First Order of Business for Democrats: The Draft [Archive]

Pendragon_6

11-10-2006, 07:59 AM

November 10th, 2006

On January 8th of 2003, Congressman Charles Rangel [D-NY] began an extensive campaign to bring back the military draft. He repeatedly submitted legislative bills to begin a military draft and compel all American men and women up to the age of forty-two to serve two years of military service. Under the Republican-controlled Congress, such bills went down to defeat.

One of the few notable supporters of the draft was Congressman John Murtha [D-PA]. Congressman Murtha reportedly is preparing to campaign to take over the highly influential position of House Majority Leader. Congressman Rangel is set to take over the House Ways and Means Committee. Two proponents of a military draft will most likely take over two key leadership positions in the new Democrat-contolled House. Surely they were not lying to America when they proposed a draft? They would not make such a serious proposal for a mere political cheap shot, would they?

As recently as last February of 2006, Rangel once again introduced draft legislation. In a press release he stated,

“Every day that the military option is on the table, as declared by the President in his State of the Union address, in Iran, North Korea, and Syria, reinstatement of the military draft is an option that must also be considered, whether we like it or not,” Congressman Rangel said. “If the military is already having trouble getting the recruits they need, what can we do to fill the ranks if the war spreads from Iraq to other countries? We may have no other choice but a draft.”

In Full
The American Thinker (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=6026)

MrSanity

11-10-2006, 08:01 AM

I don't think this is going anywhere, but God help us if it does.

Lazarus

11-10-2006, 08:07 AM

HA! You wont see a Draft coming from the Dems - I dont care how many times Rangel and Murtha have asked for it before... Pelosi would have those two tied and gagged and stored in the basement of the Capitol before she let them attach a military draft to the Democrats' reputation...

If they did this as their first order of business, that one bill alone would guarantee the Republicans control of the government again in 2 years... And half the Democrat voters would run screaming to either the Pubs or the Commies depending one how Liberal or Conservative they were...

God, yes, Charlie Rangel... You should DEMAND that Madame Nancy bring your Military Draft bill to the floor ASAP!!!:rotflmbo:

The_Elucidator

11-10-2006, 08:10 AM

I don't know what to make of this because of the 'Rats open hatred of the military and the troops. Keep an eye on the legislation to see if only affluent whitey gets drafted to be taught a lesson!

Wyatt_Junker

11-10-2006, 10:02 AM

Rangel thinks he's sacring all the white spoiled brats in the burbs, at least that's what's going thru his racist mind. That maybe if there's a draft he'll be able to scare all those soccer moms who're so protective of their little johnnies. But what he doesn't know is that, if anything, a draft will challenge the urban hood rats a helluva lot more than any other demographic. His racism is so 180 degrees backasswards that he's not in touch with who he even represents anymore and just assumes that whitey is a puss and that blacky is a tough thug.

DesertFox

11-10-2006, 10:07 AM

Chawlee juss makin' noise again. Nobody take homeboy serious.

Maggie_T

11-10-2006, 10:14 AM

I sincerely hope so. Otherwise, there goes the military. Can you imagine our country being protected by all those losers and mommy's boys? (shudders)

ldb83

11-10-2006, 10:51 AM

What losers and mommy's boys?

MrSanity

11-10-2006, 11:04 AM

I can't believe what I'm reading.

We should (and surely we will) do everything in our power to keep military service voluntary.

Maggie_T

11-10-2006, 11:22 AM

What losers and mommy's boys?

Little dense today, ldb?

ldb83

11-10-2006, 11:31 AM

Well, surely you don't mean everyone who didn't voluntarily enlist in the military is either a loser or a mommy's boy...

The_Elucidator

11-10-2006, 11:34 AM

Well, surely you don't mean everyone who didn't voluntarily enlist in the military is either a loser or a mommy's boy...

Nope, only the libs.

Lazarus

11-10-2006, 11:45 AM

Lighten up, Idb... Its a little late to be trying the reverse John Kerry on us... That was sadly transparent - try again...

Actually I was thinking about this issue at lunch today and it occurred to me that it was the Democratic Party in power in Washington that escalated Vietnam to the insane three-ring circus that everyone remembers... Im now beginning to re-think this senario...

