rumsfeld denies draft is needed

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, May 2, 2005.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    link

     
  2. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #2
    Of course he denies it. The second the draft starts, the Republicans lose - which they're now starting to do already, finally.

    Also, they haven't yet found the cash to pay for all they equipment they need for the troops they already have. Drafting in new soldiers would put the Pentagon budget above $600 billion easily, and the budget just can't take any more strain. At least, not without going back-to pre-Bush tax levels. (gasp!)

    Tax cuts and war! Woohoo!

    Personally, I like the theory put forth by Heinlein. The country votes to go to war. Only those of eligable age and health to fight may vote. If the vote passes, everyone who voted yes is automatically conscripted. Everyone who *didn't* vote gets the next round of conscriptions. I think that'd keep us out of trouble pretty well. What do you guys think?
     
  3. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #3
    I must say, I'm tired of hearing after every time the insurgency ratchets up another notch that it's a sign of desperation on their part bandied about day after day by this administration.
     
  4. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #4
    i'd say the normandy invasion was an act of desperation, too.
     
  5. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #5
    I think international disputes should be settled by single combat.
     
  6. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #6
    Bush shooting himself?
     
  7. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    I wouldn't.
     
  9. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #9
    This would be worthwhile if we were in an era of Nation Vs. Nation conflict. Really, we're in an era of Jyhadi Vs. New Crusader conflict.

    Perhaps a policy of The King Must Lead The Charge?

    I still think the best possible defense strategy is inducting Silicon Valley companies as defense contractors and turning out cheap, durable, solar charging cell phones with built in cameras and web service. We then send tremendous humanitarian aid to the nastiest parts of the world... including millions of these phones.We send the CIA to put up high-altitude derigible "floating cell towers" and provide free network access to these areas. Nothing quite like access to get a little perspective on the world around you. Plug 'em in, turn 'em on and drop the zealots' supplies of inductees.

    There's even evidence to support a Rand Co. recommendation to follow this strategy. If you dig into Lockheed's website a bit you'll find brief snippits about just those sorts of blimps.
     

Share This Page