TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- For those in the U.S. worried about the DRAFT: IT WONT HAPPEN

For those in the U.S. worried about the DRAFT: IT WONT HAPPEN

The draft will not happen, as I will explain the following points.(with some history and numbers. bear with me if this topic is of relevance for you.)

1 - As many have said, the President does not have the authority! This is heated topic as it is election year, and some people are worried about it with the upcoming election.)

2 - There are two legislations about the Draft: Senate Bill 89, House Resolution 163. Both would require males and females two 2 years of mandatory service between ages of 18-26. (Both were proposed by Democrats: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15], [SC] (introduced 1/7/2003.)

3 - Each year, Congresses passes something called the Military Authorization Act and Military Appropriations Act. Every year, they can increase the size of the military. Instead, they choose not to.
(Although in 2003, there was a "temporary" increase of 20,000 for the Army)

4 - Stop-loss has been used the past 14 years since Bush senior. Clinton used it in Bosnia and Kosovo, and now Bush is using it for Afghanistan and Iraq.

5 - This year, Congress told the Air Force and Navy that they were too big. Both services have to reduce their forces by thousands by 2006 of September.

6 - Active Duty services have met their recuiting goals in the past few years. Congress could expand the active duty by three times and we would still have enough people to volunteer. My friend, with a college degree, couldnt even get in Officer Candidate School, and had to be on the waiting list just to enlist. Another friend is applying two years early into Army Ranger School. Standards are going up too, as now the Army only accepts 10% of recruits with GEDs. It used to be a cakewalk to enter! (as though high school is so hard! =p)


7- Reserve forces. Is our military too small for today's need and current situation? Of course it is. Because Congress wont allow the military to grow, the Army is forced to call upon reservists who should be staying home and helping out during national emergencies.

8 - Now, Why wouldnt Congress increase our military? 1: money. 2: money. 3: money (Go into detail later)

9 - Each person on active duty costs the government many thousands of dollars per month (pay, benefits, training, uniforms, transportation, food, personnel costs, etc.) Congress (and the Bush Administration) are simply not willing to add several more billions of dollars to the Defense Department budget. It's that simple.

10 - Training and Conflicts of the future: A draft was a way to fight a war 50 years ago. In today's military, even the basic infantry is "high tech." You don't train someone to operate and maintain highly sophisticated military equipment overnight. It takes a minimum of 18 months to 2 years to turn out a trained Soldier, Airman, Sailor, or Marine. It takes even longer than that for many military specialties. (ex: Navy SEALS, Army Green Beret, Army Ranger, Air Force PJ/CCT, Marine Force Recon)

11 - According to the Selective Service, if a draft were implemented today, it would take 193 days for the first inductee to report in. After that, it would take another 12 to 18 months to train them and form them into new combat units. In short, if we instituted a draft today, inductees would not be effective until about two years from now (at which time, their two year service commitment would be over ).

12 - Quality of Troops: Many of today's military members would trust their life with someone who volunteered rather than someone who was threated by prison. If we were to re-instate the draft, and the military was forced to accept everyone, regardless of criminal/drug/medical/test score qualifications, we would be larger, but much, much less effective. It's not numbers that count. It's training and technology.

13 - MONEY: All the senators and congressmen are full of it and they know it. There is no way the military could afford 22 million draftees.

(According to the Selective Service, there are currently 11 million men eligible for the draft in that age-range. However, both bills apply to women as well, so about 22 million would be required to serve. Keep in mind that these bills do not just require a portion of them to be drafted, they require everyone to serve.)

Why? Here is some simple math:

Assume each person was paid the lowest possible as (E-1), which as of the 2004 year, was $1193.40 USD/Month. Multiply it by 22 million, you get $26 billion per month. In one year, you get $315 Billion!

Now, for food, they get $150/month. 22 million = $39 billion/year
and housing? they get $500/month. Oh wait, did I forget equipment , training, relocation, and uniform costs?