Given the Rats' track record of military events, its entirely possible for them to turn the situation in Iraq into another Vietnam, and a national military draft would be precisely the first logical step in their pathetic attempt at trying on the John Wayne suit leading into the '08 elections...

Supposedly the Dems never wanted to go into Iraq on principle, but they are perfectly capable and willing to use it for their perceived political benefit... It would be just like them in their new pseudo-Conservative masquerade to try to out-macho George Bush by escalating this war...

Kathy30

11-10-2006, 11:50 AM

Old news. Rangel didn't even vote for his own bill.

Maggie_T

11-10-2006, 11:52 AM

Nope, only the libs.

There you go, lbd. Sweet and short.

Antigone

11-10-2006, 12:04 PM

Old news. Rangel didn't even vote for his own bill.

It was all a scare tactic by Rangel. They were all bleating the "quagmire" mantra about the war so he threw in a "draft" hoping to scare people onto their side. It was the old "The war is going so badly we need a draft in order to win. BUT if we bring our troops home now and give up, there wouldn't have to be a draft" plan. I think they hoped people would start denouncing the war fearing there was going to be a draft (and what better way to plant that seed than suggest one yourself) and therefore strengthen their position against Bush and the war through public support for their position.

ldb83

11-10-2006, 12:04 PM

Nope, only the libs.

Well, you have a point there. A buddy of mine is a huge flaming liberal social worker and he's going to work for the V.A. to help returning soldiers who may be struggling with PTSD. What a pussy.

Wolfcounsel

11-10-2006, 12:26 PM

"...Charlie Rangel... You should DEMAND that Madame Nancy bring your Military Draft bill to the floor ASAP!!!:rotflmbo:" --Lazarus

YES! Tell her you'll plant a boot up her ass if she ignores you!

Maggie_T

11-10-2006, 12:59 PM

Well, you have a point there. A buddy of mine is a huge flaming liberal social worker and he's going to work for the V.A. to help returning soldiers who may be struggling with PTSD. What a pussy.

By liberal standards, he is. Remember how liberals derided that famous sports celebrity who went to Iraq to fight and died?

Honesty becomes you, ldb. Keep it up.

ldb83

11-10-2006, 01:08 PM

Remember how liberals derided that famous sports celebrity who went to Iraq to fight and died?

Famous sports celebrity? Redundancy aside, no, I don't remember liberals deriding Pat Tillman.

Lazarus

11-10-2006, 02:37 PM

Famous sports celebrity? Redundancy aside, no, I don't remember liberals deriding Pat Tillman.I do...

Trevelyan

11-10-2006, 03:19 PM

Well, I am certainly glad that I am legally blind when it comes to this issue. Anyone who wants to reinstitute the draft is insane.

DesertFox

11-10-2006, 03:58 PM

I don't think the draft is that bad an idea (though I don't support it), but a draft as a political ploy is a horrible idea, and that's all Charlie's got in mind.

Titus

11-10-2006, 05:21 PM

While i to believe it might be all talk the article states that Bush would Veto it but iam not totally convinced that he would as he looked to forward to working with this Democratic house and senate as it was more important to get thought some of the nonsense like immigration. Bush has been more of liberal on things than an conservative in my view.

I hope iam wrong, but i think he might work better with this congress and i don't know why but its just a feeling.

T

DoctorDoom

11-10-2006, 05:26 PM

Redundancy aside, no, I don't remember liberals deriding Pat Tillman.Drugs will do that to memory, kid.

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/trall040503.gif" />

DesertFox

11-10-2006, 05:54 PM

Ted Rall needs a round in the brain.

d'urville

11-19-2006, 03:40 PM

Well, I am certainly glad that I am legally blind when it comes to this issue. Anyone who wants to reinstitute the draft is insane.

"Insane" + "horrible idea" = Chuck Rangel:

Rep. Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 if the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said Sunday he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars and to bolster U.S. troop levels insufficient to cover potential future action in Iran, North Korea and Iraq.

http://townhall.com/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ContentGuid=e8a1b043-70c1-4ec9-ba44-0462410ee772

Not the distorted logic straight out of the anti-war left circa 1968.

DoctorDoom

11-19-2006, 05:03 PM

During the 2004 campaigns, the RAT basatards were going to colleges campuses stirring up panic that Bush and the Pubs would reinstitute the draft. It was of course horse shit, but that's all one can expect from horses' asses.

