For all those pro-drafters, just one thing...

[originalpckelly]

You may think this war will end overnight if we reinstate the draft, but 58,209 people would disagree with you.



We will never forget them. Nor should you.

[atreides1]

1. Maybe, maybe not

[peace13]

2. I agree with you.

Giving a maniac more power is never the answer.

[SammyWinstonJack]

3. K&R

[Mandate My Ass]

4. I don't play chicken with other people's lives

and that is just what drafting to end the war is.

[helderheid]

5. Well put, as is the OP - K & R

[sammythecat]

16. I was ambivalent before reading your post

but you may have hit the nail directly on the head. In this instance, right now, it appears that is exactly what a pro-draft movement is. A game of chicken. With other people's lives.

[smoogatz]

38. Drafting to end the war is a bit like fucking to end promiscuity.

to paraphrase George Carlin. Sort of.

[bleedingheart]

6. Yeah...it is far better to have the economically disadvantaged bear the brunt

like the two brothers with the GED's who finally got fed up with their McDonalds job and pay...and decided the only way to fix their lives was to join the military...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07012/753300-85.stm

Or my cousin who can't find work as a day laborer and carpenter...so he thinking about joining ..

Or my other cousin who is a mechanic and he joined the guard to make some extra cash and has now had 3 tours of duty overseas....

yup...far better for them than the children who have options...

:sarcasm:

[Warpy]

7. They would, anyway, wake up!

We don't live in an ideal world where things can be made fair. We live in this world.

In this world, the wealthy and powerful will always have their children protected from facing the consequences of greed and the lust for empire.

That is the way the world works, and you'd better wise up to that fact, fast.

No draft, not now, not unless there are foreign troops on our soil.

[bleedingheart]

8. I know the way the world works...and sometimes it takes bloodshed

the only way our boys are coming home...is if people take to the streets ...and that won't happen until about 100K plus die in the war.....

So as long as the poor die...no one cares...not even the middle class...

So the body count will go on.
The war will go on...because the only people benefitting are the rich...why end the war when they have an unlimited supply of fools to go along.

This war is with us for a long time because it just leaks blood here and there...not until we see mass casulaties or an economic recession or depression of catastrophic magnitude will anyone do anything...

Drip drip drip...

One to four a day....a mere drop in the casualty bucket...as long as they can fill up that car to visit the mall...

[originalpckelly]

10. You may want to edit that post, because I can't believe that's what you wrote.

You cannot honestly be telling me you want 100,000 people to die in Iraq. I can't believe someone would be so single-minded and stupid to do that. You don't give a fuck about the people serving, because if your sorry ass did you'd want as few casualties as possible.

[bleedingheart]

31. I don't want them to die...

I care very much for the people serving...that is why I marched against and still write/rally against this stupid war.

However more soldiers die every day and yet I don't see this war ending anytime soon...and somehow I think the callous society we live in doesn't care because it isn't shocking enough.

To be honest I am disgusted that more people on the streets know more about Ms Spears than they know about the war ...and that is the truth.

[helderheid]

11. the people ARE taking it to the streets. Corporate media makes sure you don't see it.

[originalpckelly]

12. How are you any better than the neo-cons who think it's ok...

to commit people to battle without a second thought about them or their lives?

We want as few people to die as possible. That's the idea of ending the war.

[bleedingheart]

23. I hate war, I marched against the war....because I knew some things

1. you can't "win" any war.
2. to "win" a war you must lose your soul if you want to be "victorious"...what do I mean by that...you can't have the unrealistic and idealistic war of the neocon fantasy...you have to annihilate your enemy...you must crush them and by doing that...you lose yourself...and I detest that with every fiber of my being.
3. I knew once it started it would never stop until untold suffering would have us end it or the Iraqis would just stop out of exhaustion or exasperation..
4. Unfortunately I know how human nature works and unfortunately as long as the majority of folks do not suffer the consequences of war...they won't care. People pay lip service about compassion but they rarely do what is necessary...look at the Katrina debacle..it is in our backyard and most people don't give a shit...the Iraq war is overseas and out of sight and out of mind for most...hell more people know about that stupid TV show Lost than they do about the war.