14 - Senator Hollings and Mr. Rangel introduced the legislation over a year ago (January 2003), as a means of protest against a potential invasion of Iraq. Congress immediately stuck them "in committee" to die (that's what Congress does with bills that have absolutely no chance of passing).

The two bills have languished there, ever since, with absolutely no action being taken.

Hollings version has just 14 co-sponsors, and Rangel's bill has no support at all. Folks, these bills have ZERO chances of passing.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdque...3:@@@L&summ2=m&

See? Its been stuck there since 2003.

(summarized from usmilitary.about.com)

You're right, the president doesn't have the authority, and neither does any other branch of government:

U.S. Constitution, Article XIII, Section 1

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

And look at this crap C-BS calls a STORY

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004...C-SearchStories

Its full of "I think..." and all this touchy-feely emotional feelings, instead of dealing with the facts and realities.

If anyone of your friends or someone you know is worried about the draft make them go to usmilitary.about.com and read the draft article. Facts should be relied on instead of rumors.

Serve Your Community and the Nation Become a Selective Service System Local Board Member archived page from defendamerica.mil

quote:

If a military draft becomes necessary, approximately 2,000 Local and Appeal Boards throughout America would decide which young men, who submit a claim, receive deferments, postponements or exemptions from military service, based on Federal guidelines.

Selective Service notice creates flurry of press reports suggesting return of draft

Talk of a draft grows despite denials by White House

US raises spectre of conscription
The American defence department has begun a recruitment drive for local draft boards, raising questions about a possible revival of conscription.

I'll be damned if I ever allowed myself to get drafted into Iraq. No way in hell, I would rather become a dodger. Afghanistan would be one thing, but not a fat chance for Iraq, it would be Canada here I come. After seeing the face of George W. Bush talking about dead troops in Iraq I somehow did not feel any connection to his words about those troops.

I don't think a draft would be looked on highly in this current atmosphere either. I somehow cannot imagine myself fighting in a war in Iraq about WMDs that Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Powell all misled people about.

But more importantly, a volunteer would almost definitely rather have a fellow volunteer next to him rather than someone who was forced there by the draft.

Like i said, its not going to happen. But nevertheless fun to speculate and see everyone's opinion!

Not going to happen. You would sooner see martial law declared in Iraq and Allawi ascerting authoritarian control over the country before the US started drafting soldiers to send overseas. And most of the branches of service are still acheiving their recruiting targets.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter You're right, the president doesn't have the authority, and neither does any other branch of government: U.S. Constitution, Article XIII, Section 1 Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

hell yeah!

im not too worried either way though. im an only child

quote:

Originally posted by D-res hell yeah! im not too worried either way though. im an only child

Second that as well, guess I wouldn't have to become a draft dodger after all

You know what made me laugh most about the whole draft hysteria a couple of weeks ago. Is that the people that worried the most about it that I know from my area in NJ are republicans and Bush supporters... Hardy har har... guess Michael Moore had a point on that one. Even if he is a slanter.

Re: For those in the U.S. worried about the DRAFT: IT WONT HAPPEN

quote:

Originally posted by policerobots The draft will not happen, as I will explain the following points.(with some history and numbers. bear with me if this topic is of relevance for you.) ool is so hard! =p) ...As many have said, the President does not have the authority! This is heated topic as it is election year, and some people are worried about it with the upcoming election.) ...In short, if we instituted a draft today, inductees would not be effective until about two years from now (at which time, their two year service commitment would be over ). ... It's not numbers that count. It's training and technology. ...All the senators and congressmen are full of it and they know it. There is no way the military could afford 22 million draftees. (According to the Selective Service, there are currently 11 million men eligible for the draft in that age-range. However, both bills apply to women as well, so about 22 million would be required to serve. Keep in mind that these bills do not just require a portion of them to be drafted, they require everyone to serve.) (summarized from usmilitary.about.com)