(CNSNews.com) - One of those "come-out-of-nowhere" emails now circulating in cyberspace warns about a sneaky administration effort to begin a "mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages 18-26) starting June 15, 2005...just after the presidential election."

The email says the Bush administration "is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections."

In fact, the bill in question - HR 163 - was introduced by liberal New York Democrat Rep. Charles Rangel on Jan. 7, 2003 - almost two years ago -- and it does not have administration backing.

The companion Senate bill is S. 89, was introduced by Democrat Ernest Hollings of South Carolina, also on Jan. 7, 2003.

The legislation was introduced by lawmakers who oppose the war in Iraq. The bill, according to Rep. Pete Stark, (D-Calif.), "will ensure all Americans share in the cost and sacrifice of war."Email Warns of Sneaky Bush Attempt to Draft Young Americans (http://www.cnsnews.com/Nation/Archive/200409/NAT20040927a.html)

St. Louis (CNSNews.com) - Republicans had no sooner shot down rumors of a military draft when Democratic Party Chairman Terry McAuliffe warned a group of College Democrats on Friday that President Bush would call them up for duty if re-elected.

"I know it's controversial to say it, but don't think for one second that if George Bush gets re-elected and we have another conflict in some other theater of the world, we're going to have to reinstitute the draft," McAuliffe said. "It is very controversial to say it, but it is what it is."

McAuliffe spoke to about a hundred of Washington University's College Democrats at a coffeehouse near the campus Friday afternoon. Afterward, he told CNSNews.com he stood by his comments to the students.McAuliffe to College Dems: Bush Will Reinstitute Draft (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPrint.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200410\POL200 41008b.html)

So who wants to restart the draft? The RATs.

(CBS/AP) A senior House Democrat said Sunday he will introduce legislation to reinstate the military draft, asserting that current troop levels are insufficient to sustain possible challenges against Iran, North Korea and Iraq.

"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) said on CBS News' Face the Nation.

Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War who has unsuccessfully sponsored legislation on conscription in the past, said he will propose the measure early next year.

At a time when some lawmakers are urging the military to send more troops to Iraq, "I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft," he told Bob Schieffer.Rangel Will Push To Bring Back The Draft (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/19/ftn/printable2199539.shtml)

However, Rangel's dumb idea failed the last time he tried it and it will fail again.

BuckeyeMike

11-19-2006, 06:02 PM

I sincerely hope so. Otherwise, there goes the military. Can you imagine our country being protected by all those losers and mommy's boys? (shudders)

What the HELL do you mean by losers and mommy's boys....I and all my brothers were draftees in the 50' and 60's......most of the "Greatest Generation" were draftees!
My brothers and I served our country honorably in 3 of the 4 armed forces, one receiving 2 purple hearts, another suffering effects of Agent Orange, another suffering effects of gassings and toxic bombings in an experiment at Pearl Harbor...I was one of the first on line in Florida when the Cuban Crises started. I resent your implication that draftees will diminish the military, and I greatly resent the name calling.

edit: just added it up....the four of us "losers" totaled 40 years military service when we were all done!

Gonzo67

11-19-2006, 06:36 PM

In all fairness, back when you, Uncle Bill, Uncle John, and dad were in the service, it was a different America.

Back then, there were good people both enlisting and being drafted. The ones that weren't worth a shit were all headed to Canada, or hiding out in college (at least those who's parents had the cash to buy their way out of military service by paying for tuition).

Today, if they reinstate the draft, who are we going to get with the draft? The ones that have even the slightest sense of duty and country have already enlisted, or plan to enlist when they are old enough.

The only ones the draft is going to bring in is the pussy ass liberals who do not want to serve and the assholes who hate this country and the only way they'll serve is if they are forced.

So, in today's America, Maggie is quite correct.

I am not sure if her comments were meant to be in reference to TODAY'S America, or America the way it used to be.

As for myself, I have already served. And if this country was still like it was when I enlisted, I would do so again.

But the way this country is today, the way the RATS and Liberal assholes have trashed the very idea of this country, I'll be damned if I would serve it for the Libs and Dems today.

DoctorDoom

11-19-2006, 06:42 PM

Mike, on behalf of FC and America, thank you to you and your brothers. However, this is 2006. The point that Maggie was apparently making is who would be drafted in our time, not half a century ago. Would you want gutless, spineless, treasonous assholes like these "defending" America?

