http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff10202004.html
I haven’t done anything but what you see. It just came across my desk and I posted it here. Haven’t researched a damn thing yet. I just thought y’all might be interested. Maybe you’ve already seen it. I had not.
From Defense Secretary Rumsfeld:
I can understand if people are skeptical of this. However, keep in mind that any draft would need to be approved by Congress, and the draft (except for national emergencies) remains unpopular.
Bottom line is, I don’t expect a draft. If there ever is one, I’ll be pretty busy, since I’m on the local Selective Service board. I don’t expect this, and this position will continue to be a very easy form of community service.
Of course having wounded soilders not have access to immediate medical care would also be wildley unpopular, as would pulling out of Iraq without leaving some pretense of a stable gov’t. It’s not impossible that the gov’t may have to choose from amonst unpopular options in the near future, and the pentagon, sensing this, is making preperations.
The story is cited and discussed in this thread:
The draft IS coming. You heard it hear first. While there are innocent explanations for the plan, it is one more suspicious bit of information. When you hear the president say that he has “no plans on his desk” to institute a draft, that’s when it’ll be time to start looking up your Canadian relatives.
of course I wouldn’t believe Rumsfeld if he said summers are hot in Texas.
That doesn’t (to me) make the story true or not. I am not saying I believe it either way. Not yet.
So where did this story originate. It supposedly came out today. I’d heard the scuttlebutt about a possible military draft and believed that to be out of the question at this time. A regular draft not as Kerry implied a “back door draft”.
This is something altogether different IMHO. A “NON-combatant” draft. Having doctors and nurses from civilian health services drafted as medics. I know medical staff has been drafted before but I’ve never even thought about a draft that was solely for the purpose of obtaining medical staff.
I realize this may be absolute bullshit. I don’t have enough information to say one way or the other. What Rumsfeld says though is worthless (IMHO) as well, make up your own analogy.
I’ll be checking into it a bit more. It wouldn’t surprise me though. Nothing does much anymore.
The only person talking about a draft these days is Kerry-- using it as a scare tactic. I’ve lost a lot of respect for him since he added this to his stump speech.
Actually that thread (the OP) is about a military draft to acquire troops. I saw where you made mention of the contingency plan to draft medical staff but it was way late in the thread and was more of a hijack than the main subject. I appreciate the fact that YOU did actually make mention of it in the thread but to say it was discussed is a bit more than I’d probably admit to.
You said “no plans on HIS desk”, well you nailed that. There aren’t any plans on his desk according to the article I cited. They are on the pentagon’s desk and are destined for congress next. Then they’ll probably be on his desk BUT not before the election I’d wager.
this is of course>IF AT ALL…because I still can’t verify a damned thing. I’m just saying is all.
John Mace you are correct of course. There’s no way in hell anyone from the Bush campaigne is going to start talking about a possible draft at this point. Even if it were true. BUT again this idea of drafting doctors and nurses and NOT soldiers might actually fly.
Hope springs eternal, but it gives some people a hardon.
I notice complaints from people who expected to be all done with the military life being called back into duty. I wouldn’t br surprised if standards for enlistment slowly become easy and inducements may be offered that are unconscionably withdrawn or narrowly defined to the detriment of the enlistee(e.g. promises not to be sent to Iraq). After all, GWB may actually take after his [Read my lips. “No new taxes”] father.
:eek: :eek: 
Does anybody really expect Congress to pass a draft?
Really? It would be political suicide for any congressman who votes for it.
'Case anyone’s interested, here’s the New York Times article referred to by the blogger. (Registration may be required; sorry 'bout that.) Take it for what it’s worth.
There seems to be a difference between “the draft” and selective service according to Rumsfeld. Maybe it is just my interpretation of how he uses the words which makes me suspicious.
Okay…this is the link to the FULL transcript of Rumsfeld interview this morning.
This is a example of one of his answers.
