I hate to say this, but...

[Dawgs]

It would almost be worth it to have a draft.

FINALLY WAKE THIS COUNTRY UP!!!

[bowens43]

1. no, it wouldn't.

bush is gone in a coupe of years no matter what. dead children are forever.

[coalition_unwilling]

12. Charlie Rangel supports the re-institution of military conscription . . .

I have mixed feelings. If the children of the middle- and upper-middle class were forced to serve, then maybe the members of the afore-mentioned classes might get off their asses and into the streets.

I mean, really, is it fair that children of the poor are the only ones fighting this rich man's war? Does it really correspond with your sense of what a republic is (or should be)?

Right now, my feeling is that the American middle-class "opposes" the war in Iraq, but that opposition is of a sentimental nature and not rooted in the middle class' own concerns. Bringing back the draft might make them own the issue in ways they haven't up until now.

[Charlie Brown]

21. Is it somehow more justified for the children of the rich to die

than the poor?

"I mean, really, is it fair that children of the poor are the only ones fighting this rich man's war? Does it really correspond with your sense of what a republic is (or should be)?"

Is it any more fair for wealthier children who may oppose the war to be forced to serve? The draft-age children of Dean and Kucinich, for example.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

[stepnw1f]

30. It Would Be Fair If All Would Serve

Rich, Middleclass and Poor. That how I read his/her post.

And yes... I'm sick of the rich living off of the poor who die trying to survive or make a living. Imagine the wealthy suffering... oh no.. we can't have that... our masters....:puke:

[Charlie Brown]

33. "All" do serve

There are rich and middle class kids in the service, just like there are poor. There may not be as many, but to claim that all of the middle class and wealthy "sit out" wars is in error. Just look at Kerry, the Kennedys, etc.

"And yes... I'm sick of the rich living off of the poor who die trying to survive or make a living."

and your solution to that is to send rich kids off to fight and perhaps die in a war they may or may not agree with.

[stepnw1f]

37. Rich Serve as Much as the Poor....?

What as officers or grunts on the front-line?

How many poor serve as opposed to wealthy? What percentage would you say?

[coalition_unwilling]

44. Every week at my anti-war vigil, I see young folk in $60,000 SUVs

drive by cheering BushCo and calling us traitors (although not as many recently). In my pettier moments, when given the opportunity, I tell them that if they are such big backers of BushCo, they should enlist.

I think the point I was trying to make (perhaps not as successfully as i could have) is that once the children of the rich and middle-class are forced to fight, their parents will pay a hell of a lot more attention to making sure we don't get embroiled in more Vietnam\Iraq-type quagmires.

In other words, I don't want any children to die (rich or poor), but as a political tactic, putting the rich offsprings' asses on the line may be the best way to ensure that fewer children die.

[CottonBear]

2. I wonder how many Americans would become illegal immigrants

in Canada and Mexico if a draft was reinstated?

[xultar]

24. I wonder what Lou Dobbs would say then...

:rofl:

[Straight Shooter]

3. Then don't say it.

Because nothing ever wakes up a bushie.

[RubyDuby in GA]

4. I almost agree

except that it would again be the poor and uneducated kids being sent and not the people that need to go (i.e every Republican between the ages of 18 and 40).

I'm almost to the point of saying let them have everything their way and see what kind of wonderful utopia it becomes. :sarcasm: Things would change pretty quickly in my opinion.

[Sammy Pepys]

5. What?

No way.

[flamin lib]

6. I've said repeatedly that a draft would be necessary for

America to pay attention. It would do three things: It would make youth politically aware (when the drag your ass out of school, make you wear ugly clothes and get shot at it gets your attention), it would make mom & dad pay attention (my mom was all for killin' commies until her boy got drafted) and it would force our leaders into taking the 1 & 2 into account.

[rinsd]

35. I reject it on its premise....

I will not vote for the conscription of people for the purpose of political advantage.

[occuserpens]

7. Draft is pure madness

For a number of well known reasons. To begin with, this a known argument of those who actually support the war, but don't have guts to say this directly. In fact, the only reason for the draft is to "win the war" no matter that it can't happen!