<center><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/shoot-officers-sf-031503.jpg" />

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/Idiots.jpg">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/IMG_3584.jpg">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/LAantiwd.jpg">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/LAantiwu.jpg">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/LAantixR.jpg">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/LAantixU.jpg">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/LAantixV.jpg">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/AntiWar/LAantixZ.jpg"></center>

BuckeyeMike

11-19-2006, 06:45 PM

Her's was a blanket statement....my post stands!

DoctorDoom

11-19-2006, 06:51 PM

Mike, you're not thinking. You're reacting. Ask her what she meant before going off in a fit of rage. I see no way to interpret what she posted as condemning every draftee since the draft was initiated in 1917.

And ask yourself whether you and your brothers and your fellow draftees would be drafted now. This is a real-time issue, not a trip down Memory Lane.

WHO would be drafted in 2006? A: the buttfux in the pics and their pathetic ilk.

BuckeyeMike

11-19-2006, 07:11 PM

d'urville

11-19-2006, 07:32 PM

I thought she was being sarcastic?

WHO would be drafted in 2006? A: the buttfux in the pics and their pathetic ilk.

Is this even a draft?:

He said having a draft would not necessarily mean everyone called to duty would have to serve. Instead, "young people (would) commit themselves to a couple of years in service to this great republic, whether it's our seaports, our airports, in schools, in hospitals," with a promise of educational benefits at the end of service.

Sounds more like warmed-over Americorp to me.

DoctorDoom

11-19-2006, 07:35 PM

IMO, you're still over-reacting. Rather than looking for "implications", what do the words actually say? Rule of thumb: when the meaning of a statement is clear as it is written, don't bother looking for hidden meanings. If a person says, "Two plus two equals four," it is meritless to wonder, "Did that person lie about the base-3 sum?"

And even suggesting that Maggie has contempt for every draftee that ever lived is stretching the matter into the twilight zone.

The point is moot in any case, since the actual drafting ended in 1973 and there is no interest in resuming it. In fact, that asswipe Rangel is using it to evoke anti-war sentiment. If you want to attack someone, go for HIS throat.

DoctorDoom

11-19-2006, 07:37 PM

Is this even a draft?The SSS is perpetual. The draft depends on need, and does not require a law. Charlie is stirring shit.

Beowulf

11-20-2006, 07:28 AM

Famous sports celebrity? Redundancy aside, no, I don't remember liberals deriding Pat Tillman.
Oh but they did. Remember Rene Gonzalez of the University of Massachusetts when he wrote this:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1792200

Here's an exerpt:
The column in question was submitted by graduate student Rene Gonzalez and published Wednesday in the Daily Collegian. It was titled "Pat Tillman is not a hero: he got what was coming to him."

The defense rests!

Beowulf

11-20-2006, 07:30 AM

And as far as the Democrats initiating a draft, I say let em. It would be political suicide for the Dummycratic Party. It almost was when a Republican suggested it.

DesertFox

11-20-2006, 07:39 AM

Mike, Maggie was referring to the asswipes in Doc's pix. Nobody is more pro-American and pro-military than the Mags. And she's right. I was in the Army before the draft ended, and you spent a good deal of your time trying to find this punk and that idiot and the other fool. Nowadays that problem doesn't exist. Colin Powell comments on this in his bio. When he took over a Battalion in the late Seventies or early Eighties, his first thought was, "How many AWOLs?" He was used to that from his troop experience in the Sixties. But by the Eighties there weren't any.

Lazarus

11-20-2006, 08:17 AM

Well Charlie Rangel is still pushing the draft issue, but now he's not even trying to mask it - Its clearly a blantant attempt to play liberal politics at the expense of people's lives... He made it clear in no uncertain terms that his draft would put rich kids in harms way...

Nancy, your boys apparently didnt get the memo about your brave new world of bi-aprtisan cooperation for a better America...

Preach on, Charlie... In fact I think you should push the point and bring it to the house floor... Pass it and send it to the Senate... Rub the voters' faces in... Show them that its Democratic business as usual...

Lubbock

11-20-2006, 08:59 AM

I understand Maggie's post, and I understand Mike's posts.

But . . .

We're talking about two different eras. Two different times in history.

Mike and his brothers served before the '60s, way before the nation "gained a social conscience," before the '80s when the Lib-Nation began PC-sonification.

