Will there be a draft?

Is there going to be a draft?

  • Total voters
Bush said all we need to do to get back our forces is redeploy our troops stationed in old Soviet locations to the hot zones in the Middle East and we should have enough. Regardless of what anyone says, the Soviet Union is not going to swing back up and invade Europe. They are useless sitting over there, we need them where they are needed. I'm pretty sure they know that too.
IF I was PRESIDENT...and I mean right now, then I would start a military training for high school graduates, just in case because better be ready then sorry

and just in general about the draft, all of those guys would be sleazy

mod edit:In the future, do not post back to back

only if threre was a REALLY big war. :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :army: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :camo: :dive: :CG: :avi: :avi: :avi: :avi: :avi: :visor: :visor: :visor: :visor: :visor: :visor: :avi: :avi: :avi: :dive: :dive: :dive: :camo: :camo: :camo: :camo: :camo: :CG: :CG: :CG: :CG: :drill: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :m1: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :army: :army: :army: :firedevi: :2guns: :9mm: :m16shoot: :rambo:
Lupos said:
I actually went around asking people in my school the other day. All but three kids said that they believe Bush would reinstate the draft if reelected. One even went to the extent to tell me that since Bush SCARED us into Iraq, he would SCARE us into a draft.

That guy is onto something. :idea:
I was drafted in the US Army in 1968 and then took an extra year to get into the MOS I wanted, as far as the Draft in todays society I would not count it out, but it would take an Act of Congress to re-instate the Draft
The Other Guy said:
never EVER EVER want to serve in the millitary.

Could you explain that?

I think that the draft is good for society, a person can learn alot from military service, if they are willing, an unwilling participant will only be a thorn in the military and they will likely take away the wrong messge.
Damien435 said:
I think that the draft is good for society, a person can learn alot from military service, if they are willing, an unwilling participant will only be a thorn in the military and they will likely take away the wrong messge.

I am going to say that 90% of the people drafted are going to be unwilling.

as for The Other Guy, the believe he does not want to serve in the military. The military is not for everyone.
"Kerry also opposes a draft and has suggested that re-electing Bush would greatly increase the prospects for one. The president, fearing that young voters will be swayed by the charge, fired back, ''The person talking about a draft is my opponent.''

It is right there in the second para. Bush "fired back." that means Kerry fired first
I found this really good article on the draft that I think a lot of people who are eligable should read. It's basically saying it's highly unlikely for so many reasons. But after the fiasco with Vietnam, we'd rather have an all volunteer army.
Doody said:
It seems that 55% of American teens think that they will be drafted into military service in the near future.

I don't think the draft is a possibility...what do you all think?

First and foremost, most American teens are idiots.

Not a chance of any draft anytime. I am glad of it. I want the person beside me to want to be there, and I know I can put my life in their hands if I had to.

drilldownmaster2004 said:
it may be a scare, but i don't remember the dem's telling us about Bush planning to reinstate the draft

Where have you been? Kerry and thousands of his supporters were on my old college campus telling them Bush was going to reinstate the draft, so vote for him or else.

Not to mention that was all over the Ohio U campus.

Both bills that were pending in Congress were sponsered by DEMOCRATIC memebers.

What's that? You, in the back row. Could you repeat the question, please?

Oh. The email you read stated that Congress is already considering two such bills, and that the Bush administration is quietly pushing them through?

You're speaking of Senate Bill 89, introduced by Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC), and House Resolution 163, introduced by Representative Charles B. Rangel (D-NY). Both bills would require two years of military service (or community service for those who are medically unqualified) for every male and female in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 26.

These are the only two "draft" legislation bills which are currently active. First and foremost, please note that both bills were authored and introduced by Democrats, not Republicans. 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.

Both bills would require every single male and female between the ages of 18 and 26 to serve two years in the military (or community service). Rangel's version has just 14 co-sponsors, and Holling's bill has no support at all. Folks, these bills have ZERO chances of passing. More about this idiocy, later.

Added Note: To help stop the on-going rumors about a draft, the House of Representatives pulled HR 163 out of committee (where it had been languishing untouched for over a year), and subjected it to a full floor vote on October 5, 2004. The bill was soundly defeated by a vote of 402 to 2 (that means it's forever dead, folks). Interestingly, even the congressman who introduced the legislation, Representative Charles B. Rangel (D-NY), voted against it.

There are no other draft-related bills currently pending. None. Zero, Nada, Zippo.

Any more questions about these bills? No? Good, let's continue. The Bush Administration has stated over and over and over again that they have no plans to re-institute a draft, that they don't think a draft is necessary, and they don't believe a draft would even be effective with the type of military we have today. Ladies and gentlemen, they couldn't have made their views any clearer. The current administration is against a draft. They have said so, publicly, and loudly, at least 100 times. It's that simple. (For just one example, see related story).

One of the programs that Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has expounded on, indicating that (under a Bush presidency) a draft is necessary, is the use of "Stop Loss." When "Stop Loss" is in effect, members of the military are not allowed to separate or retire, during the period of the "Stop Loss." "They have effectively used a stop-loss policy as a backdoor draft," Kerry said.

I've got news for the senator -- Stop Loss has been going on now for 14 years. It was first widely used by President Bush (senior) during the first Gulf War, and was extensively implemented by President Clinton for both Bosnia and Kosovo. Bush (junior) implemented it for Afghanistan and Iraq. The "Stop Loss" in effect today is the minimum ever implemented. It affects a soldier only if he or she has been notified of an upcoming deployment. In other words, if a soldier is told he/she is scheduled to deploy, then he/she cannot separate or retire until after the deployment is complete.

(from the site Egoz posted)

That explains pretty much everything.