War Czar Considering Draft

[yeahwho]

All of you first round draft picks better beware, Iraqi war czar Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute is now actually bouncing around the word, "Draft (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/10/war.adviser.draft.ap/)".

And, if the draft were reinstated, things have changed since Vietnam (http://www.sss.gov/viet.htm)which some view making it a more "fair and equitable" proposition. The draft would operate by lottery with nobody older than 25 being eligible. And those college deferments which used to be able to keep 1960-era draftbait out of the service ad infinitum will only be good until the end of the current college semester.

You know they've been keeping a list since 1980 (http://www.sss.gov/Statestats-FY06/Comparison2007.pdf) and compliance has been high.

So yeah things are getting a little tight since my last post 10/22/06 in the Iraq, How Bad (http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=71460&highlight=default)? thread, 906 US soldiers killed since then, it's bad and the military is getting stretched.

I think we have a 50% or better chance of this actually happening.

[kaiser soze]

If this goes through, the first pieces of meat they should draft should be the sons and daughters of those who supported the war in Iraq.

[EN[i]GMA]

For the love of God we cannot let a Republican get elected...

[kaiser soze]

Anyways...what is the draft for?

I thought they said "Mission Accomplished"

[Bob]

I think we have a 50% or better chance of this actually happening.

what are you basing that on

[yeahwho]

what are you basing that on
50% are better, mainly because this fellow Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute is the adviser to the President. He's talking about the realities of the military (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12688693) in a very candid way. What brings on stress of this nature (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&ie=UTF-8&q=army+stress&btnG=Search+News)? GWB is asking these men and women to do a job that requires a minimum of at least 3 times the number that ever were on the ground. There are now 162,000 US troops in Iraq, of which 30,000 have arrived since February as part of Bush's revised strategy to stabilize Baghdad and to push Iraqi leaders to build a government of national unity.

Things have stabilized somewhat, politically it is a nightmare in Iraq. When will things be stable enough to enable Iraqi political leaders to make hard choices about reconciling rival interests among Sunnis, Shias and Kurds?

I'm figuring in other factors besides Iraq, the stretched reserves, any unrest or natural disasters internationally plus some recent attempts that seem desperate to fill recruitment projections that have started to lag, IPods and Cash (http://www.army.mil/-newsreleases/2007/08/06/4296-20000-bonus-for-recruits-who-report-to-basic-training-before-sept-30/). It seems to be a reality more today than any other day since Vietnam. More likely than not likely, yet still just slightly above 50%.

[Jasonik]

GMA;1504448']For the love of God we cannot let a Republican get elected...

This is the kind of narrow thinking that will leave you gobsmacked when Hillary Clinton (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/washington/14cnd-clinton.html?ex=1331524800&en=205ab0561a633900&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) reinstates the draft.

Considering your signature, I'd have thought you'd be familiar with the only candidate knowledgeable in Austrian economics, much less actively promoting them, who by the way is against all use of US military aggression abroad, and more importantly, at home. He happens to be running on the republican ticket... maybe you've heard (http://www.mises.org/books/freedomsiege.pdf) of him?

[Schmeltz]

That Times article doesn't even hint at the possibility of Hillary Clinton bringing back the draft. In fact, the plan she describes in the interview would require fewer troops than the current Republican strategy, making the draft less necessary, not more likely. But then it isn't a particularly sound plan anyway.

[Jasonik]

The policy of militarily occupying foreign territory to protect US oil interests will only lead to more war, mark my words.

If we continue as a policy to force OPEC members and their trading partners to value oil in dollars and not euros, yen, yuan, etc. we'll be fighting wars, proxy or otherwise, with China or Russia over Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf petroleum in no time.

It is an insane policy and Clinton is no different from the neocons with regard to using military force in this manner.

[Schmeltz]

All good points, though I think wars are going to be fought over oil no matter in what currency it's priced and I doubt that a Clinton administration would prove so profoundly misguided in its foreign affairs as the Bushies have, nor so blindly ideologized as to develop a similarly oblivious, irreleastic approach to, well, reality. Even so, that article still doesn't say anything about Hillary Clinton's views on the draft.

[Jasonik]

Our continued military presence (occupation) in the middle east will most assuredly provoke a response from another nation thereby necessitating a draft. The way to stop this is to reverse our policy of occupation and aggression. Clinton shows no signs of doing this.

Ron Paul on the other hand...

Reject Draft Slavery (http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=3719)

Congress to Ponder Conscription? (http://www.stopthedraft.com/index.php?articleID=9326&sectionID=28)

Ron Paul Absolutely, Positively Opposes Draft (http://dailypaul.com/node/1254)

[EN[i]GMA]

This is the kind of narrow thinking that will leave you gobsmacked when Hillary Clinton (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/washington/14cnd-clinton.html?ex=1331524800&en=205ab0561a633900&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) reinstates the draft.

Considering your signature, I'd have thought you'd be familiar with the only candidate knowledgeable in Austrian economics, much less actively promoting them, who by the way is against all use of US military aggression abroad, and more importantly, at home. He happens to be running on the republican ticket... maybe you've heard (http://www.mises.org/books/freedomsiege.pdf) of him?

Well, my sig is kind of a misnomer because I'm not a libertarian anymore and I just haven't gotten around to change it. And it's still somewhat true.

But you're actually right about Hillary; she's probably my least favorite Democratic candidate, and I don't trust her farther than I can throw her. But even taking all of that into account, she'd STILL be better than nearly any Republican who isn't named Ron Paul, who of course would be terrible in other areas.

I really do find it tough to imagine Hillary re-instating the draft, at least for this war. It's not outside the realm of possibility, certainly, but what reason would she have for doing it? If things got really tough, she'd be more inclined to bail, I'd think.

[yeahwho]

I can't believe that Bush just made this comparison to Vietnam, but he has...

President Bush drew broad and stinging comparisons Wednesday between the bloodletting and regional chaos that followed the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam a generation ago and what could befall the Middle East if American forces leave Iraq "without getting the job done."

Here is the full story (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/328698_vietnam23.html)

It would probably make some sense if he actually served in the military in Vietnam to make this comparison, what a disingenuous chickehawk fuck. Yep he signed up and here is his military record (http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html/).

It's just kind of an eerie feeling I've got about this administration, the whole "Fight it There, So we don't Fight it at Home" is a messed up line of crap. Times are very dark, the draft actually may be the only alternative to support this sort of ideology.

Then there also is this sort of spooky thinking on the horizon,

Americans from 18 to 42 should expect SPP-inspired military draft from Bush administration

Not Good. (http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/08/15/01688.html)

[Carlos]

not surprised they talking bout a draft when the plan is this:

http://foxattacks.com/iran?utm_source=dems

your government truly is the most dangerous thing on this planet... scary times.

[BeticoCM]

the current regime is in full procrastination mode. they are trying to delay the inevitable all-out civil war in iraq long enough until after the pres. election which will then let off bush and company off the hook for the most part. they're hard at work covering their tracks and deleting and destroying evidence.