There was a time when the nation united behind a threat to our Liberty and way of life.

Gone are the days . . .

A draft today would fill the ranks with the me-me-me generation. Malcontents and cry babys.

Bluemoon_Rising

11-20-2006, 09:31 AM

Actually, the draft is typically the Democratic position. Has been for years. Carter reinstated the draft registration. A voluntary army belongs to the Republicans.

Rangel’s looking to make class warfare. That's all. And the more noise he makes over it, the better. Only the Democratic, socialist base is impressed.

While Pelosie secretly goes for it, she won’t let it go anywhere, as she knows it’s political suicide. Pelosie will screw things up for the Dems in other areas of policy.

Wyatt_Junker

11-20-2006, 09:53 AM

I like the idea of a mandatory draft like Israel.

However, here's how you really do it.

1) Bring back the Full Metal Jacket drill instructor.

2) Shave everyone's hair so that the pretty boys understand their non-uniqueness in life.

3) Take the slackers and put them on latrine duty.

4) All non-warriors line up to my right. They serve the warriors. The non-warriors understand that they are menial day laborers & help with day to day infrastructural support.

Therefore, even in a war, the momma's boys don't have to ever actually fight. Keep the combat portion optional. However, the warriors get paid some serious corn. And the warriors also get some serious opportunity to get ahead in life. They are promoted within society on the fast track because they are society's defenders. The rest of the sludge gets to shit squabby the crapper and then watch American made agitprop on the evils of communism and see all the dead skulls of Stalin's gulag and Pol Pot's killing fields and Islam's beheading videos Clockwork Orange-style. Pounded into their heads FOR 2 YEARS are the evils of totalitarianism and the benefits of democracy. It is relentless deprogramming from liberal indoctrination.

Its easy really. Not only are Rangel's pussy demographics from Harlem not in harm's way, but they also get to serve this great country of ours directly. And if they don't wanna, they are deballed on site. If you have a rebel who won't even provide military infrastructure duty, you disincentivize his ass real good. He becomes a social throwback to dunceville. But he gets put in what is akin to a boy's home for troubled youths.

Warriors get top dollar and opportunity.

MrSanity

11-20-2006, 09:57 AM

I like the idea of a mandatory draft like Israel.I hate the idea.

Taylor

11-20-2006, 11:36 AM

I oppose a draft. However, I support increasing the millitary like we did during the Reagan years.

DoctorDoom

11-20-2006, 12:03 PM

Rangel and the RAT bastards also oppose the draft. In fact, they oppose the military, except for the child-rapers in the blue berets. They don't want the US as a superpower. That's "unfair". America should be modeled after the oh-so-civilized socialist paradises of Europe—weak, spineless, gutless, compromising, groveling nonentities at the mercy of whatever bunch of barbarians has a hankering for conquest.

The dirty little secret is that the RATs' idols, the blustering, blathering European has-beens that are vociferously assailing America's military power, in fact don't want it destroyed because they rely on it for protecting their own sorry asses, q.v., WW1 and WW2. False bravado is the European MO.

The RATs are a clear and present danger to America. They should be treated as traitors.

Maggie_T

11-20-2006, 01:19 PM

For every one of those buttfux you show me there are 10 that are like my brothers and me.....these buttfux would be weeded out in basic or run to Canada, just like before. If she had meant to indicate that these assholes are what she's meant, she should have said so.....not ALL of these draft age men (and now women) are of this ilk. It was not a "fit of rage" ...it was an emphatic statement of my resentment as to her implications....no foul language was used. Oh yeah....I said HELL.........puleeeze forgive me.

What the bloody hell? :eek: For crying out loud, I go away a couple of days and people implode behind my back.

Mike, you should know me better than that. I never, ever, referred to past generation of soldiers in my post. For goodness sake, man, do I have to spell it out for you?

Well, since apparently that's what you want, here you go. I did not mean to disrespect you, your brothers, and past generations of soldiers. When I said "momma's little princes and princesses" I was referring mainly to liberals and to the bland wussies that they spawn. I cannot even imagine how you got to the conclusion you got. I am VERY pro-military being a navy-wife, navy-daughter-in-law, navy-sister-in-law.

