***Draft Watch***

Now that Bush has been elected according to most Kerry Suporters the draft is just right aroun the corner. So this thread will be here to keep everyone aware of the impending draft that is sure to come down from a presidential order any day now.

Any Kerry Supporters care to place bets on when it is going to be?

I will be periodically bumping this thread and updating the draft watch to just show that it will not happen.

... but it was the DEMOCRATS that introduced the Bill to reinstate the draft.

www.snopes.com...

www.theorator.com...

Yeah, Democrats Rangel, McDermott, Conyers, Lewis, Stark and Abercrombie introduced HR163 in the hopes of scaring the American public into thinking that the Republicans were going to initiate a draft, THEY AREN'T.

For the results of this failed bill read:

washingtontimes.com...


Now that you have the facts, do you still want to continue down this ridiculous path?

From a fairly random link:

With the prospect of US presence in Iraq extending several years, young people who would normally be drawn to enlisting as a way of paying for their education and gaining medical coverage are now thinking twice about it.

I predict it'll take 2 years for this problem to really mature, with all these plans to build 14 permanent bases in Iraq.

May 2005 or the next fake terror attack. Bush is the AntiChrist

[edit on 3-11-2004 by DiRtYDeViL]

There will be no draft...sorry...the military really does not like dealing with draftees or mal-contents. They are harder to train and lead to serious morale problems once deployed.

If we need more troops the military will raise recruitment goals, signing bonuses, etc...

SORRY TO REPORT TO YOU THAT YOU ARE WRONG. AND IF ANYBODY WANTS TO WARN ME WITH A U2U PLEASE DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME!

Kozmo, so you would believe that there is not going to be a draft under Bush?

He was just waiting until he won before he dropped the bad news

They are stretched at the moment with Iraq, who do you think they will invade Iran with?

Just a matter of time... I would like to put that there is also a post called ***Border Watch*** around the time of the draft... just watch Mexico's and Canada's population soar!!!

Originally posted by MrNice
If we need more troops the military will raise recruitment goals, signing bonuses, etc...

Bonuses already went up from 6k to 15k, in order to meet the goal. And of course everything has a price, so I guess for $1M signing bonus you can met the recruitment goal of any magnitude. Or maybe America will realize one day it's driving itself into debt it cannot repay. I donno.

I've read your postrs before and you seem like a reasonable person... why all the pessimism and despair? Damn, the election results aren't even 24 hours old and the entire world is predicting Armegeddon by sunset. Our government STILL has checks and balances in place to ensure appropriate representation of the people. Bush is NOT a dictator and cannot simply enact policies willy-nilly. I, along with the apparent majority of Americans, believe that Bush will continue to fight terrorism on our shores and abroad... for the benefit of not only the United States, but for mankind as a whole. Just because Old Europe and many other countries lack the intestinal fortitude to do what is right because it is difficult or unpopular does not make Bush the anti-Christ. For Pete's sake people, LIGHTEN UP!

In all honesty let�s look at the facts. Bush usually does the exact opposite of what he says. Bush stated that there will be no draft under his presidency. So guess what you can guarantee there will be!

Originally posted by Aelita
with all these plans to build 14 permanent bases in Iraq.

I can not find anything about these "14 permanent bases" in Iraq. Can you specify?

Originally posted by kozmo
Just because Old Europe and many other countries lack the intestinal fortitude

You mean to say that the US has constipation and Europe does not?

Seriously, though, that's a silly argument. Europe has seen too many brutal wars on its soil to be accused of being whimpy and all. On the contrary, they value peace and aren't trigger happy. The US obviosuly have not passed this stage.

It's not that Kozmo.

It's the fact that since Bush won, Blair will have a larger chance of winning now. Which means that we will see a terrorist attack in the UK at somepoint. It was going to happen, but now it might happen sooner.

I live 15 mins away from Scotlands most populated city, if they dont attack London (which i think they will). They'll attack Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Cardiff, Glasgow or Belfast.

It's going to happen. And i'm just upset that a man who cant speak english properly, who has no regard for other countries, and who is down right dumb got voted back in.

If Blair holds the Uk elections early (which is speculated) i dont want someone else kissing Bush's A**. There only going to create more problems for the UK. I wish we sided on the rest of Europe over Iraq, the cheap slaggings and "comedy" images by the Americans would have been worth it

I seem to remember reading a couple of reports several months ago stating that the Selective Service Boards were being re-staffed and were to report operational readiness in the SSpring of 2005.