I feel awful for the families and the soldiers, I continue to denounce the war and march...but the war is still raging and the cynic in me knows why...

[Mandate My Ass]

13. They don't have an unlimited supply but a draft would give them that

Vietnam would have ended a lot sooner without a draft, and without the disgraceful loss of life.

[bleedingheart]

17. yes they do...as long as there are kids without any future or hope

as long as there are people have no options...they have their supply...

[originalpckelly]

18. You don't care about these people or you would flippantly...

call for 100,000 casualties. You just lost all respect from myself, and hopefully anyone else who cares about the people you just want to kill.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

36. you arguments remind me of General McClellan during the Civil War

he seemed to have shared your viewpoint and did not want to make the difficult decisions of sending troops into tough battles. In hindsight, had he committed troops earlier in the war, the Union would very likely have womped the Rebels. But McClellan hesitated. He didn't pursue. He hemmed and hawed. A few soldiers would die at this battle, a few at this other one.

Drip, drip, drip...

By the end of the war, there were some 120,000 casualties KIA, and another 200K+ who died from other causes, and that was just the Union side. Had McClellan risked large casualties earlier in the war, overall, less soldiers very likely would have died by the end of it.

If we are in Iraq for another 5-10 years (who knows?) we may see the same thing all over again.

Also, the draft resolution will never, ever pass, so this entire thread is really a moot point. If it somehow does pass, you can bet that we will pull out of Iraq much faster, and as a result LESS troops will die.

So I think you should dim your criticism of your fellow DUers a bit. We all want the same thing and there are no easy answers.

[Mandate My Ass]

39. This "war" was illegal from the get-go

so all this strategizing about how to "win" it by throwing more bodies into it sooner rather than later, is not germane IMHO. We attacked under false pretenses of what turned out to be a non-existent threat and are occupying against the will of the Iraqis.

Not one more drop of blood should spill in order to end this.

[Mandate My Ass]

19. They don't even have enough for the "surge"

I'm sorry that financially disadvantaged people feel that is their only option, but giving them more cannon fodder is insane when Bush is salivating to attack Iran and Syria. It would be a bloodbath that goes on for decades and Vietnam would pale in comparison.

I can't wish that much death and destruction in the hopes it will be politically disadvantageous for this administration.

[bleedingheart]

27. the problem is that people have bills to pay and as long as

there is debt, lack of opportunity...and the low end jobs are bid out to those who will work for less...there will be cannon fodder...

I hate war...I hate it...but the more i read...the more I see...the more I realize what a disaster we are headed for...and I know it is going to take monumental sacrifice to end this freaking nightmare.

In no way do I relish this or think it is good...it saddens me so much I can't stand it...I think of my own family and those of friends who are making sacrifices and those who have lost loved ones...and it pains me...but in spite of the election ...I have not seen anything that shows me this war will be brought to an end...

not yet...but I do have some hope left ...

[Mandate My Ass]

29. If Congress does it's job, no more monumental sacrifices will be

necessary. If they hold hearings on the Downing Street Memoes and cherry picking intelligence, their case for war falls apart and so does the minimal public support they enjoy right now.

Here's hoping that's the case and not a draft, because unlike the 60's, their sacrifices will be ignored in the press, not acknowledged for the tragedies they are.

[bleedingheart]

33. Let us talk about the press...there is an area where we the people

could make a difference...but yet I haven't seen it done...

Why can't we organize people to boycott cable news...cancel subscriptions to services, papers, magazines in protest of the pathetic coverage?

But yet i don't know if people can sacrifice seeing the newest episodes of Rome in order to send a message.

People pay as much or in excess of $1500 a year for cable...and they get spoon fed corporate pablum on any news channel...while the rest of the programming is 95% garbage.

For all the "embedded" reporters...I have yet to see anything that really brings that war home for anyone...

I do pray that Congress will do its job...I really hope so...but if they don't...what will be the next step?

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bleedingheart]

37. apparently you are unable to discern from my posts

that I basically think that the public sentiment...even if it is changing...has not yet reached a point where this war is ending any time soon.

