Jim McDermott (D-WA) supports the return of the draft???

[Cascadian]

WTF??!! It appears to be true. My Congressman Jim McDermott along with other politicians want to reinstate conscription. Even though they won't admit it, even the Bush administration wants to bring it back as well.

I guess the Green Party (Joe Szwaja) may have to bring back a candidate to challange old Jim as a result of this.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001914539_danny28.html

I am truly disappointed in McDermott's decision.

John

[ithacan]

1. I heard him talk about this on Democracy Now

He's for national service, not military service, anyway here are his comments when Amy asked him about this:

REP. JIM MCDERMOTT: I'm not supporting calls for a draft. Charlie Rangel and I put in a bill to say let's have a debate here about how we're going to do what the President says we're going to do. Anybody who looked at it could see there weren't enough troops, and this country got rid of the draft. I believe we ought to have national service. I think men and women ought to serve at least a year in the service of their country, whether it's in schools or mental hospitals, or in forests or wherever, or military. I would not vote for a draft. I would not vote for a simple military draft to expand our wild ideas around the world. But I do think there ought to be a debate. You see from Chuck Hagel that this issue is now coming on the republican side. They recognize -- they were trying to hide this and get past the election and bring it up in the next term. That's what they were really -- that had to be the plan, because they do not have enough people there. They're so thin that they're really having serious problems now manning these posts.

AMY GOODMAN: And now the Seattle Post Intelligencer, your paper here in Seattle, saying that the chief of the Selective Service System has proposed registering women for the military draft and requiring young Americans regularly inform the government about whether they have training in niche specialties needed in the armed services.

REP. JIM MCDERMOTT: This is exactly what we were afraid of, that they would begin to select and look for what they wanted, and pull people in and hold them. I mean, these people have joined the National Guard and Reserves. They think they're going to serve for a year. So they get over there, they get a message, 90 more days, that's it. They have lives at home that they have been putting on hold. Now they're going to get this draft started where they can reach out and select the women. “Oh, you're a computer person -- oh, we need you. You are a schoolteacher, and we don't need you.” That's not a democratic process. We have to look at this and have a national debate on that before they go ahead and do that.

<more>
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/07/1450214

[punpirate]

2. I like McDermott's opinions on most issues, but...

... I believe he, like most Democrats who support the draft, are wrong for doing so.

McDermott thinks, like most Democrats, that a universal draft will bring into the military all the children of the chickenhawks, and that such will cause those Repugs to question their votes for war.

Not true. No matter what Charlie Rangel or Jim McDermott believe about the draft, they will never be able to pass legislation which will put the children of the rich and the powerful in harm's way.

The poor, the disenfranchised, will always be the ones to fill the draft, and additional people will simply make the neo-cons believe they have the necessary cannon fodder to carry out their imperialist vision for world domination.

The rich will not suffer. Never.

McDermott should acknowledge that. Providing more bodies for the machine will not make the machine less powerful--on the contrary, it will give it strength.

Jim McDermott, as with so many Democrats, is wrong. Fewer soldiers inhibit empire-building. More will encourage our destruction.

[Donkeyboy75]

17. I don't think his motivation is to put rich kids in the firing line.

If it's politically motivated, I'll bet he just wants the general population to be more critical of the government's decision to put our troops in harm's way. Those who really don't care will suddenly have a vested interested in who we fight once it's them and their children going off to war.

That being said, I think it's a bad idea. Like you said, a draft will just keep the war machine well stocked.

[KharmaTrain]

3. We're Shaking The Trees

I'm almost 50 and had this discussion with my son, daughter and some of their friends...17-21 years of age. They're feeling what I felt in the early 70's...a fear of the draft and what it means. Most Americans are far removed now from what those fears are...be it for themselves or a loved one. I still think this country doesn't realize how deep we're in this mess in Iraq and how it's going to mean maintaining a lot of troops there for the foreseeable future (at least through the end of the year, even if we win the elections and call for an immediate pull-out). Now the question is, how do we do this right?

Currently, we've got troops there that are either reservists or on extended stays...people who either weren't trained for this "job" or have been there way to long. Our other military committments are also strained and our national security is very vulnerable as well. What are we to do?

This regime's answer is throw money and hire contractors...or suck up the poor through "free educations" that end up being a one-year tour of Baghdad. There's no plan here...no "exit strategy". Is it fair to those who currently serve that we leave them hanging? It's their civilian bosses that must be replaced and then scale down this "war on terror" before we lose more friends and bodies. Again, how are we to do this?

Unfortunately, as a nation, we're in this mess together. If you want to go to Canada or deny your citizenship, then go and don't come back. Right now, we're in a fight to regain a sane government and to do so, a message has to be brought home to every American home as to how bad things are and how worse they're going to get if this regime continues...or, even worse, feels it has a mandate. Talking up the draft does just that.

