I am a proud military supporter. My husband is currently deployed in Iraq. It sickens me that the Democrats are propsing a draft. I believe in the all-volunteer military that we have. It supports our countrie's freedom of choice. Furthermore, having an all-volunteer mil guarantees that you have individuals that WANT to be in the mil..at one point or another. If we institute a draft you'll have unwilling people putting our troops in danger. Why do we need a draft anyway. enlistment is up and the Air force is down sizing. I know a bunch of recently released mil members that would love to have their jobs back. The democrats are crazy and just want to prove a point by sending some rich republicans son overseas forcefully. That pisses me off because it puts my husband in danger. What do you think?
2006-11-25 04:42:02 · 16 answers · asked by knufflebunny 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Democrat (singular), to date I have only heard Charles Rangel propose this. I wouldn't worry because no one is actually going to support this. Liberals hate the military, so that leaves them out. Moderate Democrats are now and always have been opposed to drafts. Republicans have sponsored an all volunteer service for many years now. Write this off to more of Charlie's lunatic fringe mentality and stop worrying. Additionally thanks to you, your husband and your family for the sacrifices you are making to this great land of ours.
2006-11-25 04:51:39 · answer #1 · answered by Bryan 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Charlie Rangel, a Democrat, is proposing it. But the Democratic Party overall is opposing it, and it will probably not get anywhere. He's proposing it all for the wrong reason, though personally I think the rich Republican kids ought to go since they are the ones go gung-ho for going over there in the first place.
Actually, the constitutionality of a draft for Iraq is questionable. The Constitution authorizes Congress "to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions." (Article I, Section 8). In the early 70s, in the waning Vietnam War years, the courts were actually ruling against the draft on the grounds that the Vietnam War did not qualify for a draft (in other words, the US was not undergoing a rebellion - such as a civil war - nor an invasion). None of them ever got to the Supreme Court because, wisely, the military decided to drop the individual draft cases so such a ruling would never occur.
2006-11-25 06:34:10 · answer #2 · answered by The Doctor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Get one thing straight, not all democrats support the proposal of a military draft. There is one democrat that has been pushing for the past 3 years to re-instate the draft and he's been shot down every year, more than likely he'll be shot down again this year.
Enlistments are up because the standards were lowered and the Air Force, is down sizing and giving more jobs to civilians.
Same is true with the Navy.
I agree with the all-volunteer military and only a drafted military when it is absolutely necessary i.e. WWI and WWII.
And personally I think the rich republicans sons and daughters need to do a little time doing a real days work, and serving in the military would be the perfect way to do it.
2006-11-25 05:03:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I do not believe we should have a draft. It was needed in WW II but is poor policy and unfair for anything less that our absolute survival. It is only proposed by the Democrats because it will produce the same public response as during the Vietnam fighting. There McNamara thought the answer was a war of attrition. We had five times their population and were killing them at a thirty to one ratio, so they had to quit. Thus we continued to suffer unnecessary casulaties, suffered often by men who did not volunteer for military service but were drafted. But Americans lack the patience for that type of conflict. We as a people go all out or begin to fade away. With many there by force, there was opposition to the needless risk to which they were exposed. Public opinion weakened. The Democrats want to repeat that bit of history.
2006-11-25 05:04:32 · answer #4 · answered by Edward Hyde 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First off the Democrats aren't proposing a draft ... so calm your narrow little mind for a moment. Charles Rangel, a Democrat, threw this out there as a way of shedding light on the fact that a disproportionate number of people dying in this senseless war come from impoverished lower class America. His goal was to let the wealthy portion of this country, who profit off this quagmire, that it's time they start to participate if it is to continue. This war ain't noble, it's not accomplishing a damn thing and it was perpetrated on a scared post 911 America under false pretenses. So it's now time for our failed current administration to end this thing ... and it's time to pull the military recruiters out of this country's most blight ridden areas. Just think how far the billions we waste on this war could be spent actually giving some hope to people in these neighborhoods rather then sending them off to die in Bush's botched, profit driven war.
Lady instead of being outraged by the Democrates for possibly putting your husband in danger, be outraged at your President ... cause he's already put him in danger, and for no reason.
2006-11-25 05:25:35 · answer #5 · answered by Headshot 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Don't worry your head off about the draft. It is not going anywhere. Rangle only brought up the proposal because he wanted to see that all who are able would be serving. Little Right Wing boys don't join up, the fighting is left to the poor whites and minorities, as it was in Vietnam.
Right wingers have little yellow ribbon stickers on their SUVs that say "support our troops," but they are not willing to fight in the wars.
If they reinstate the draft, and they will not, they should draft all equally, including women - so if they reinstate the draft, maybe you will have a chance to go.
2006-11-25 07:26:31 · answer #6 · answered by Polyhistor 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
First off, it's not a proposal being made by "the Democrats." It's being proposed, for purely symbolic reasons, by one congressman.
I am strongly opposed to the draft on Constitutional grounds and would never support it under any circumstances. However (you knew there was a "however" coming, right?), the societal benefits would be enormous in that it would get the current crop of draft age "citizens" off their dead ends and give them a dose of reality they could really use.
2006-11-25 05:21:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Troops are spread thin, guard and reserves are being used more and more so like it or not we are strained. Syria looks like it is popping off leaders in the region with impunity, Iran has thumbed its nose at the UN (like the UN is even relevant anymore), N.Korea has test fired a missile and purposefully aimed it at Hawaii, and Chavez is trying to buddy up with all our enemies to give them an ally to our south.
It is folly to believe G W is responsible for all of this, this has been brewing for a long time. But we are still strained and a draft can relieve some of that strain on our military. I have no doubt hat a big boosting to our military will make a lot of the uneasiness in the world stop because they will se we can handle it. A draft got us through WWI and WWII, I think it can serve us now as well.
2006-11-25 04:52:29 · answer #8 · answered by JFra472449 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Don't you think it would be smart to at least look at every option at this point. Just because someone throws an idea out on the table, doesn't mean that it is what is going to happen. It only means that it will be considered along with all of the other options. Smart thinking if you ask me.
An all volunteer army is a great idea,,,,,,,,, unless no one volunteers
2006-11-25 05:39:22 · answer #9 · answered by tom l 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As a veteran of the all volunteer military I agree with you. The draft should be used only in a state of national emergency. Iraq certainly isn't that.
2006-11-25 04:45:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