I would like to be proven wrong...but yet I don't think people in this country really view that number of 3000 very seriously..

And before you start cursing at me...I am not the one playing politics with people's lives. I am merely stating that people in this country will not see this war end until the suffering is really "in their face" and it may take tens of thousands of deaths to do that...and while I would hate to have that happen I find that our fellow citizens are not all that politically involved and the majority don't care about anything but themselves...

[originalpckelly]

40. You cannot protect someone's life by killing them.

[Pithlet]

47. Yep. Dead is dead.

Whether by the neo-cons or by some misguided idiocy from some on the left side of the isle. I'm not letting anyone have my babies just to prove a point. Fuck no. I'm not into gambling with other people's lives.

[Warpy]

20. We've GOT bloodshed

Why do you want a madman who lusts after more of it to get his wish? Whose kids are you willing to sacrifice? My guess is that your own are either a future dream or a distant past.

NO DRAFT. There is a reason we fought so hard to end it.

More blood from our kids and their population is not going to change a damned thing. Only by continuing to clip the PNAC's wings will we be able to end this horror show known as their foreign policy.

[Lost4words]

9. I agree with your post!

[janx]

26. And you think that rich kids would be drafted, and poor kids

wouldn't be?

Are you kidding? If a draft were reinstated, the poor kids and middle-class kids (those who aren't already in the military who are working hard for a living) would be the first to go. Only they would not go voluntarily.

[HughBeaumont]

48. Actually, what's even far better than that, and what no one seems to be discussing . . .

. . . is to kicked our fucked up addiction to militarism, say no to wasteful tax draining wars, stop asking our military to be the world's goddamned cop and start giving the people with no options opportunities to rebuild our outdated infrastructure, build affordable housing, work with the poor and start doing more for THIS country rather than go and ruin others.

[tabasco]

14. College deferments. They won't have them next time.

Check the selective service website if you don't believe me.

No outs for the rich. They do it in Germany, we can do it here.

My German gf's parents are rich but both of her brothers had to serve their hitch.

[janx]

30. A compulsory service in a military is far different from

a mandatory draft in a time of war. There's a huge difference.

Also, you are making the assumption in your post that all (if not most) college kids are rich. That is far from true.

[tabasco]

57. College deferments were the deferment of choice for rich kids during Vietnam.

Nowhere did I say that all college students are rich. Your logic is flawed.

[Lasher]

15. Reinstating the draft to end a war is like having sex to promote virginity

The Vietnam war lasted 15 years and 57,690 Americans were killed. If having the draft promoted an end to that conflict I hope we can find find a more expedient remedy for the nightmare in Iraq.

[zbdent]

21. If Repukes' kids actually were forced to fight for this country

(instead of enlisting in the 101st fighting keyboardists), the Iraq war would never have started ...

[Beelzebud]

22. Pro Draft? Call it what it is - Pro-Escalation

Thats all a draft would be.

Instead of having 3000 dead, we'd end up with 30,000 dead.

It makes me fucking angry that any democrat could honestly be for a fucking draft....

Pathetic...

[Rosemary2205]

24. I want a draft with no deferments.

Until the public and the congress get enough pressure on the admin to stop getting people killed for no reason then yes, soldiers will continue to die. Bush is going to kill soldiers anyway. The only thing that will change is WHO dies, not how many. As soon as you start getting rich white christian kids murdered or maimed the support for endless war will dry up and the congress will do exactly what they did for vietnam, dry up the funding.

[originalpckelly]

25. Tell that to the 58,209.

They disagree with you. Their war was based on lies too. There were protests. They still died.

[Rosemary2205]

28. Tell me

how has NOT having a draft stopped the 3000 dead now in Iraq and how does HAVING a draft get us more dead than we'd get otherwise in the future.

My own brothers didn't die in Cambodia because of a draft, they died becuase America didn't see fit to fight back against a bad policy until that many guys were dead. The draft isn't the PROBLEM, electing a POS is the problem.

[MH1]

34. Good point. The question is, WHOSE names will be on the wall. n/t

[originalpckelly]

42. No, it's about how many people will be on the wall.

If you want to give poor children an opportunity to go to college, start a scholarship fund or donate to one. If you can't do that because you don't have the money, then work to get other people to donate.