I have a mind to demand an apology from YOU. However, since I prefer to reserve my animosity and my quarrels for liberals, I hereby apologize for whatever offense you took from my post, and repeat that it was not my intention to offend you, much less our military.

And it is obvious that I am telling the truth, since Doc, Fox, Gonz, and others understood me completely.

Sheesh.

Wyatt_Junker

11-20-2006, 01:26 PM

I hate the idea.

Dazzling rebuttal, but here's where you're not getting it. Promoting a warrior class within the military means that 'the fighting' itself is still voluntary. The hippies, slackers and other various dickslaps can perform simple manual labor and provide helps. That slaughters Rangel's rhetoric and at the same time provides our nation with a sub-layer of a somewhat institutionalized worker class that doesn't for once have their head up their ass.

Public school is failing. There is no centralized pro-American booster organ. The military should be mandatory to assume that role. There are many ways of serving. Those who want to actually fight for their nation and provide the potential for ultimate sacrifice for their motherland, would get the doors of opportunity thrown wide open for them: promotions, more career experience later on and triple the amount of money they're now getting.

All the other lice-infested freeloaders(non-warriors) will be our slaves, a tithe to the state to show their appreciation.

Gonzo67

11-20-2006, 01:56 PM

since Doc, Fox, Gonz, and others understood me completely.

Well, to be honest, I didn't "completely" understand. I assumed that way, based on your previous stances on the military. I happened to guess right.

Maggie_T

11-20-2006, 02:02 PM

Well, I'm glad you did, Gonz. Thank you.

USPatriot8320

11-20-2006, 02:31 PM

Any party that brings up a draft in today's age is suicidal. The American public would be up in arms. The only way I see a draft making it without an uproar is if an American city or two were completely destroyed, even then it would still face resistance. Why on Earth democrats want to ruin themselves even before they take control is beyond me. If the troop levels are that low in Iraq, pull them from other bases, simple as that. Scare mongering doesn't work.

Maggie_T

11-21-2006, 07:40 AM

Any party that brings up a draft in today's age is suicidal. The American public would be up in arms.

And that's exactly what Good Ol' Charlie wants. He wants the American public to hate the military the way all liberals hate them. Liberals have tried to weaken our military in many ways (I'm sure I don't have to mention those ways). Since it didn't work, now they are trying to bring back riots, card-burning, etc. Liberals know that people will take it out on the military, not them. They want another Vietnam era, where people refused to do their duty. You know. "Hey, hey, ho, ho. We won't die for Texaco," and stuff like that.

And I would not put it past Charlie - a confirmed racist and bigot - to want to bring back the draft simply to punish rich white kids, who he believes get away because they're white. Remember his idiotic remarks about how only blacks were drafted, or some such nonsense?

Scare mongering doesn't work.

We shall see.

Lubbock

11-21-2006, 07:59 AM

But . . . but . . . but . . .

Didn't Bella Pelosi [thank you Rush] just state emphatically that The Draft is off the table?

Let the fun begin.

The true test of Bella's "power" [real or imagined] will be when Conyers gears up for impeachement.

Let the games begin.

DeclinetoState

11-21-2006, 10:40 AM

Ways to resist the draft:

Pretend to be gay. Kiss the DI the first day of boot camp.

Have a sex-change (if your're a man and only men are drafted).

Show up at boot camp with a full beard and keep saying, "Allahu akbar!" "Jihad," and "Fragging."

Show up at boot camp with nothing but the clothes on your back and loads of cigarettes and blindfolds.

(No, I don't recommend any of these, but you know me. . . :D )

MrSanity

11-21-2006, 11:32 AM

Dazzling rebuttal, but here's where you're not getting it. Promoting a warrior class within the military means that 'the fighting' itself is still voluntary. The hippies, slackers and other various dickslaps can perform simple manual labor and provide helps. That slaughters Rangel's rhetoric and at the same time provides our nation with a sub-layer of a somewhat institutionalized worker class that doesn't for once have their head up their ass.

Public school is failing. There is no centralized pro-American booster organ. The military should be mandatory to assume that role. There are many ways of serving. Those who want to actually fight for their nation and provide the potential for ultimate sacrifice for their motherland, would get the doors of opportunity thrown wide open for them: promotions, more career experience later on and triple the amount of money they're now getting.