Hell yes, it should scare anyone to think we're going to send young people off to a needless slaughter. This message has to get loud and clear to ALL young people...especially those spawn of Repugnicans who have grown up in the cocoon of Faux News and Rush...and their parents, who lucked out by being born too late for Vietnam and too old to have to fight now. These are the people who have no concept of war other than Star Wars, Nintendo and CNN...they haven't seen the real coffins and mangled bodies war creates. They still haven't. When that happens, there's gonna be a real change in this country...and sadly, if it's gonna take sending their kids off to war, then, so be it.

McDermott, Rangel and others who have called for restarting the draft are shedding light on what's already being said behing closed doors inside the beltway. Look around DU and you'll see plenty of articles pointing to the plans the DOD already has as to who goes and when. Do we deny these plans are just a Congressional vote (in Repugnican hands) away from being enacted? It can happen just that fast.

I joked with the "kids" that I haven't seen many college protests, and my daughter, who attends a major university said people are afraid to speak out. I asked, what's holding your tongue? This regime figures 18-21 year olds are too busy wanting to get laid and wasted to vote...and the "kids" agreed. I have no idea, other than seeing draft notices go out that the message will really start hitting home.

[JPJones]

4. It's a smart move

A draft personalizes the war. Nothing focuses the mind like...

As long as there are no exemptions, then it is even fair. Jenna, Barb, and the children of members of Congress should be the first ones drafted.

Plus, it will make the college kids think twice before voting for Nader.

No one really expects there to be a draft - as long as Kerry wins. Otherwise, it's a done deal.

[immoderate]

8. Agreement

McDermott and Rangel are smart to get ahead of the curve with a draft plan that allows no exemptions. This will be harder to get past the voting power blocs. If you play poker you can see the strength of this position.

I also have some sympathy for national service--if it is compensated and worthwhile. Many of those who enlisted to get an education would gladly opt for this opportunity.

--IMM

[TexasProgresive]

5. I heard McDermott on Dem. Now!

and I think that the call to debate the draft is to get the opinions of lawmakers in the record before the *ites force it through with little or no debate in a midnight vote. Of course the repugnants don't want to debate because it will force them to have to be open and above board - not their style.

I for one believe that all of us as youths - from 18-20 should engage in mandatory public service-but likely it wouldn't work because there would be plush jobs that would be reserved for the silver spoon set.

When I graduated high school I was in no way ready to chart my life. They way higher education is structured you are required to set out on paths that may not be right for you. I originally majored in Mech Engineering. While I am a technically oriented person, this was totally wrong for me. It took military training including technical school for me to get the mental discipline and yes valuable training to find my niche.

[RedEagle]

6. Shaping the Debate?

I agree that McDermott is forcing the debate out in the open. Given the current makeup of Congress, if this isn't in front of the public, then they will pull off another Patiot Act.

Draft? No.

But press on the subject? Yes.

The idea of a draft and the history of those who were of age during Vietnam and have children of age now, just might shake a lot of people up who have their heads in the sand, finally.

The image in people's minds of body bags coming home of children who were drafted against their will during Vietnam, will haunt the idea of a draft now.

McDermott wants natinal service. But what is McDermott really doing? Nothing like conscription to help end a war for profit and money. Sad truth.

There could be more than meets the eye.

Every congressman who votes for a draft should see their children and grandchildren called up first.

[Kanary]

7. There's *going* to be a draft..... that's a given

So, how do we want to do it....... let Bushwa&CO have it their way, or, FOR ONCE, have the discussions, and have the Dems in on the planning in order to make it more equitable.

I see the wisdom in this.

I respect him for this, rather than be disappointed, as you are.

Maybe you can say more about why you feel so strongly disappointed in him?

Kanary

[Cascadian]

10. This has the potential to blow up in the Democrats' faces.

John Kerry better take care and not even so much as bring the draft subject. This could divide the Democrats further if this is persued. You will have those who support this conscription and those who do not. It is divisive all around. It could even alienate voters. The Republicans will expose this division and play it to the hilt. I would rather the Democrats not play the draft card.

John

[Kanary]

12. NOT bringing it up is *sure* to blow up in the DEMS faces

Look, the plans are already in the making. It's already set to go. Denial isn't going to make it go away.

This is ONE opportunity the Dems finally have to take the lead in something, and clue in the society that this is what Bushwa plans, and then question how we are going to handle it.

This is the first encouraging move I've seen the Dems make.

Kanary

[Cascadian]

13. They should let the Republicans just go ahead bring it back.

Give the Repubs and Bushco just enough rope to hang themselves. Why add more lives to the carnage? How is this suppose to help the Democrats making young men and possibly young women in becoming cannon fodder? It's like giving a pyromaniac a book of matches in order for him to stop setting fires. Come on!

John

[Kanary]

18. I guess you're not getting the "discussion" part of this

I understand your strong feelings about this. I'm so upset with this war that sometimes it's really hard to get throught he day.

BUT..... We've GOT to stop letting the Republicans define and set all the terms. That's what's gotten us into a lot of trouble.