[wakeme2008]

8. I agree 100%

that would wake up more ppl than anything else.

[Cobalt Violet]

9. Unfortunately it may be the only way to wake some people up. n/t

[occuserpens]

13. To wake people up to support the war, right?

[Cobalt Violet]

27. Wrong.

To motivate young people to vote for once.

[occuserpens]

40. Makes no sense

You can't reasonably pursue a major reform just to "make people vote".

[occuserpens]

42. .

[Charlie Brown]

10. No No and No

I will not consign the youth to fight and die in Imperialist wars.

Rangel and others are fools for even pondering the idea of bringing back the draft.

[Crazy Dave]

11. They're already forcing members of the military into extended duty

...longer than their original commitment. It's a policy called "Stop-Loss".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060129/pl_nm/iraq_usa_stoploss_dc

Volunteer military my fucking-ass!

[acmejack]

14. Invisible draft, but that's OK?

They joined in the first place so if they get drafted they deserve it? I guess it kind of makes sense...

[Crazy Dave]

23. I don't think anybody deserves it

Especially the way military recruiters prey on lower income youths versus the privileged and recruits from poverty stricken areas are the majority. In my opinion, the lower income people were already victims and to victimize them further and say they deserve it is just plain wrong.

[jane_pippin]

15. Thanks mommy and daddy!!

I'm getting a little tired of this, especially when it comes from my parents' generation--who went through a draft and (rightly) never let us hear the end of it--being so quick to claim it as The Solution To Wake Up The Country! Ooh rah rah!

I don't want any more friends dead, maimed, or psyhcologically screwed up for life. Thanks, but no.

Edit: I'm not claiming you're from my parents' generation--maybe you are, I don't know. But I have heard it a lot from people around their age and even from one of them--a liberal peace lovin' Dem with a draft age kid--so I just had to vent.

[Nutmegger]

16. I see both views....

and I'm an effing college student!!

On one hand, we need this "war" in everybody's living room; let's see how long they will "support the troops".

On the other hand, after reading extensively about our last draft, it is negative and would force many youths into the heat of battle. No one, including me, wants to fight in a "war" that they so strongly disagree with.

So I don't know. It's scary to think about but I think people are living in this bubble, that things are well and we're bringing "freedom and democracy" to the Middle East.

Of course, the effing "liberal media" is not with us this time and that hurts our movement.

[Crowdance]

17. Our young people will leave in droves

My own kids will be in the first wave--I'll make sure of it. I'm already looking at where they can go for the duration--and perhaps permanently. I'd rather they remain alive somewhere else than risk their lives fighting for oil.

[SmokingJacket]

18. I used to feel this way, but my son's getting older.

There have to be better ways to wake up the country than to let even a single unwilling, peaceloving young person go to war and die for nothing.

[Pacifist Patriot]

19. I'm not so sure anymore. A draft would be constructed in such a

way that the poor and marginalized would be the victims (yet again) and voting base could remain blissfully unaware of the personal consequences. I think a draft instituted with this current administration and legislature would be disasterous.

[seabeyond]

20. would be a quick eye opener. probably why bushco

hasnt done it yet

[cantstandbush]

22. I agree, without reservation! Wars would end very soon. n/t

[laruemtt]

25. i think i agree. up to now,

americans are acting like ms. "beautiful mind" babs, not wanting to bother themselves with the reality of what we're doing. it's not even allowed to show them the coffins coming back. they don't have a clue what's going on other than they have some yellow ribbon on their cars that make them feel "patriotic." how sad it's come to this.

[lectrobyte]

26. Why? As long as the "right people" get drafted, what would a

draft really change?

[shanti]

28. will you be the first to go?

n/t

[Charlie Brown]

31. It's very interesting that all these "pro-draft" DUers

do not care to serve themselves.

[tabasco]

38. I'm pro-draft (universal service) and I was Army for 12 years.

Universal service is common in Europe.

It deters war and has a number of benefits to society.

I would only like to see it begun in peacetime. Obviously not with a warlike asshole like Bush in charge.

