With all this WAR going on in the middle east does anyone thinks there will be a DRAFT?

Answer 1

Anything is possible. If it does happen, there'll be a lot of ex-patriots in Canada...

Answer 2

Actually with the minimal support for the wars going on or how Bush is handling terrorism, they're trying to avoid a draft. Which is why they're trying to pass on more responsibilties to NATO troops to relieve our dwindling numbers of active U.S. troops. Or why they did a "back door" draft a few years ago recalling many veterans who were still in "inactive reserve" or "retired" status.

Trust me....the White House knows that creating a draft would be a dire mistake. The only way it would happen is if we get involved in another conflict with say Iran or North Korea.

Answer 3

No, absolutely not...well at least for the foreseeable future.

HOWEVER, most people are unaware that US Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY)...YES a Democrat... of District 15....introduced a a bill to re-introduce the DRAFT.

First: Rep Rangel introduced (sponsored) bill HR 163 - Universal National Service Act of 2003 to the 108th Congress on 01/07/2003. There were 14 Co-Sponsors. Bill was sent to committee.

Associated Senate Bill 89 (SB 89) was introduced into the US Senate by Senator Hollings (D-SC); yes another Democrat on the same day; 01/07/2003. SB 89 Universal National Service Act of 2003. Sent to a Senate Committee for a vote and was defeated. Then sent to the Senate Armed Services Committee where it still sits today.

Basically both Senate and House bills required every US citizen, male and female between the ages of 18-26 to perform 2 years of period of national service in the Armed Forces or a civilian capacity in national defense.

Second: HR 163 was dramaticaly defeated on
10/05/2004 by a vote of 402 -02 thus failing to pass the House.

Third: Rep Rangel once again sponsored the same basic bill (ages, both sexes, service period)
to the House as HR 2732; the Universal National Service Act of 2005. Date sponsored was 05/26/2005. No associated Senate Bill as the original SB 89 was still in the Senate sub-ommittee.

Fourth: Rep Rangel (D-NY) introducted HR 4572 Universal National Service Act of 2006 to the 109th Congress on 02/14/2006. No change in the
requirements and obligations as the prior HR bills he sponsored. By this time he could muster zero co-sonsors for his DRAFT Bill. Also the similar Senate Bill (SB 89) was still in commitee.

Remmber, from Rep Rangel's first intro of his Draft Bill; HR 163 on 01/07/2003 to this time forward remember 2 things:
1) every bill contains the same requirements (age, sexes, time period, etc)
2) the the war in Iraq what percentage of those drafted will perform domestic service verses those sent to the army and Iraq? Any guesses?

So, the Draft Bill introduced in to both the House and Senate were sponsored by Democrates. I imagine most democrates, liberals and most other voters would have sworn only a Republican would dare sponsor a Draft Bill.

Do I think there will be a draft any time soon with all the War in the mid-east? NO. I don't think the American public is ready to bring perhaps hundreds of body bags back home containing the remains of mothers, sisters, wives and
daughters. Besides, we have a significant pool of men and women willing to support and defend their country wearing the uniform of the USA.

If you don't trust or believe the information I have provided regarding the efforts of the Democrats plesae feel free to review my sources.

Answer 4

Yes a draft is possible. especially if we go to war with Iran and Korea. Seeing as to how china and russia would be in on it as well. It wont matter how many people are already in USA's army if china sends its population of 1 billion people at us. I still think that the U.S. and its allies would win but we are gonna have to accept the probability of mass body counts. I dont think nukes will be used on either side its just to rash of a decision. Nobody really wants that.

Answer 5

No, we have about 130,000 troops in the middle east.
We have over a million total troops, most of who are still in
the U.S. so there would be no need for a draft at this point.

We may be short on Army soldiers a bit but not much.

And I'm really surprised to see some of the answers here from cowards who won't serve their country.

Answer 6

I sure do hope so. We need to do something about all these good for nothing rap listening droopy drawered unemployed welfare sucking layabouts. A little military discipline would be just the thing to teach some respect, manners and focus. And not to mention, teach these individuals what properly fitting clothing is all about. You can't hold up your britches with one hand and fire a rifle with the other.

Conform, get a job, or get drafted. Sounds like a plan!!

Answer 7

Not just because of the wars , but we should have a draft. This military is made up of mostly the poor and uneducated , that can't find good jobs to raise their family 's with.

Answer 8

No. The only way congress would approve a draft is if America herself were under imminant threat of invasion. The Dem. party would never let it happen any other way. Even then, I think it would be a very close vote.

Answer 9

The democrats have been calling for a draft for some time now... no one else has.

Answer 10

No. I can tell you from personal experience that it takes a year to train someone to the point that they can actually contribute to a military unit. And that's volunteers, who want to be soldiers. No one in the Army, or any other branch of service, wants to babysit a bunch of reluctant draftees. They'd be more trouble than they're worth.

Answer 11

Well, we would only use draft if we absolutely need soldiers, and that is one thing that we have plenty of. I think that if this is officialy declared WW3, then we might start thinking about drafting.