WASHINGTON -- 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.

"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," Rangel said.

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

In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.

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," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.

"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Rangel, the next chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.

"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.

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.

Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.

Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.

The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 _ now about 16 million _ from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.

Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1900376_pf.html

 

This is so hilarious. So while all the democrats and liberals were on the scare tactic trick about how republicans would cause a draft, it seems the people they were sure would protect them are turning into the ones they should have been fearing all along. God I SOOOOO hope this goes through. They want a draft not because we need more troops, but to prevent future wars because politicians won't want to have to send their own kids! :lol

 

I would love to see this go through and watch half the country run to Canada, but on the other hand I don't want to see this happen because I don't want to be in a fighting hole next to someone who doesn't want to be there. So many people in this day and age are not even eligible for military service though, literally millions upon millions of kids who were diagnosed with ADD are not qualified now and just lot's of things like that. While our country has more than 300 million people, we also have one of the smallest pools of those who are eligible for service in the past century by today's standards.

 

Regardless, mandated military service for every man who turns 18 would be great for the country. Crime rates would drop, people in this country would not take their freedom for granted, people would actually be PROUD of being American's, everyone in this country would be more united and "tight knit," people wouldn't look at every single thing as a left/right, everyone would have the opportunity to go to college for free, the list goes on. I don't necessarily agree with an immediate draft, however if you go through your entire childhood and teen years full well knowing that you'll be serving when you turn 18, it would work really well like it does in other countries such as Israel, Switzerland, South Korea, etc.

 

The fact remains though and it doesn't really matter what any democrat or republican says because it's all just talk, unless there is a tangible full scale invasion of American shores, we'll probably never have another draft.

WASHINGTON -- 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.

"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," Rangel said.

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

In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.

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," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.

"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Rangel, the next chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.

"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.

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.

Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.

Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.

The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 _ now about 16 million _ from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.

Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1900376_pf.html

 

This is so hilarious. So while all the democrats and liberals were on the scare tactic trick about how republicans would cause a draft, it seems the people they were sure would protect them are turning into the ones they should have been fearing all along. God I SOOOOO hope this goes through. They want a draft not because we need more troops, but to prevent future wars because politicians won't want to have to send their own kids! :lol

 

I would love to see this go through and watch half the country run to Canada, but on the other hand I don't want to see this happen because I don't want to be in a fighting hole next to someone who doesn't want to be there. So many people in this day and age are not even eligible for military service though, literally millions upon millions of kids who were diagnosed with ADD are not qualified now and just lot's of things like that. While our country has more than 300 million people, we also have one of the smallest pools of those who are eligible for service in the past century by today's standards.

 

Regardless, mandated military service for every man who turns 18 would be great for the country. Crime rates would drop, people in this country would not take their freedom for granted, people would actually be PROUD of being American's, everyone in this country would be more united and "tight knit," people wouldn't look at every single thing as a left/right, everyone would have the opportunity to go to college for free, the list goes on. I don't necessarily agree with an immediate draft, however if you go through your entire childhood and teen years full well knowing that you'll be serving when you turn 18, it would work really well like it does in other countries such as Israel, Switzerland, South Korea, etc.

 

The fact remains though, unless there is a tangible full scale invasion of American shores, we'll probably never have another draft.

 

 

Are we just going to print the money to pay for college tuition for everyone?

If the country were invaded, I'd dodge the draft and start a militia. I guarantee you I could do a better job.

As a 17 year old teenage boy, this scares the sh*t out of me. I'm not going to lie.

 

Say whatever you want about me, but I don't want to go fight in a war.

Does anyone think it's funny that Accord titled the topic "Democrats want a draft"? The same Accord who said (in the same topic) that if everyone had to serve in the military he is about to join, it would help stop people from seeing every issue in terms of "left/right".

 

In fact, your entire first paragraph is about as "left/right" as one can be.

 

The best part is, it's not an act, folks! This guy means every single thing he says!

 

 

And if I got drafted, I would go fight. I don't want to die, but I'm not going to run away.

WASHINGTON -- 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.

"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," Rangel said.

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

In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.

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," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.

"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Rangel, the next chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.

"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.

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.

Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.

Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.

The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 _ now about 16 million _ from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.

Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1900376_pf.html

 

This is so hilarious. So while all the democrats and liberals were on the scare tactic trick about how republicans would cause a draft, it seems the people they were sure would protect them are turning into the ones they should have been fearing all along. God I SOOOOO hope this goes through. They want a draft not because we need more troops, but to prevent future wars because politicians won't want to have to send their own kids! :lol

 

I would love to see this go through and watch half the country run to Canada, but on the other hand I don't want to see this happen because I don't want to be in a fighting hole next to someone who doesn't want to be there. So many people in this day and age are not even eligible for military service though, literally millions upon millions of kids who were diagnosed with ADD are not qualified now and just lot's of things like that. While our country has more than 300 million people, we also have one of the smallest pools of those who are eligible for service in the past century by today's standards.

 

Regardless, mandated military service for every man who turns 18 would be great for the country. Crime rates would drop, people in this country would not take their freedom for granted, people would actually be PROUD of being American's, everyone in this country would be more united and "tight knit," people wouldn't look at every single thing as a left/right, everyone would have the opportunity to go to college for free, the list goes on. I don't necessarily agree with an immediate draft, however if you go through your entire childhood and teen years full well knowing that you'll be serving when you turn 18, it would work really well like it does in other countries such as Israel, Switzerland, South Korea, etc.

 

The fact remains though, unless there is a tangible full scale invasion of American shores, we'll probably never have another draft.

 

 

Are we just going to print the money to pay for college tuition for everyone?

No, we would cut non-essential programs. If everyone in this country was forced into mandatory military service, everyone who serves 4 years would receive the GI bill. It's doubtful the mandatory service would be 4 years long, i'm guessing either 18 months since that's pretty much the norm for other countries with military conscription. So those who decided to stay in past their obligation would definitely receive the GI bill.

 

Does anyone think it's funny that Accord titled the topic "Democrats want a draft"? The same Accord who said (in the same topic) that if everyone had to serve in the military he is about to join, it would help stop people from seeing every issue in terms of "left/right".

 

In fact, your entire first paragraph is about as "left/right" as one can be.

 

The best part is, it's not an act, folks! This guy means every single thing he says!

 

 

And if I got drafted, I would go fight. I don't want to die, but I'm not going to run away.

 

The title of the thread is democrats want a draft because............... democrats want a draft. Really not a difficult one to figure out.

WASHINGTON -- 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.

"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," Rangel said.

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

In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.

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," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.

"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Rangel, the next chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.

"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.

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.

Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.

Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.

The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 _ now about 16 million _ from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.

Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1900376_pf.html

 

This is so hilarious. So while all the democrats and liberals were on the scare tactic trick about how republicans would cause a draft, it seems the people they were sure would protect them are turning into the ones they should have been fearing all along. God I SOOOOO hope this goes through. They want a draft not because we need more troops, but to prevent future wars because politicians won't want to have to send their own kids! :lol

 

I would love to see this go through and watch half the country run to Canada, but on the other hand I don't want to see this happen because I don't want to be in a fighting hole next to someone who doesn't want to be there. So many people in this day and age are not even eligible for military service though, literally millions upon millions of kids who were diagnosed with ADD are not qualified now and just lot's of things like that. While our country has more than 300 million people, we also have one of the smallest pools of those who are eligible for service in the past century by today's standards.

 

Regardless, mandated military service for every man who turns 18 would be great for the country. Crime rates would drop, people in this country would not take their freedom for granted, people would actually be PROUD of being American's, everyone in this country would be more united and "tight knit," people wouldn't look at every single thing as a left/right, everyone would have the opportunity to go to college for free, the list goes on. I don't necessarily agree with an immediate draft, however if you go through your entire childhood and teen years full well knowing that you'll be serving when you turn 18, it would work really well like it does in other countries such as Israel, Switzerland, South Korea, etc.

 

The fact remains though, unless there is a tangible full scale invasion of American shores, we'll probably never have another draft.

 

 

Are we just going to print the money to pay for college tuition for everyone?

 

Considering how many people already die over there and if we sent people who probably aren't even mentally fit to be in a war, half won't make it back anyway.

WASHINGTON -- 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.

"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," Rangel said.

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

In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.

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," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.

"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Rangel, the next chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.

"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.

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.

Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.

Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.

The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 _ now about 16 million _ from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.

Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1900376_pf.html

 

This is so hilarious. So while all the democrats and liberals were on the scare tactic trick about how republicans would cause a draft, it seems the people they were sure would protect them are turning into the ones they should have been fearing all along. God I SOOOOO hope this goes through. They want a draft not because we need more troops, but to prevent future wars because politicians won't want to have to send their own kids! :lol

 

I would love to see this go through and watch half the country run to Canada, but on the other hand I don't want to see this happen because I don't want to be in a fighting hole next to someone who doesn't want to be there. So many people in this day and age are not even eligible for military service though, literally millions upon millions of kids who were diagnosed with ADD are not qualified now and just lot's of things like that. While our country has more than 300 million people, we also have one of the smallest pools of those who are eligible for service in the past century by today's standards.