[Charlie Brown]

41. I don't have a problem with what you describe

People here support bringing back the draft to "end" the current war(s), which is just idiocy.

[Ohio Joe]

29. Sorry but...

I would not support a draft.

[SammyWinstonJack]

32. Not my sons!

My oldest already gave 8 yrs of his life to the military and my youngest doesn't need to die for lies and profits for war mongers and liars!. Neither of my sons who are 33 and 28 need to die for bushco,INC.

[dogday]

34. I thought about the draft today and wondered

just how far we would have to go before we activate it. I pray for the boys who would have to do this, mine is there now and I don't wish it on anyone. It would be true however, it would wake up not just the soldiers, but the families as well, they are the ones that rallied here in the US during Viet Nam.....

[bluestateguy]

36. We've been over this

I know what the Rangel argument is in favor, but it's filled with holes. The road to hell is paved with bad intentions. You can try to put in a draft with "no exceptions", but it won't work. The well to do chickenhawks WILL FIND A WAY to get their kids out. They have good lawyers who know how to do this, or powerful friends who are just a phone call away.

Many other young men will just march off to war because, well, the government just says they have to go. We live in a country with millions of people who have been conditioned to respect authority, not question it. These young people will go because they are told to, and they won't have the connections to get out, or the political sophistication to protest. The practical reality of such a policy is more young people are sent off to war and come home dead or wounded.

And do you really want this president to have an unlimited supply of cannon fodder for more wars of aggression?

[RaleighNCDUer]

39. You know, I agree, but not for the wake-up call.

I was raised as a military brat, and I was draft age at the last go-round, so I know something about it. One thing never mentioned is that the draft democratizes the military. Sure, there is the aspect that a draft that touches the middle/upper class might forestall undue international adventures. That's fine and well. But I have been concerned that for the past couple decades we have developed a 'professional' military - but it is not the professional military I grew up with. Back in the day, a soldier of whatever rank was as likely to be liberal as conservative, democrat as republican, from wealth as from poverty. It was a great cross-section of the American experience, and people from all backgrounds mingled with people from all other backgrounds. One thing that I particularly remember is that the military, at least on the levels I knew, was strictly non-political. It was not a tool on the right-wing's belt.

I've been terribly disturbed by stories I've heard about the fundamentalist take-over of the Air Force Academy -- that would have been unthinkable back during the days of the draft (and do we really want people who eagerly wait for Armageddon to control 95% of our nuclear arsenal?). Even if the Air Force, or Marines or Navy didn't draft, great numbers of recruits went into those branches to avoid becoming grunts (well, not the Marines - we were a completely different story) and that kept such singular mind-sets from taking hold.

We keep talking on DU about how so many of us are vets, and so few of the freepers are -- isn't it true that most our vets became vets because they were drafted?

During the years that we had drafts we fought 4 wars -- WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam. Of those, only Vietnam was not forced on us, and admittedly it could not have escallated to the degree it did without the draft. But in the years when there was no draft what did we have? Restricting us to the past century, there was the Spanish-American War and the Phillipine Insurrection before WW1, 20+ incursions into Central America and the Caribbean between WW1 and WW2, Greneda, Panama, Lebenon, Somalia, the Balkans, Gulf 1 and Gulf 2 all since Vietnam.

Notably, the only (known) attempted coup against the US government was plotted by business interests and the professional military between WW1 and WW2 - forestalled by Marine General Smedly Butler. It is unthinkable that an army division made up of 50% draftees would ever march against our own government simply because they were ordered to. At the same time, a division of 50% draftees could well turn against a government that has gone out of control, because the soldiers are citizens first, not soldiers. That's why the founding fathers warned against having a standing army, but thought to rely upon 'well-regulated militia' which would deal with any emergency until a draft could be implemented.

As long as we insist on having this standing army, I think a limited draft could be beneficial. Of course, if we didn't have 730 military bases outside the US, we wouldn't need a standing army like that.

[occuserpens]

43. I can only repeat: support for the draft = support for the Iraqi war

Just under thin rhetorical cover