This is in response to whether or not there is need for a draft. He basically said there was no need for a draft because congress has a selective service available which is NOT a draft.
His definition of a draft versus selective service is much like Bill Clinton’s definition of sex and a blow job. They are not the same.
That was the jest of the first article that I linked. The way it is presented. If the people thought that we were ONLY going to use the selective service to fill a few medical positions for our injured troops. I’d say YES the people would go for it. The people would say to congress, “Our boys need medical attention and if you have to force doctors to go, then do it.”
This is the same guy who said we knew “exactly” where all those Iraqi WMDs are hidden, right? :dubious:
Well, there is a Selective Service System, which I’m a small part of. It does the work of drafting people if there is a deaft, but doesn’t draft people if there is no draft.
In the interim, it handles Selective Service registration of young men, as a preparedness issue.
The Selective Service System has been in place since 1948, and registration for the draft has been going on for well over twenty years.
So yes, there is a difference between the two terms, related as they are.
Wouldn’t it just be easier to pay really well and get medical personnel as civilians? There is enough of a crunch already in the medical field, especially for nurses, that I think drafting medics would be very unpopular.
Really? And if there is an imminent threat (real or made up) which the military can’t handle because it is bogged down in Iraq, what then? Sure, there will be no draft if everything works out perfectly, but the first unexpected challenge, and boom.
Why doesn’t Bush want to add two new divisions? That would reduce the chances of a problem, right?
I keep hearing that Kerry has a plan to add two divisions, and I’ve never gotten a good explanation of how they are going to recruit two more divisions. It’s a volunteer military, after all; if people don’t want to join up then the plan of adding two divisions doesn’t meant squat.
Some signifcant change relative to Iraq delopments will have to take place around June next year if not before . We will have to lower troops considerably or extend units for a second or third year. That’s the crunch point in time.
A draft won’t help-- it would be nearly a year before important numbers of draftees could be inducted, trained and deployed.
I don’t know what the dollar values might be.
I think the implication was that if it can be justified to send medical personnel to Iraq…it could later be justified that other selected personnel might also be sent.
Get the old foot in the door, you know or would that be slippery slope? Anyway it may all be crapola…I’m just interpreting an article which may be based on rumors anyway. I haven’t been on the computer all afternoon and as such haven’t had a chance to verify anything.
Sure you’re right, but that isn’t exactly how Rumsfeld is explaning it. It sounds like to me he is saying the “draft” is an all inclusive event where we require everyone of age to go. As opposed to a “selective” service whereby congress can actually recruit specific personnel to fill a military need. Definitely not “the draft” as is generally described.
This is how I interpreted his comments. It sounds like a political statement that could be used to cover somebody’s ass later.
ie: the press: “Mr. Rumsfeld, you said that there wasn’t going to be a draft.”
his response: “Well, technically this isn’t a draft, congress decided with the public’s consent to have only specific/selected personnel provide their services to assist our troops. They need all the support we can provide. Especially in the medical field, we can’t have soldiers dying because they had to wait for a medic.”
:this of course is followed by applause:
Kinda like how a police action technically isn’t a war. 
What makes you think our troops won’t still be there? When asked how long he thought the troops might stay. He flat out said he didn’t have a clue. When asked if he thought it might be TEN YEARS. He didn’t say NO. Yeah, a draft would come…excuse me selective service if we had to require assistance to be sent to the Middle East it would definitely help. Even if they DO leave Iraq, what makes you think they’ll come home and not go somewhere else…like maybe back to Afghanistan, or some other evil country?
I do believe we’ll still have large number of troops come June–it’s today’s level and the number of unit rotations then I was commenting on.
It’s my opinion the Iraq matter is close to crossing the point of no return regarding public opinion. If things aren’t better by June, the public will demand(and Congress will response) to lower troop levels. And if things do get better, the public will demand(and Congress will response) to lower troop levels, as fewer military will be needed.
You might be right the draft could be reinstated in the next few years. I just don’t think Iraq will be the cause.