 

Regardless, mandated military service for every man who turns 18 would be great for the country. Crime rates would drop, people in this country would not take their freedom for granted, people would actually be PROUD of being American's, everyone in this country would be more united and "tight knit," people wouldn't look at every single thing as a left/right, everyone would have the opportunity to go to college for free, the list goes on. I don't necessarily agree with an immediate draft, however if you go through your entire childhood and teen years full well knowing that you'll be serving when you turn 18, it would work really well like it does in other countries such as Israel, Switzerland, South Korea, etc.

 

The fact remains though, unless there is a tangible full scale invasion of American shores, we'll probably never have another draft.

 

 

Are we just going to print the money to pay for college tuition for everyone?

No, we would cut non-essential programs. If everyone in this country was forced into mandatory military service, everyone who serves 4 years would receive the GI bill. It's doubtful the mandatory service would be 4 years long, i'm guessing either 18 months since that's pretty much the norm for other countries with military conscription. So those who decided to stay in past their obligation would definitely receive the GI bill.

 

Does anyone think it's funny that Accord titled the topic "Democrats want a draft"? The same Accord who said (in the same topic) that if everyone had to serve in the military he is about to join, it would help stop people from seeing every issue in terms of "left/right".

 

In fact, your entire first paragraph is about as "left/right" as one can be.

 

The best part is, it's not an act, folks! This guy means every single thing he says!

 

 

And if I got drafted, I would go fight. I don't want to die, but I'm not going to run away.

 

The title of the thread is democrats want a draft because............... democrats want a draft. Really not a difficult one to figure out.

 

flip flopper.

Uh, dude, REPUBLICAN McCain said that troop levels in Iraq need to be raised. Gee, I wonder from where THAT'S coming.

The title of the thread is democrats want a draft because............... democrats want a draft. Really not a difficult one to figure out.

 

I just reread the part where it said that every single registered democrat in the United States is trying to get the draft back.

 

It would make much more sense to say "Democrat wants draft", seeing as there was a total of one democrat talked about in the article who wants the draft back. It's purposefully misleading.

Rangel is a loon who has been calling for a draft for a while. I hope he gets hit by a bus.

 

And mandated military service can go crawl up some other country's ass. Compulsory voting.....compulsory military.....nothing 'compulsory' works. Especially if you're going to encourage freedom of opinion and freedom of religion. People don't want to fight for various reasons and that should be honored. I have the utmost respect for anyone that serves in the armed forces, no matter what your reasoning is, and part of it is because I don't want to fight. I ain't going overseas to die for something. I don't believe in anything happening outside of this country that strongly.

 

If tanks started rolling down my street, yeah I'm fighting.....but that ain't happening, so I ain't fighting. And btw, nobody fears going to Switzerland's army at 18. Hmm, I wonder why?

What a horrible and misleading title. Not a surprise, however.

 

It's ONE Democrat, not multiple ones.

 

He's also doing it for a reason, although not one that I agree with.

WASHINGTON -- 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.

"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," Rangel said.

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

In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the Nov. 7 election.

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," said Rangel, who also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.

"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Rangel, the next chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he worried the military was being strained by its overseas commitments.

"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.

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.

Graham said he believes the all-voluntary military "represents the country pretty well in terms of ethnic makeup, economic background."

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.

Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

Yet the prospect of the long global fight against terrorism and the continuing U.S. commitment to stabilizing Iraq have kept the idea in the public's mind.

The military drafted conscripts during the Civil War, both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. An agency independent of the Defense Department, the Selective Service System trains, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 _ now about 16 million _ from which to supply untrained draftees that would supplement the professional all-volunteer armed forces.

Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1900376_pf.html

 

This is so hilarious. So while all the democrats and liberals were on the scare tactic trick about how republicans would cause a draft, it seems the people they were sure would protect them are turning into the ones they should have been fearing all along. God I SOOOOO hope this goes through. They want a draft not because we need more troops, but to prevent future wars because politicians won't want to have to send their own kids! :lol

 

I would love to see this go through and watch half the country run to Canada, but on the other hand I don't want to see this happen because I don't want to be in a fighting hole next to someone who doesn't want to be there. So many people in this day and age are not even eligible for military service though, literally millions upon millions of kids who were diagnosed with ADD are not qualified now and just lot's of things like that. While our country has more than 300 million people, we also have one of the smallest pools of those who are eligible for service in the past century by today's standards.

