical care. They had this and Bush took a lot of it away!

Thousands replaced by civilians from the volunteer Civilian Stability Corps

Thousands in Iraq replaced by NATO, including the French, troops. Don't forget that Kerry looks French and the French love him and hate Bush. They will help Kerry to get contracts and put their thumb in Bush's eye.

Plus Kerry sees catching al-Queda as a law issue with Special Ops. Less troops needed there then.

Plus the 40,000 go to South Korea and other bases, although Bush just shipped some out of South Korea just last week.

In any case, avoiding the DRAFT can be done--as long as you're not George W. Bush and hell-bent on carrying out the PNAC Plan to dominate the Mideast and Central Asian oil.

Also Kerry is not dumb enough to say he would just pull out like Kucinich. Why? Because America likes to think of itself as a winner and Kerry knows that. Kerry is going to win the WH and try to sidestep this during the election I agree--AND THEN WHEN HE IS PRESIDENT HE WILL PULL THE U.S. TROOPS OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND MAKE IT SEEM LIKE A VICTORY. HE AFTER ALL IS THE GUY THAT SAID "HOW CAN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO BE THE LAST MAN TO DIE FOR A MISTAKE?"

But he will do this after the Inauguration not before the Election.

Think about it.

Pretty good article with some pretty sensible advice.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0519-13.htm

Also, I agree with what you said:

Kerry is going to win the WH and try to sidestep this during the election I agree--AND THEN WHEN HE IS PRESIDENT HE WILL PULL THE U.S. TROOPS OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND MAKE IT SEEM LIKE A VICTORY. HE AFTER ALL IS THE GUY THAT SAID "HOW CAN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO BE THE LAST MAN TO DIE FOR A MISTAKE?"

Exactly. With that statement he made in the wake of his Vietnam experience, it would be absolute political suicide for him to prolong or exacerbate the war in Iraq. I trust Kerry to get us out of there.