Here's something to chew on.

[The Underlord]

US Preparing for Military Draft in Spring 2005

by Adam Stutz • Wednesday January 28, 2004 at 09:50 AM

 

The current agenda of the US federal government is to reinstate the draft in order to staff up for a protracted war on "terrorism." Pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills S 89 and HR 163) would time the program so the draft could begin at early as Spring 2005 -- conveniently just after the 2004 presidential election!

 

Reinstatement of the draft

 

Dear Friends and Family,

 

I urge you to read the article below on the current agenda of the federal government to reinstate the draft in order to staff up for a protracted war on "terrorism."

 

Pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills S 89 and HR 163) would time the program so the draft could begin at early as Spring 2005 -- conveniently just after the 2004 presidential election! But the administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed NOW, so our action is needed immediately. Details and links follow.

 

If voters who currently support U.S. aggression abroad were confronted with the possibility that their own children or grandchildren might not have a say about whether to fight, many of these same voters might have a change of mind. (Not that it should make a difference, but this plan would among other things eliminate higher education as a shelter and would not exclude women -- and Canada is no longer an option.)

 

Please send this on to all the parents and teachers you know, and all the aunts and uncles, grandparents, godparents.... And let your children know -- it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change! Please also write to your representatives to ask them why they aren't telling their cons!@#$%^&*uents about these bills -- and write to newspapers and other media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important story.

 

The Draft*

 

$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. SSS must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website: http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the SSS Annual Performance Plan - Fiscal Year 2004.

 

The Pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of Congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

 

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and H.R. 163 forward this year, en!@#$%^&*led the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the Committee on Armed Services.

 

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era remember. College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and the US signed a "Smart Border Declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs, John Manley, and US Homeland Security Director, Gov. Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their cur-rent semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

 

*This article by Adam Stutz is from the "What's Hot Off the Press" column of the newsletter of Project Censored, a media research group at Sonoma State University that tracks the news published in independent journals and newsletters. From these, Project Censored compiles an annual list (more than 20 years running) of 25 news stories of social significance that have been overlooked, under-reported, or self-censored by the country's major national news media. The mission of Project Censored is "to educate people about the role of independent journalism in a democratic society and to tell The News That Didn't Make the News and why."

 

"What's Hot Off the Press" includes student synopses of articles currently being investigated for inclusion in the next Project Censored report. For more info and/or to receive Project Censored's newsletter, go to http://www.projectcensored.org, or email [censored]@sonoma.edu

 

 

Don't beleive it yet? Go to http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislati...lative_home.htm and search for "S 89", then later search for "HR 163" where it says "By Number" and you'll find the articles

 

 

Here's a chunk of it:

 

Section 7 !@#$%^&*led: INDUCTION EXEMPTIONS. Reads as follows:

"(a) QUALIFICATIONS-No person may be inducted for military service under this Act unless the person is acceptable to the Secretary concerned for training and meets the same health and physical qualifications applicable under section 505 of !@#$%^&*le 10, United States Code, to persons seeking original enlistment in a regular component of the Armed Forces.

 

( OTHER MILITARY SERVICE-No person shall be liable for induction under this Act who--

(1) is serving, or has served honorably for at lesat six months, in any component of uniformed on active duty; or

(2) is or becomes a cadet or midshipman at the United States Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, the United States Air Force Academy, the Coast Guard Academy, the United States

 

Merchant Marine Academy, a midshipman of a Navy accredited State maritime academy, a member of the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps, or the naval aviation college program, so long as that person satisfactorily continues in and complete two years training therein."

 

This means that there are NO exceptions to YOU being drafted unless you have a physical or mental disability that is discussed in section 505 of !@#$%^&*le 10 of the United States Code.

WOMEN AND MEN WILL BE DRAFTED. COLLEGE STUDENTS WILL BE DRAFTED. GLBT PEOPLE WILL BE DRAFTED.

 

Section 8 !@#$%^&*led CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION. reads as follows:

 

"(a) CLAIMS AS CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR-Any person selected under this Act for induction into the uniformed services who claims, because of religious training and belief (as defined in section 6(j) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. 456(j))), exemption from combatant training included as part of that military service and whose claim is sustained under such procedures as the President may prescribe, shall, when inducted, participate in military service that does not inclue any combatant training component.

 

( TRANSFER TO CIVILIAN SERVICE-Any such person whose claim is sustained may, at the discretion of the President, be transferred to a national service program for performance of such person's national service obligation under the Act."

 

"This means that any C.O. (Conscientious Objector) will STILL BE DRAFTED. And will have duties that aren't combatant. Which means that I (as a C.O....it is against my religious beliefs to kill, or attempt to kill, another person), if drafted, could still be shipped off to Iraq and do something like working a radio on the front lines telling the people who are shooting where to shoot. Yeah. " -Someone

[SVS]

Erm, I was aware that those bills were dorment in Congress.

 

There was limited media coverage regarding this a few months back, you do not see the media blitz you would expect from it because they are still dorment and I doubt anyone sees it as a threat.

 

I highly doubt a Draft like this would go through, it vastly resembles the type of setups communist countries employ. So unless you think our populace is wanting to embrace the ways of the Peoples Republic of China I am sure it will get shot down.