 

Regardless, mandated military service for every man who turns 18 would be great for the country. Crime rates would drop, people in this country would not take their freedom for granted, people would actually be PROUD of being American's, everyone in this country would be more united and "tight knit," people wouldn't look at every single thing as a left/right, everyone would have the opportunity to go to college for free, the list goes on. I don't necessarily agree with an immediate draft, however if you go through your entire childhood and teen years full well knowing that you'll be serving when you turn 18, it would work really well like it does in other countries such as Israel, Switzerland, South Korea, etc.

 

The fact remains though and it doesn't really matter what any democrat or republican says because it's all just talk, unless there is a tangible full scale invasion of American shores, we'll probably never have another draft.

 

There are so many ridiculous and unfounded claims in this paragraph I'm not even sure where to start. Instead I will recommend that you start actually reading what you're writing in all of these posts and maybe use a bit more discression when you want to blindly bash democrats, liberals, arabs, muslims, and any other group which you feel the need to generalize about.

 

It amazes me how in this one article alone you manage to completely contradict yourself on the left/right issue and you don't even realize it.

He has an affinity for bashing anyone left of center or further, and Muslim/Islamic people in general. I've gotten used to it by now.

I remember when he introduced a similar bill in early 2004. That time Democrats were circulating advertisements opposed to the President that mentioned that there was a bill to authorize a draft pending in Congress. Of course they neglected to say that a Democrat introduced the bill, and that it had zero chance of passing.

 

BTW, there is no evidence that conscription improves character, patriotism or promotes unity and plenty of examples of the contrary. Also, there would be no free college, because that is an incentive for volunteering, if service were mandatory, there would be no need for the incentive.

In history, other than Lincoln, has any Republican President ever overseen a draft for a war? Vietnam was under JFK and LBJ, WWII was under FDR and Truman....I'm not pointing to whether they were right or wrong, but just pointing out the history.

 

Just for the record, I think the volunteer armed forces are better because the career it allows them is beneficial and you get more varied amounts of people in the armed forces.

The example is faulty because Republicans have not been the warhark party up until recent years.

 

This is a different ideological party.

The ideology of the parties shift often over the past 100 years so it is hard to really to put into perspective whom is pro war and whom wasnt in the past.

 

But this article is misleading as 1 individual wants and believes that if the politicians children are in harms possible way too war would become much less popular.

 

Personally I dont see that happening for the change in politicians. They will just set it up so their children will be placed "elsewhere" look at bush durring Vietnam.

Topic title changed, for the sake of accuracy -- only two people are quoted in this article, and one is a Republican.

 

 

As for other Democrats wanting the draft, that's only conjecture at this point.

Does anyone even like Charlie Rangel?

People in Harlem love him.

The example is faulty because Republicans have not been the warhark party up until recent years.

 

This is a different ideological party.

Pretty much hit the bullseye on that one.

In history, other than Lincoln, has any Republican President ever overseen a draft for a war? Vietnam was under JFK and LBJ, WWII was under FDR and Truman....I'm not pointing to whether they were right or wrong, but just pointing out the history.

 

Just for the record, I think the volunteer armed forces are better because the career it allows them is beneficial and you get more varied amounts of people in the armed forces.

 

Korea and Vietnam had Republican Presidents during their latter half.

In history, other than Lincoln, has any Republican President ever overseen a draft for a war? Vietnam was under JFK and LBJ, WWII was under FDR and Truman....I'm not pointing to whether they were right or wrong, but just pointing out the history.

 

Just for the record, I think the volunteer armed forces are better because the career it allows them is beneficial and you get more varied amounts of people in the armed forces.

 

Korea and Vietnam had Republican Presidents during their latter half.

But they did not initiate the conflicts which required conscription to start. Plus, Congress was controlled by whom?

In history, other than Lincoln, has any Republican President ever overseen a draft for a war? Vietnam was under JFK and LBJ, WWII was under FDR and Truman....I'm not pointing to whether they were right or wrong, but just pointing out the history.

 

Just for the record, I think the volunteer armed forces are better because the career it allows them is beneficial and you get more varied amounts of people in the armed forces.

 

Korea and Vietnam had Republican Presidents during their latter half.

But they did not initiate the conflicts which required conscription to start. Plus, Congress was controlled by whom?

hey...congress and the president have their heads on the platter for the current bulls*** war...and as was mentioned, the political ideals of each party was vastly different 40 years ago than they are now