Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I support draft reinstatement

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I support draft reinstatement

    My condition: Bush's daughters are sent to the Marines and then immediately to Fallujah. Along with every military-age son and daughter, grandson and granddaughter of each member of Congress.

    Fair's fair.
    "There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle."
    --Albert Einstein

  • #2
    But daddy didn't have to go either.
    Turning the other cheek is better than burying the other body.

    Official Sport Lounge Sponsor of Rhode Island - Quincy Jones - Yadier Molina who knows no fear.
    God is stronger and the problem knows it.

    2017 BOTB bracket

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes.

      Just a thought:
      An issue with the Vietnam was that preferential treatment was given to people who got into the National Guard, which was essentially a non service, service. It did do some things, but was rarely at risk.

      IF preferential treatment is going to be given to ANYONE in that regard, why not reserve that for soldiers who have children? It's just an idea.

      If there is a draft, I don't think there is any reason you shouldn't be in fallujah if you are 18-25 unless you can't walk.


      Final thought:

      I wonder if a supply sergeant might 'lose' the absentee ballots from soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, especially guard members, since they ain't going to be voting for Bush.
      Are you on the list?

      Comment


      • #4
        If the draft were employed, those drafted would most likely not see combat whatsoever. They would be trained and then deployed to protect interests here at home and possibly in non-combat areas.

        The military would activate those units already trained (National Guard and Reserves) to go over to Iraq while the draftees would replace them here at home.

        Another issue that will pop up is the fact that draftees will no longer provide productivity for those companies they are required to leave, which could potentially hurt the economy.

        Comment


        • #5
          oh, I think if you are drafted, you'll probably go to Japan or Korea.
          Are you on the list?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by SLUBLUE@Apr 22 2004, 08:40 AM
            oh, I think if you are drafted, you'll probably go to Japan or Korea.
            You could, but it would be in a non-combat zone. It would have to get really ugly for draftees to go into a war zone with minimal training.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Iowa_Card+Apr 22 2004, 08:36 AM-->
              QUOTE (Iowa_Card @ Apr 22 2004, 08:36 AM)
              Another issue that will pop up is the fact that draftees will no longer provide productivity for those companies they are required to leave, which could potentially hurt the economy. [/b]
              How about requiring military service by those who's jobs go to India anyway? :o


            • #8
              well..since Bush has been trashed in such liberal media publications as Army Times and Stars and Stripes.....i wouldn't be shocked if the majority of the military vote goes to a guy who actually served
              Are you on the list?

              Comment


              • #9
                Originally posted by SLUBLUE@Apr 22 2004, 08:55 AM
                well..since Bush has been trashed in such liberal media publications as Army Times and Stars and Stripes.....i wouldn't be shocked if the majority of the military vote goes to a guy who actually served
                Scary thing is...and I've been 'in'...so many people in the military bash Clinton for what he did (or didn't do depending on how you look at it) but give Bushie a free pass... <_<

                Comment


                • #10
                  Regardless of the possible deployment of the new troops supplied through a national draft, I"d suspect that there's a shitload of wealthy, blue-blooded chicken-hawks out there-- who happen to have kids in their late teens, and above-- who SUDDENLY are reconsidering their previous strong support of our Iraqi efforts.
                  Norman Chad, syndicated columnist: “Sports radio, reflecting our sinking culture, spends entire days advising managers and coaches, berating managers and coaches, firing managers and coaches and searching the countryside for better middle relievers. If they just redirected their energy toward, say, crosswalk-signal maintenance, America would be 2 percent more livable.”

                  "The best argument against democracy," someone (Churchill?) said, "is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    I personally support a mandatory 3-4 year national commitment by 19 year olds...male and female. No outs, no National Guard, turn 19 and it's off to basic training. The ONLY exception would be those too physically handicapped to serve in some capacity.

                    Now that begs the question: did I serve? No, but now I wish I had.

                    the Dog

                    Dat's right!

                    Official Lounge Dog
                    Official Lounge sponsor of Bryce Salvador
                    Official Lounge sponsor of Cardinalgirl

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Let there be NO exemptions.

                      Also, I'd scan the internet for all of these "armchair-keyboard warriors" and ship their asses to the middle east.

                      Yes, I'm speaking to all of you war mongers on this site, who take a indifferent attitude towards to famileis who're paying the ultimate price for George Bush's foolishness.
                      Make America Great For Once.

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        Originally posted by The Kev@Apr 22 2004, 10:03 AM
                        Let there be NO exemptions.

                        Also, I'd scan the internet for all of these "armchair-keyboard warriors" and ship their asses to the middle east.

                        Yes, I'm speaking to all of you war mongers on this site, who take a indifferent attitude towards to famileis who're paying the ultimate price for George Bush's foolishness.
                        DING

                        Kev, you have to have exemptions for people who can't fight. But they could be drafted for office or mail jobs overseas.

                        Seriously, if the national guard would be a defense on the homefront/emergency type organization, i'd let soldiers with kids go in the guard. why risk orphaning children?
                        Are you on the list?

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          As usual, a reasonable idea gets turned into something stupid.

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            Originally posted by Rdog3933@Apr 22 2004, 09:56 AM
                            I personally support a mandatory 3-4 year national commitment by 19 year olds...male and female. No outs, no National Guard, turn 19 and it's off to basic training. The ONLY exception would be those too physically handicapped to serve in some capacity.

                            Now that begs the question: did I serve? No, but now I wish I had.

                            the Dog
                            Why don't we just eliminate high school for all the people who can't pass standardized testing in 8th grade too? Why in the hell would you ever force high school graduates to go into the military for 3 to 4 years? Our military forces may be a little shorthanded, but to take away someone's freedom of choice to go to college or whatever is ridiculous. I'm glad I don't live in a country ran by you.

                            Comment

                            • Working...
                              X