You don't realize, that not only will be rich kids be sent, poor kids and middle class kids will be as well.

I have no problem with someone who's rich and anti-war not serving, because they are not asking another person to make a sacrifice for them, when they themselves are unwilling to sacrifice.

The idea behind criticizing GW Bush and most of the neo-cons for their lack of military service, or lack of service in a war, is that they are hypocrites. It's not just because they were rich, it's because they support war. If GW Bush had never served, and at the same time was a Democrat and an anti-war leader, I'd have no problem with that. Again, that's because he wouldn't be asking others to die in his place.

The draft would sweep up people who both support the war and don't support the war. A poor kid who demonstrates at every anti-war rally could find himself in Iraq. He could die.

What you're saying here is that you want to take away someone's choice, in order to give them one. You want to force not only the poor kid, but all other kids to fight. That's even worse than having a choice to join-up or not.

You're taking away opportunity, not giving it.

Not only that, but you want to give the neo-cons more people to kill.

How is this any better than the current situation?

[MH1]

45. How better? It's more fair.

With a national service requirement, there will be plenty of non-military options.

I believe - and I'll admit I don't have any backup, just my knowledge of people - many people, when faced with the requirement to do something for their country for two years, will choose military because they like the idea.

Also, you should still have a conscientous objector provision. One of my brothers started that process during Vietnam and probably would have been approved for it, but the draft ended before it mattered for him. (I don't really know the details - maybe he did get a decision on it, but I know he was never worried about having to go.)

Under truly horrible circumstances, you will probably still need some sort of lottery to fill the military ranks adequately. It sucks but that's the way it is. I don't think an accident of birth - being born into a situation without any other good options - should doom one to the military as a way out. If doomed by chance along with others who had happier accidents of birth, so be it.

That chance of it happening to those of more privileged birth, will create some motivation for staying out of horrible circumstances. Clearly it isn't enough, though, but I still think it will make some difference.

I don't think universal service is perfect, but I do think that people should have to put some time in for their country in one way or another, as a down payment on the benefits of citizenship.

But let's be clear on two points:

1 - I have ALWAYS (that is, ever since I understood about it, over 2 decades now) been for universal service. The current state of U.S. military mis-adventures is irrelevant to my opinion on the subject.

2 - I have served myself in the regular U.S. Army (7 years, plus 1 National Guard).

Finally, the situation in Iraq is simple: we effed up by going in, we effed up in handling the post-invasion from a tactical sense, even if you get past the immorality of invading in the first place; and we are not doing any net good by continuing the occupation. (it is important to note that there are undoubtedly individual cases where our troops ARE doing good, and it is wrong to totally ignore that - but the good acts are outweighed by the impossibility of the task). We need to start pulling troops out of Iraq NOW. Then, rebuild our military AND our public service corps by instating a universal service program.

[sniffa]

43. the dead can taLk?

hoLy smokes!

[Lucky Luciano]

32. It is likely that a draft would end the war before the first

draftees got sent over. All hell would break loose in this country with this already unpopular war were a draft to be reinstated. Almost none of the draftees would show up and the legitimacy of the government would be seriously questioned unless (via protests that the M$M could not possibly ignore) the war is halted.

The reason the M$M can ignore the protests is because you do not see 100K per week at various locations. It should be weekly. Not quarterly.

[TahitiNut]

41. Who made you 'Speaker For The Dead'?

Those are my brothers on the wall, one of whom is a distant cousin who bears my name, and even I don't exploit their deaths to push a personal opinion. If there's anything that's detestible about the discussions of the draft, it's the lines people cross in pushing their agenda. I've assiduously, I believe, adhered to ethics-based advocacy for national service, only to meet with baseless claims, egregious insults, and ridiculous hyperbole.

There's very little question that the 'anti-national-service' consitituency is in the majority, not only on DU but nationally. It's highly unlikely that we'd have an equitable national service policy in the current political climate. As an advocate for universal national service (and, lacking that, equitable national service) I have niether the illusions nor desire to force such policies upon the majority. Nonetheless, I regard civil discussion essential.

