anyone else agree that the draft is the most messed up thing ever? People ages 18-26 don't exactly make up a huge portion of the nation. How dare a bunch of 60 year olds decide i get to go fight in a war i don't even believe in. I am talking about this now due to that idiotic democrat from NY who thinks it'll "do our young people good". That's bull++it. The fact of the matter is, there should be no war period, but there always will be due to morons, but do people really think an army made of up of kids forced to fight is right? it's not at all, i'll say this right now, there is no way someone is ever going to force me to kill someone or fight in a war i don't think we should be fighting.
2006-11-20
00:09:40
·
12 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
News & Events
➔ Current Events
I am 17 years old, and i'll be damned if right when i turn 18 i get drafted. I didn't live my whole life to go die in someone elses war. I do think it is ironic that people who were drafted fought for my right to say the things I want. Just like veterans fought for the right to burn our flag. I have great respect for anyone who has fought for the freedoms we enjoy today. How dare you say such things (to the poster like 3 or 4 or 5 down) Because I am against war and against the draft doesn't mean sh**. If I absolutely had to serve, you better belive I'd have ever fellow I serve with's back. In my eyes. The draft will never be ok or moral. I can feel the way I want and you cna feel the way you want.
2006-11-20
02:54:56 ·
update #1
One more thing... If there is a draft women should be drafted as well if they can vote to elect people who would impose it... Also I don't do bad things. I don't do drugs, join in violence and other bad activities. I just want to live my life peacfully they way i choose.
2006-11-20
02:57:43 ·
update #2
i agree that this seems like a political move. rangel voted against the war, and has tried to promote the draft a few times. i believe the first was in '03, and there was a 402 - 2 vote against it. he's also saying they should be able to draft ppl from the age of 18 - 42, males and females, i believe. i'm 23, and my dad is 41.... that would be messed up, and i dont want to fight a war over oil. if my country was attacked and we needed to be defended, i'd be there to chop off my hair in a heartbeat, but this war isnt something most of us believe in, and being as Bush has daughters of serving age, i think Rangel is trying to drive a point home. from what i understand, the military is still signing up enough ppl to cover the oil war, so i'm hoping that there isnt a draft next year. it seems like there would be a vote against it, and for all the things bush has done wrong, i'd think he'd veto that bill, he's unpopular enough as it is.
and as an american you have the right to feel however you want, so anyone that tells you otherwise is a total asswipe.
and if there was a draft, bush's drunken daughters wouldnt be qualified, and i'm positive that he'd get them out of it, the same way he didnt serve in vietnam. he didnt even show up to his duty of protecting oklahoma.
2006-11-20 14:48:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by hellion210 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I settle for as real with ChestyPuller's enter-i does now no longer help a draft only for the army yet think of familiar provider, familiar meaning certainly all and sundry, would be a powerfuble device. The drafted workers have not ever, which includes Vietnam, made up a majority of the army workers for the reason that international conflict 2 (66% of the mlitary replaced into drafted then) and on the best of Vietnam the mlitary replaced into 34% draftees with 25% of Vietnam veterans being draftees. form of makes you ask your self the situation each and all of the communicate related to the draft is extremely approximately. i'm no longer able to think of of any reason to on the 2d reinstate a mlitary draft for the reason that guy capability desires are being met by utilising skill of volunteers. for the reason that Rangell, a liberal Democrat, is incapable of attending to understand subjects and talking approximately information the present military is underrepresented in minorities (meaning human beings of shade) and over-represented by utilising skill of white, center type workers so a draft does now no longer draft "Republican infants" which i assume he's utilising as a code be extensive conscious for white center type yet woud extremely ought to amplify this form of blacks interior the army to realize the demographic effects he desires. So the documents are a draft that he talks approximately could certainly propose plenty much less white persons and extra suitable black ones it extremely is the countless of the politically good suitable disinformation he talks approximately.
2016-11-25 21:01:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Charlie Rangel's point is, if there was a draft, Bush would have thought twice about sending kids to Iraq, because Jenna and Barbara might have been conscripted to go. If there was any chance the Bush girls might have had to go and fight, I doubt Bush would have been as "gung ho". After all most of the administration avoided the Vietnam and Korean conflicts.
Rangel asserts that the people likely to sign up for the military need the job. Poor and minorities are targeted by recruiters because they have little options, and it is a way out of poverty. Unfortunately, some had signed up to pay for college, and got sent to a war zone and lost limbs and lives.
2006-11-20 00:23:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by j s 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
that's because the diseases there spreading aren't killing enough people so to try n stop crime and get rid of some of the population this is there plan n if i even as a women have something to say it would b the same as you for 1 there shouldn't even b a war to begin with it seems everytime there is bush around theres a war.Someone should get him out of control and get a president who believes in peace and not war.I'll tell ya i would never send my son to war to fight bushes battle someone needs to put him in the feild.
2006-11-20 00:35:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by too4barbie 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
THe draft should only be used if our country's defenses are about to be exhausted (as in a country invading us, not Iraq). We are far from that. Rangel wants to introduce the draft to make this hard, unpopular war even more unpopular. It is a dirty trick and a lot of people know his intentions. Even if you think the war is justified or not, his actions are inexcusable. Time for impeachment of Rangel
2006-11-20 00:21:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Brewjar 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I'm against it. There would be no need for one if the biased, liberal media had not poisoned the minds of the American people against the war and the current government.
2006-11-20 02:16:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Close the window and there will be no draft.
2006-11-20 06:28:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's a great idea, everyone should serve thier
country in some way besides collecting welfare...
2006-11-20 04:38:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
whenever I feel a draft, I get pneumonia
2006-11-20 13:36:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's ironic that draftees have fought and died for your right to say that.
2006-11-20 00:12:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by tumbleweed1954 6
·
0⤊
2⤋