A few times it’s been posted on the Board that Democrats suggested the draft as a scare tactic. I wonder if someone has a cite for that because the news quoted the Republicans (who supposedly initiated this) as saying something to the effect of “every American should share in the burden…”.
I know, I know…you’ll want a cite for that, but I can’t link to the radio! (And, this is my thread, afterall! ) The radio station carries ABC news, though. IIRC, I believe it was Reps from ND that were pushing the issue.
Anyhow, I’d be curious to see a cite linking the Democrats to the suggestion of a draft. Hopefully, the source one finds does not have its roots in such reliable sources as the Onion or some Rush Limbaugh quote. - Jinx
And don’t forget that Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-South Carolina, who sponsored the draft bill in the Senate. He is mentioned towards the bottom of the article Fear Itself linked to.
Well, it certainly was used as a scare tactic in the sense that prominent Democrats, like Howard Dean, were telling people that if Bush was elected he was likely to institute the draft. This editorial was published in major newspapers in Sept.
Wow you have been posting fast and furious this week trying to throw crap at conservatives. This and some other things you have posted lately have been just wrong and easily verifiable. Your name never made an impression with me until this week. Now I think of you as being widely inaccurate and desperate. Its a shame because you made some good points as well. Maybe its time to step away from the board for a week, relax and come back swinging.
Welp, the election is over now, and we can cease with all the partisan smokescreening and start with partisan discussions. However, I’ve never been much for smokescreening, anyway. I sincerely believed that we’ll be facing a draft for sure over Iraq by next summer if Bush got in, and that we’d probably see one if Kerry won. We will certainly see a draft next year, and it will be Congressional Republicans who propose the legislation.
Congratulations, Bush voters of 2000 and 2004: you’ve helped to create a whole new generation of veterans whose service to their country future Bushes running for office will be able to smear.
What? You are the one who came up with the link to CNN. Probably in about 10 seconds. The implication in the OP was that the only link between Democrats and the draft could be found on The Onion and Rush Limbaugh. Of course that is not true as you proved with your link. The OP could have found this out pretty quick too. No I don’t consider The Onion or Rush Limbaugh to be reliable sources. In fact neither are primary sources at all. Both take information and comment on it, one for humor and the other to further his own agenda. Is that clear enough?
Sorry, I must have misunderstood why you bolded the part about Rush and The Onion. I thought that was the thrust of your argument. My bad.
On second review, I think you missed the sarcasm in OP. He was referrring to the propensity of some posters to rely on questionable cites, and used the word “reliable” sarcastically. Or so I inferred.
Oh heard the sarcasm. I took it to mean he expected it to be a lie and that it could only verified with unreliable cites. In this case it was easily verifiable and the Rangel/Hollings legislation was pretty well covered in the mainstream media. I saw Chuck talking about it several times on TV.
But in the event that you don’t want to back it up with him (I don’t think he’s good for it, actually; I hear he’s getting fired soon) I’ll gladly take that bet.
A wager? Frankly, no. I’m not much of a gambler. I’d be more interested in how you think Bush will handle Iraq without a draft. Who can accurately predict the facts, I feel, is secondary to what’s important. We Americans need to remember how to disagree.
So: what option for Iraq does Bush have, apart from the draft? Inquiring minds want to know.
I think I read somewhere that Rangel voted against his own draft bill.
I think it’s fair to assume that the Democrats did this as a scare tactic… hoping that the people most affected by the draft, youngsters, would assume that it was the Republicans who brought this up.
Though it is underhanded, it was somewhat effective. There’s no fighting clean in politics.
Iraq doesn’t need a draft. We’ve lost less than 2000 soldiers in the less than 2 years we’ve been there. It’s important to make comparisons to other military conflicts like Vietnam… here there’s no North Iraq still operational, no U.S. president micromanaging the battles, no USSR and China backing our opponents (though Iran is), no large loss of American soldiers, and (so far) no ten-year war.
I honestly don’t think this “war” will garner more than twice the amount of space in the history books than the “Kosovo War”. We’ll have to wait and see, though.
I am a 21 year old, reasonably healthy male, without any good political connections or much money, and I don’t fear a draft in the slightest. The US lost 4 times as many men during the 3 years it took to (mostly) pacify the Philliphines than we have lost so far in conquering & occupying Iraq, and no draft was needed then, even with the US Army being much smaller then. I think a 100 years from now, the Iraqi war will be mostly a footnote the the War On Terror/Radical Islam(which is going to take a long time), much like the occupation of the Phillipines is mostly a footnote to the Spanish-American war that proceded it.
I think that any shortfalls in manpower in Iraq could easily be made for my moving in troops from areas were they don’t need to be any more. Since we no longer fear the Russians storming across the Fulda gap, there are lots of soldiers sitting around in Germany that could be restationed, for example.
I think so, too. It was no secret that it was a scare tactic. Rangel openly adimtted that on talk shows several times. Politicians do that kind of stuff all the time, but this was silly. It had no chance of getting any support at all.
Muddle along as he’s doing now, and get out when he can.
But it doesn’t matter. Even if Bush WANTED to get the draft going, Congress wouldn’t do it. If the Pubs voted in the draft, you’d see the Congres turn Democrat in '06 faster than you can say soccer mom.
Stay the course. Despite what the media hystericals want you to believe, it is not bloody mayhem in the streets every day in Iraq. It’s a persistant insurgancy, centered in a few specific cities. For a more accurate read on the situation, I suggest reading a selection of the dozens of blogs being written by soldiers in Iraq or by Iraqis themselves. Not operating under the “if it bleeds it leads” mentality of the press, they write about their everyday lives … 90% of which is quite mundane.
The steps are simple: Get an elected government in place; doesn’t matter so much who it is so long as it’s not a fundamentalist. Let them develop a police and military, and let them deal with rebellion. US forces slowly withdraw, remaining mostly to train, to equip, to provide close air support and to handle the occasional tough job. But it’s ultimately up to the Iraqis to make their country a success, and it will be their military that has to wipe up the rebellions.
A year ago, more troops would have helped; and those who were saying a year ago that we needed them were (IMO) right. But more US soldiers are not the long-term answer, and that was then and this is now. We’ve managed to make our way to the next phase in the plan; or more accurately, we will after the battle in Fallujah is over, and the new government is sworn in in January.
If by 2006 (when troops drafted in 2005 would start becoming availible) the Iraqi government is only staying in power because of massive numbers of US draftees, then we’ve likely already lost.
Bush has waited too long to exercise the draft solution. Say by magic, congress approves a draft tomorrow – it would be about next November many draftees could arrive in Iraq.
But next spring and early summer , large numbers of troops now in Iraq will either have to be replaced(by some combination of NG units and redeployments from places like Japan and S. Koren) or their terms will have to be extended. All of these things will reduce support for the Iraq matter and the draft as well.
The other option is to reduce the number now there significantly. It’s even beyond Karl Rove’s political wizardry to conjure up support for a draft if the need for troops declines.
) The radio station carries ABC news, though. IIRC, I believe it was Reps from ND that were pushing the issue.