I don't see how letting Bushwa let this all stay quiet until after the election, then institute the draft immediately helps the Dems....? By that time, they're certainly NOT going to hang themselves.

The point is to stop letting them hide it all, and get this out into the open, so that EVERYONE understands just what the plans are, and has some input. Having input... that's a DEm ideal.

I hope you can see this side of it. McDermot is doing a good thing.

Kanary

[usregimechange]

9. You still have a wondderful congressman, I have Roy Blunt! n/t

[NewJerseyDem]

11. Rangel has 13 cosponsors for this bill to reinstate the draft

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d108:6:./temp/~bdisrd:@@@P|/bss/d108query.html|

Neil Abercrombie (HI)
Corrine Brown (FL)
Lacy Clay (MO)
John Conyers (MI)
Elijah Cummings (MD)
Alcee Hastings (FL)
Sheila Jacson-Lee (TX)
John Lewis (GA)
Jim McDermott (WA)
Jim Moran (VA)
Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC)
Pete Stark (CA)
Nydia Velazquez (NY)

[Dems Will Win]

14. KERRY NO-DRAFT PLAN vs. BUSH REACTIVATING DRAFT FOR 2005

The Dem bills are irrelevant and will never be brought to the floor. Here's what's really happening:

This summer Bush is reducing DRAFT ACTIVATION time by having the SSS conduct NATIONWIDE EXERCISES to test the whole system, even to the point of filling all DRAFT BOARD vacancies and gearing up the Alternative Service for COs for the first time in three decades. With the current reactivation plan due to go into effect in a few weeks, the SSS must report to the Director on March 31, 2005 they are tuned up and ready to conscript within 75 days of reauthorization from Congress (just a trigger resolution is needed, no new law). The first lottery for 20 year-olds could be June 15, 2005.

http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

That's what Bush is doing. Quietly oiling up the DRAFT Machinery for Spring 2005.

Kerry's NO-DRAFT plan to raise 40,000 additional troops and avoid reinstatement of the draft is added up this way (my synthesis):

1. Move some paper-pushers to combat (lots of potential there in nearly a million non-active-duty)
2. Increase enlistment with real scholarships and pay raises
3. Let troops know Special Ops will hunt al-Queda, no more invasions needed, so Guard/Reserve re-up rate goes up. "Primarily a law enforcement effort, not a full military effort", say JK on MTP last Sunday.
4. Start a "Civilian Stability Corps" that would help in reconstructing Afghanistan and Iraq and relieve military pressure.
5. GET FOREIGN TROOPS TO COME INTO INSTEAD OF LEAVE IRAQ!!

http://www.candidatemap.com

"...I propose that we enlist thousands of them in a Civilian Stability Corps, a reserve organization of volunteers ready to help win the peace in troubled places. Like military reservists, they will have peacetime jobs; but in times of national need, they will be called into service to restore roads, renovate schools, open hospitals, repair power systems, draft a constitution, or build a police force. A Civilian Stability Corps can bring the best of America to the worst of the world—and reduce pressure on the military."
< Source: Kerry, John. "Protecting Our Military Families in Times of War: A Military Family Bill of Rights." March 17, 2004. http://johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0317.html >

With this NO-DRAFT PLAN, Kerry will not have to resort to conscription, even after Bush screwed the whole thing up.


From STOPTHEDRAFT.COM

http://technologyreports.net/stopthedraft/?articleID=2550

What do a former fighter pilot in the National Guard and a former officer in the Navy have in common? Both have promised not to reinstate the military draft if elected president.

Senator John Kerry has promised that if elected president he will not reinstate the military draft, but will increase troop numbers by 40,000.

President Bush and his staff have also promised the American public that there are no plans to reinstate the military draft.

-snip-

John Kerry wants to deploy 40,000 more troops to Iraq and finish the job quickly. Yet when asked how he would do it, he said that a draft is not needed and people will enlist. To his advantage, however, Senator Kerry was an anti-war activist after serving his duties as a Navy officer in the Vietnam War and knows first-hand the pitfalls of the military draft.

-snip-

Kerry said on MTP that we don't need to invade whole nations beyond Afghanistan. He has a plan to increase 40,000 troops without a draft, a plan to bring in foreign troops to Iraq.

There's this: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/clips/news_2004_0330b.html

“When I returned from service in the military, I testified to the Congress about the racism in the military, about the lopsided application of the draft, the impact that it had on minority communities, the lopsided number of casualties, both African-American and Hispanic, predominantly.

“And I testified to the Congress about the inequality of the application of the draft and the way in which they were treated when they came home, left in communities that were neglected and lacked health care and education and other issues.”


Also this: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/clips/news_2003_1203a.html

"Kerry also said he doesn’t believe there is a need to reinstate the draft, a source of conflict during the Vietnam War. "

[Cascadian]

15. Has anybody seen this website?

The forces of opposition are forming already. Interesting website and one I wholeheartedly support!

http://members.cox.net/nodraft/index.html


Any politican who supports the draft take note!


John

[Cascadian]

16. KICK