All the other lice-infested freeloaders(non-warriors) will be our slaves, a tithe to the state to show their appreciation.I question the idea that through forced labor, we will win any support on a political level. And here's the thing - the US military already has over a million people in it, and only about 135,000 are in Iraq right now. What I would recommend otherwise is to get the military out of Germany, Japan, Korea, and other places they have been scattered, because they serve no purpose in established democracies. Also, we should lift any ban on military recruiting. Period. Society accepts that those 18 and older are adults capable of making their own decisions. Instead of infesting our schools with Planned Parenthood, P-FLAG, GLSEN, and other anti-American schmucks, we should hold mandatory seminars informing our youth about the accomplishments and benefits of the United States military, past, present, and future.

But a mandatory draft is the wrong idea, even if it doesn't consist of throwing people out on the frontlines. What if we drafted a resentful crowd who did a half-assed job and botched up their assignments?

Wyatt_Junker

11-21-2006, 12:40 PM

. What if we drafted a resentful crowd who did a half-assed job and botched up their assignments?

Then we botch them up... intentionally.

The more they botch, the more they learn the intracacies of custodial engineering and feces realignment.

I want all the human zeros in America to get grade A fuked. The sloppier they are, the sloppier we treat them. The lazier they are, the more they get assigned to the slow lane of life.

Its called mirroring and its based on exacting the opposite of your own effort.

They're some people in America that I'm not qualified to shine their shoes. They are willingly serving America in a time of war.

They're some people in America that need a kick in the ass to 'get it'.

They're some people in America who will never get it.

The first crowd gets a handsome financial incentive.

The second crowd gets used in certain beneficial capacities.

The last group, the boneheads, get sent to chip rock in the quarry. Hard cases learn about rocks. Rocks are hard too. Give them a hammer and let them earn their keep. If they object, there are other countries that they can go to live besides America. And in the Junker draft, we will even help to send them there.

And going to college doesn't exempt you either. University life is a left bent indoctrination center. Sorry, but that card shouldn't play anymore. Everyone should pay into the state(with their service) for a brief period of their life. America deserves no less.

MrSanity

11-21-2006, 12:43 PM

Then we botch them up... intentionally.

The more they botch, the more they learn the intracacies of custodial engineering and feces realignment.I don't see the logic in this reply. You can't make a zero a hero. They have to do it for themselves.

Wyatt_Junker

11-21-2006, 02:44 PM

I don't see the logic in this reply. You can't make a zero a hero. They have to do it for themselves.

No, you make a zero a negative 1. Put 'em on shit duty. If they don't want to fight for their country, fine. Give them a toothbrush and a bucket of suds. If they don't want to do that, then they're a freeloader. Expatriate them.

Lazarus

11-21-2006, 02:51 PM

I suspect an in-depth analysis of how the Israelis do it would be very educational... They dont seem to have any noticable problems...

DoctorDoom

11-21-2006, 05:55 PM

I suspect an in-depth analysis of how the Israelis do it would be very educational... They dont seem to have any noticable problems...Israel is surrounded by and under daily attacks by the towel-heads. The Israelis know what their country is facing if they are not constantly vigilant. The pussy-whipped candy asses who march in the streets of the US and Europe whining about war and just getting along don't have a f'ing clue about the evil nature of the enemy.

Until violence and death become commonplace in the US, we'll be up to our eyebrows in gutless, week-kneed, appeasing liberal sewer scum.

BuckeyeMike

11-22-2006, 04:17 PM

What the bloody hell? :eek: For crying out loud, I go away a couple of days and people implode behind my back.

Mike, you should know me better than that. I never, ever, referred to past generation of soldiers in my post. For goodness sake, man, do I have to spell it out for you?

Well, since apparently that's what you want, here you go. I did not mean to disrespect you, your brothers, and past generations of soldiers. When I said "momma's little princes and princesses" I was referring mainly to liberals and to the bland wussies that they spawn. I cannot even imagine how you got to the conclusion you got. I am VERY pro-military being a navy-wife, navy-daughter-in-law, navy-sister-in-law.

I have a mind to demand an apology from YOU. However, since I prefer to reserve my animosity and my quarrels for liberals, I hereby apologize for whatever offense you took from my post, and repeat that it was not my intention to offend you, much less our military.

And it is obvious that I am telling the truth, since Doc, Fox, Gonz, and others understood me completely.

Sheesh.

Please accept my apologies!