ok, I disagree on a few things. First of all, the two year lag time for the draft wouldn't matter if we are in Iraq or somewhere else for, say, a decade. Second, one big reason that we are having trouble in Iraq is that we don't have enough troops. A small, well trained army might be very good at defeating a large, disorganized, poorly trained army. However, the case of long-term occupation is completely different from that of military attack. It doesn't take a navy seal or a fighter pilot to guard an oil pipeline or a hospital, and without a large army there will always be many weak points in Iraq vulnerable to insurgent attack. On the issue of what the president can and cannot do, there is a real possibility that, as terrorism increases (and I have no doubt it will, especially _because_ of this war) the president will have more and more justification for demanding emergency powers. He bypassed congress in starting this war in the first place! Finally, on the topic of money, our current president has no problems with increasing the military budget.
The bottom line: if the president really wants a draft, and he has some justification (real or imagined) than our asses are going to be drafted. And if the prohibition against drafting college students can be removed, only-children and short people shouldn't feel so safe.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan I'll be damned if I ever allowed myself to get drafted into Iraq. No way in hell, I would rather become a dodger. Afghanistan would be one thing, but not a fat chance for Iraq, it would be Canada here I come. After seeing the face of George W. Bush talking about dead troops in Iraq I somehow did not feel any connection to his words about those troops. I don't think a draft would be looked on highly in this current atmosphere either. I somehow cannot imagine myself fighting in a war in Iraq about WMDs that Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Powell all misled people about.

waste of energy typing this ^^^. it wont happen, why your comments?

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter You're right, the president doesn't have the authority, and neither does any other branch of government: U.S. Constitution, Article XIII, Section 1 Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Many people can argue with this valid point. But in all reality no one in a court of law is going to honor it. Why? You'd have to look into Maritime Law or Commercial Law.

That is why, even under the First Amendment, the monument of Ten Commendments didn't stay in that courthouse lobby [link]. Even after a flurry of interest from many pro-religous groups, did the seperation of church and state concept take control.

Democracy, what a concept.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter You're right, the president doesn't have the authority, and neither does any other branch of government: U.S. Constitution, Article XIII, Section 1 Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Yeah, there's a line under Article 1, Section 8: "Congress shall have the power... to raise and support armies,..." This is buttressed by the well-known "necessary and proper" clause.

The issue has also come up before the Supreme Court multiple times, in different ways *challenges run from declaring the concept of a draft unconstitution to an all-male draft being discriminatory against women* and the Court has never agreed with such challenges. So actually they do have the authority...until the Court decides otherwise.

First off there is no ARTICLE XIII but rather AMENDMENT XIII aka the 13th Amendment.

And since you have led us to Article 1, Section 8 you forget to mention the point I was trying to make:

"To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces". and "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

I would like to remind people of the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) and the USC (United States Code).

Title 32, Subtitle B, CHAPTER XVI, Part 1636 of the CFR would be a good read for any law student that is against a draft.

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 First off there is no ARTICLE XIII but rather AMENDMENT XIII aka the 13th Amendment. And since you have led us to Article 1, Section 8 you forget to mention the point I was trying to make: "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces". and "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." I would like to remind people of the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) and the USC (United States Code). Title 32, Subtitle B, CHAPTER XVI, Part 1636 of the CFR would be a good read for any law student that is against a draft.

I forgot the part where I was making reference to your post.

Refering to Amendment 13 was to Arbiter.

Refering to Article 1, Section 8 was to Radagast.

Refering to Title 32 of the CFR was for everyone.

My apologies for any confusion that arose.

Hypothetically speaking, if it does happen, you could claim to be unable to serve because of an internet addiction.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Not going to happen. You would sooner see martial law declared in Iraq and Allawi ascerting authoritarian control over the country before the US started drafting soldiers to send overseas. And most of the branches of service are still acheiving their recruiting targets.

Occrider's got it right. Give it up.


[[[smoke]]]

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.