[sniffa]

44. ...

:applause:

[MH1]

46. I'll second sniffa's

:applause:

[TahitiNut]

50. Thank you both.

About 80% of the guys in my unit in Nam (at USARV HQ, Long Binh) were draftees, mostly college grads. (We also had a couple of the activated National Guardsmen. Man, did that make news.) To say we discussed the draft would be an enormous understatement. By far, the overwhelming majority objected to the INEQUITY of the draft, NOT the draft itself. Male-only, deferments, privilege and elitism were merely some of the criticisms ... but the draft itself was regarded as essential in a democracy. That's why, imho, the draft was changed in the early 70s to a lottery-based system with very few deferments. It was an enormous improvement. Now, all that'd be needed is gender-neutrality in the draft. I still prefer a universal national service policy, but an equitable draft is better than what we have. Far better.

[Pithlet]

52. I think pointing out to the pro-drafters exactly what they're advocating

is exactly on point. I think the OP is right on. Anyone who actively supports and successfully institutes a draft, no matter their intentions, needs to be reminded what happens to people who are drafted. If my kids are drafted and killed, I will point my finger at anyone who had anything to do with that draft, and I don't care what side of the isle they're on politically. I'm not talking the people who are backing Charlie Rangel, who's pointing out the hypocrisy of the Right. I'm talking people who actually wish to see a real draft instituted. Whatever it takes to get people to see how crazy that is, I'm all for.

[TahitiNut]

55. Presuming to TELL people what they advocate is the epitome of the strawman fallacy.

What makes you imply that 'volunteers' are more deserving of death and dismemberment due to our national failures than We The People who permitted it to happen?

Absolutely nobody is more opposed to this illegal invasion and occupation of sovereign nations that posed no imminent threat to us than I am. At the same time, the total and complete annihilation of a democracy that shares the fruits, both sweet and sour, of our national policies is a far, far worse calamity.

More than 2/3rds of those who served in WW2 were draftees! Believe me, the fascists (both then and NOW!) would like nothing more than to pander to the dilettantes who say "Not me! Not mine!"

Eventually, conscription WILL happen. Better it happens with equity when it'll motivate an nascent OPPOSTION to fascism than it happens with a restoration of the inequities of privilege and elitism in service to global fascism/corporatism. It was the deactivation of the draft that facilitated the rise of our neoconservative/fascist plutocracy! Considering the rhetoric, even on DU, it may be too late to avoid an even deeper plunge into fascism. I hope not.

[Pithlet]

56. If you actually do want to see a draft implemented

Then I don't have to presume anything. How is opposing your position that a draft is ideal any kind of fallacy? No one gets me, my kids, or anyone against their will, without a fight from me. Pointing out that dead is dead whether the person who supported the actions leading to their death was on the left or the right is not a fallacy.

I want to add that I have two family members who volunteered and just came back from Iraq. I also have loved ones who've fought in past wars who were drafted. Don't presume to think that I feel it makes any difference as far as their value or what they've contributed. I want to see this war end. Seriously pushing for a draft at a time when a warmonger is President is insanity. Pushing for one when there isn't makes no sense.

[KingFlorez]

49. Draft or no draft, they died in a pointless war

Same as Iraq. It's not about supporting a draft, it's about having a debate that makes the people who would never serve, but support war have to defend their actions.

[Totallybushed]

51. An excellent point, which

many here overlook.

The war won't magically disappear with a draft. It's not like the rich and powerful's kids will be caught up in it, anyway. They'll just have that many more troops for their evil enterprises.

Charlie Rangel's heart is in the right place, but his head is up his ass, and that's no lie.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

53. Are the proponents of the draft enlisting themselves?

I don't see how they're different than any other chickenhawk.

[Pithlet]

54. Good question, but I don't care either way.

My kid is just as dead whether by a chickenhawk or a misguided fool.

[Lilith Velkor]

58. No, they "already served," just like the RW chickenhawks

Dead is dead, parts is parts, and a chickenhawk is a fucking chickenhawk.