Now, if there was no draft planned, why spend time and money re-staffing the boards and asking them to report ready for operation?

Originally posted by kozmo
Just because Old Europe and many other countries lack the intestinal fortitude to do what is right because it is difficult or unpopular does not make Bush the anti-Christ.

There have been alot of good posts on this thread and this is one of them. In 20 years these Libs will look back and say "damn, i was wrong, Bush started the distruction of world wide terrorism." IMO, the quicker "old Europe" (i like that) gets on the ball the quicker we will be victorious.

But history has taught us time and again that it is destined to repeat itself unless we act to forge a new future. Example, WWII brought us Hitler... it also brought us the appeasing French who were negotiating with Hitler behind the other European nation's backs in order to guarantee their own safety and sovereignty. They had more pacts and accords with Hitler, you couldn't count them. What happened??? A few years later they were occupied by the Nazis. Fast forward to the late 1970s when the US and European governments attempted to appease terrorist sponsoring nations... what happened? Well, they sectretly become more bold, brash and dangerous, to the extent that threaten our everyday lives. Sorry Snoop, but we are doing EXACTLY what needs to be done... what should have been done long before this problem had progressed this far. If we had stood strong and united back in the 70's and 80's, we wouldn't be facing this disaster today. Imagine what the face of this threat would like in 20 years from now if we continued to do nothing? We'd be facing a fully nuclear armed MiddleEast. Think about it.

Originally posted by Britguy
I seem to remember reading a couple of reports several months ago stating that the Selective Service Boards were being re-staffed and were to report operational readiness in the SSpring of 2005.

Now, if there was no draft planned, why spend time and money re-staffing the boards and asking them to report ready for operation?

Bush does not need to institute a military draft. All he needs to do is declare a state of national emergency - a pandemic flu will do if there is no terrorist attack. Under emergency measures he can draft people into the Select Service, and then send them to the military through the back door.

The terms for SS draft were recently revised. LOL


.

Originally posted by Snoopdopey
Kozmo, so you would believe that there is not going to be a draft under Bush?

He was just waiting until he won before he dropped the bad news

The decline in the populaces understanding of the U.S. Constitution, the legislative branches and the proper evolution of a Bill into Law is numbing. George Bush (or any President for that matter) cannot institute a draft. The only members of the legislative branch that have sponsored or cosponsored a Bill reinstating the draft are Democrats who hoped to scare the unwitting and ill informed (which they have succeeded apparently) into fearing such a measure. Duped, is no way to go through life. The military doesn't want a draft, it doesn't work with a modern military. It was an all volunteer military under a strong President (Ronaldus Magnus) that brought the Soviets to their knees, it was a draft military under a socialist nail biter (Lyndon Johnson) that laid our nation low. Which do you think the military would rather have? How many members of the House of Representatives would be reelected in two years if they voted for the draft? How many of the 33 Senators in two years would be reelected after voting for the draft?

Fun facts about the draft.

The President who first signed a modern draft bill into Law and instated the draft in peacetime? The very Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The President who ended the draft, and enacted an all volunteer military (with U.S. troops still in harms way), the very Republican Richard M. Nixon.

Republican agenda: The all volunteer military.

So while it may be the "MTV" thing to do, fear mongering about a draft is just that, fear mongering.

Originally posted by Aelita
Europe has seen too many brutal wars on its soil to be accused of being whimpy and all. On the contrary, they value peace and aren't trigger happy. The US obviosuly have not passed this stage.

And we do not want to get to that stage where we don't see anything worth fighting for. BS, this is not a time to sit back and wait for the next attack. Come on, why is this so difficult for you people to understand.

Let me put this in dumb *ss terms.

Fight the war in on their land means they do not bring the fight to America. If you want to sit around and wait for another attack go to France, they like to give in.

Kozmo.

I respect your views. To some extent i know you are right. But i just feel we went the wrong way about it.

Whatever happened to assasinations and special ops?

Why do we have to invade and kill thousands of innocent people to kill a minority of terrorists? The british government didn't drop thousands upon thousands of bombs on Northern Ireland... It's just unreal.

We fight the fight through intelligence and superior technology. Not by throwing petrol at a flame.

What do you think?