Draft Rumors

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Neserk, Jun 7, 2004.

  1. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #1
    Anyone else hear this?

    TPTB are considering raising the age of the draft to 35 so they can include Computer Geeks in their draft for technological reasons?

    I searched news sources, and couldn't find it. But I "heard" it :rolleyes:
     
  2. screener macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    #2
    You gotta give up the coffee, you seem to be posting all the time. No one can keep up so you're starting to make things up.
    Not A good sign.
     
  3. dopefiend macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    #3
  4. screener macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    #4
    Sorry, but that just sounded so unbelievable.
    Should make the gung ho types happy, ya think?
     
  5. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #5
    anyone know anything about this congress.org effort, especially who funds it?
     
  6. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #7
    saw it, but it doesn't really say who they are (e.g. resumes to go w/ those names) or who sponsors it. until i know that stuff, i'm skeptical about any articles they put out.
     
  7. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #8
    Well, It seems Congress.org, while an interesting concept, allows anyone a forum to put forward their views...the problem is, I can't find out who the source of the article is...although the way it was phrased it coudn't hurt to keep an eye open...looking around I found another article about the same bills:
    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=5965616&content_dir=ua_congressorg
    http:which was written in a *ahem* much different style, with slightly different conclusions *ahem*
    there is also this link:
    //www.infowars.com/
    for your enjoyment...

    looks like we got a mystery gang...

    *edit* I didn't find any info regarding Neserks' initial post BTW...seems to cap at 26...
     
  8. Neserk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #9
  9. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #10
    Don't start packing yet, boys. This thing comes up on a regular basis, with these same fine folks trying to drum up the draft again.

    Here's why it won't happen.

    A rehashing of the draft won't go through without the support of the Congressional Black Caucus. The Congressional Black Caucus will NOT support a new draft policy unless it is adjusted to ensure that poor minorities are not disproportionately drafted. This would require removing the protection clause granted to college students.

    Do you think anyone is going to support such a proposal, especially when a congressman's most influential constituents are those who have families of college-going individuals.

    This hurts the top of the socioeconomic pyramid too much to ever come to bear.
     
  10. Neserk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #11

    The article states that college students will only be allowed to finish their current semester and seniors would be allowed to graduate. No way out for the rich ones. Although with student loans and grants *anyone* can be college student.
     
  11. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #12
    Yeah, my point is that that's not a popular compromise. I wouldn't worry about it passing.
     
  12. Neserk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #13

    For me, I'm not. They wouldn't take me, ever :D I'm too crazy for the military.
     
  13. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #14
    I would just make a convincing argument of how I'm a national treasure that cannot be risked...

    We fight wars for the protection of people like me.

    :D ;) :cool: :) :D ;) :cool: :)
     
  14. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #15
    excellent points madchemist...perhaps you are worth saving after all... :rolleyes:

    I do wonder what the US is going to do, assuming a long-term occupation...can they keep our soldiers out there indefinitely?...is there a precedent for this, that didn't involve a draft-scenario? If there are plans to take on the larger Muslim world, we are going to lose...there is many more of "them" then there are of "us"...ok, too depressing, I'll take this up again tomorrow... :(
     
  15. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #16
    I think the government is wondering what it's going to do, as well. Nobody thought about the long endgame that this war would require. Bush went in talking about how America is not in the business of nation-building. I guess he realized after he destroyed Iraq that unless he wanted it to become another Afghanistan, where lawlessness ruled and terrorist bigwigs could take advantage of an impoverished population. At least under Saddam the people were so oppressed that their anger and concern could be directed toward internal affairs.

    So now we have to fix the country. And that's not going to be easy. We also have to fix Afghanistan and that's an almost impossible challenge. Both countries need something of the following, but with Afghanistan in a more severe situation. First,they need roads, running water, and electricity. Then, they an efficient, effective, and fair means to 1) enforce the law, 2) collect taxes. Then they need strong, representative central governments that can either bring the tribes together or hold them in check. These govts. should also have pretty decent constitutions and mechanisms for widespread voting (shouldn't be that hard, actually, compared to the rest of it).

    Also important to the welfare of the people...Industrialization would help, which can only be accomplished after the creation of a stable infrastructure. At the very least, more service industry stuff. Then a few factories and whatnot. This could go hand in hand with building a power/road/water grid. If companies move their factories in (b/c of low wages), then they will help build the grids for those areas.

    Then these countries need education systems K-12. I think they have a couple of universities; those need better funding. It may be that parochial schools are the best option for these countries, although I'm not sure. If one goes parochial, it would be much easier to get wealthy Muslims around the world to donate money to help start the process. However, that's a drop in the bucket. A tax collection system is what's going to make it happen.

    Now I don't know how Afghanistan should deal with the opium, which I think is the drug of abundance there. One side of me believes that it promotes the sort of underground economy that funds insurgencies, revolutions, and terrorism. In that sense, it would be bad for the nation's stability not to crack down on it. On the other hand, legalizing it would allow it be regulated, which would make it more difficult to create a strong black market opium trade. Because premium products like these could be subject to high taxes, this would increase revenue.

    It seems that drugs aren't as much a problem of consumption as they are a product of export. Therefore, the United States and Europe will try to make these drugs illegal because they want heroin to be sold to their youngsters. This is a problem because I was going to suggest high export taxes (b/c the end user would likely be willing to pay), but since import into the other country is illegal, it would still have to go underground.

    Note, I'm looking at this purely from the perspective of bolstering the Afghan economy. Heroin is a vile drug that should be eliminated entirely. I want to be a doctor and thus I'm obviously very much against any use of such damaging substances.
     
  16. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #17
    First of all, Neserk, this is for you...

    madchemist, I was strictly referring to military deployment, although it if course goes hand-in-hand with what you were referencing...
    After looking at some numbers, I can't see there being a draft implemented unless the US opens another front in their WOT, or alternately, if the current front(s) expand...we have about 160K in Iraq now and even if we rotated them out completely and raised troop levels fairly modestly, we would probably still come up with a total figure under or about 500K...at the most, this might necessitate a limited draft scenario.

    To put things in perspective, in Vietnam there were 1.766 million drafted during the duration of the war, and over 10 million in WWII (from Veteran Affairs)...also, based on the 1990 census, there are approx. 34 million Americans (male and female) aged 18-26. If you take into account the raising of the cap on ages to 34, the number jumps to 67 million.
    So I wouldn't put on your worry cap just yet...but if there is another huge domestic terrorist attack, and we invade another patsy country...then that's a whole 'nother ball-game...
     
  17. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #18
    Go to Congress' website and enter S89 or HR163 on the page to look up the various bills that have been proposed.

    S89 is the Universal National Service Act of 2003, introduced by Mr. Hollings (Democrat).

    HR163 is the Universal National Service Act of 2003, introduced by Mr. Rangel (Democrat), Mr. McDermott (Democrat), Mr Conyers (Democrat), Mr Lewis of Georgia (Democrat), Mr Stark (Democrat), Mr. Abercrombie (Democrat).

    Sure sounds like a pair of partisan bills to me.
     
  18. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #19
    Don't you want to be called Captain Neserk? Where you end up having your company taken away from you and you end up leading a squad of men in order to bring Private Ryan back home because his brothers were killed in action earlier? We can then all guess as to what you used to do before the war, and when the pot gets to $1000 (adjusted for inflation) we can split it. :p
     

Share This Page