[Aileron]

Well, it is reflective however on the situation. The War on Terror is not a choice, there is really no option the US can take but to end terrorism. Note that I don't mean all terrorism. The minimum the US can do is end anti-US terrorism. However, most likely we will need to end all anti-western or anti-first-world terrorism.

 

Also, its not some quickie conflict. This war will probably take decades and span over several countries.

 

The only other choice the US has is to accept civilian causualties, as some foreigners suggest. The problem with this is first off that it is the primary responsability of governments to protect their populations, and this responsablity should under no cir-*BAD WORD*-stances be cast aside. Secondly, if the US loses 2000 people every time a McDonalds moves into a third world neighborhood, we will run our of people very quickly.

 

 

Thus, I can't argue against a draft if it happens. We have no choice.

[MonteZuma]

Bah. Your logic is flawed. You assume that the only way to fight terrorism is with soldiers.

 

'Foreigners' don't suggest that you accept civilian casualties. In fact civilian casualties are one of the reasons why people reject the US' method for tackling this problem.

 

There would be less civilian casualties if the war on terror was more strategic and involved less soldiers.

 

Monte.

[Yupa]

http://www.sss.gov/IMAGES/Tpublicat04.jpg

http://www.sss.gov/IMAGES/Tpublicat08.jpg

http://www.sss.gov/IMAGES/Tpublicat12.jpg

 

...BAHHAHAHA OMFG GOVERNMENT WEBSITES ARE SO TREMENDOUSLY GAY!

[Dav]

the middle east isreal terrorism can be fixed bt isreail withdrawing completely from gaza and the west bank and hading it over to the palistinians, as thay have been told to by the un for many years.

[Yupa]

for another thread, Dav, but just a small comment...

 

terrorism in the middle east can be fixed if both sides just STOPPED and the whole place had one representative democracy

[Aileron]

Bah.  Your logic is flawed.  You assume that the only way to fight terrorism is with soldiers.

 

'Foreigners' don't suggest that you accept civilian casualties.  In fact civilian casualties are one of the reasons why people reject the US' method for tackling this problem.

 

There would be less civilian casualties if the war on terror was more strategic and involved less soldiers.

 

Monte.

A meant American civilian casualties. I've met some people (okay, a single liberal beyond liberals who probably never had a job in his life.) who think America should just forgive terrorist actions, which would be in my opinion a fundimental breach of the social contract. No country should forgive any act of terrorism that exceeds double digit casualties, although retaliation should not always be applied in such cases.

 

 

 

Back to the more important point, I will agree that you can't just bomb terrorism into oblivian. That is because the causes of terrorism are based in deeper more cultural beliefs.

 

What we need to do is change part of the Middle Eastern cultural beliefs. That can be done by bombing them into oblivian.

[Bacchus]

I promised myself not to answer those threads anymore...

 

But this...:

 

think America should just forgive terrorist actions, which would be in my opinion a fundimental breach of the social contract. No country should forgive any act of terrorism that exceeds double digit casualties, although retaliation should not always be applied in such cases.

 

 

 

Back to the more important point, I will agree that you can't just bomb terrorism into oblivian. That is because the causes of terrorism are based in deeper more cultural beliefs.

 

What we need to do is change part of the Middle Eastern cultural beliefs. That can be done by bombing them into oblivian.

is RIDICULOUS.

 

double digits casualties....pfft, you're a joke ail. How about 200 000 k casualties in iraq alone mate? How about the -*BAD WORD*-ing bomb? How about Kissinger? Pinochet? How about "american" economy being forced in every -*BAD WORD*-ing country US has interests in it?

 

 

Social Contract?

 

What we need to do is change part of the Middle Eastern cultural beliefs. That can be done by bombing them into oblivian.

 

this isn't even funny, it's despicable. and it's "oblivion" btw...

 

You don't know nothing about social contracts, you can't even begin to ask yourself why those people have so much hatred toward US that they are willing to suicide themselves to make a point.

 

ok, i'm done. cya.

[Dav]

for another thread, Dav, but just a small comment...

 

terrorism in the middle east can be fixed if both sides just STOPPED and the whole place had one representative democracy

Well it is for this topic, they say lets stop all terrorism but they convenianly ignore israil and the palistinians. The simple reason is israil are a fault and the us makes alot of money selling them millatary hardware.

[»nintendo64]

The way to know if your country endorse freedom and fights for its freedom, it's to examine and analyze your country actions. Never your oponent's

 

-nintendo64

[Aileron]

I promised myself not to answer those threads anymore...

 

But this...:

 

double digits casualties....pfft, you're a joke ail.  How about 200 000 k casualties in iraq alone mate?  How about the -*BAD WORD*-ing bomb?  How about Kissinger? Pinochet?  How about "american" economy being forced in every -*BAD WORD*-ing country US has interests in it?

 

 

Social Contract?

Well, the victim countries shouldn't just forgive the US either. You keep putting words in my mouth, !@#$%^&*uming what my opinion is. I don't know why I am discussing this with you. You hardly read what I post, and respond to what you think that I think.

 

The social contract goes way back to Thomas Aquinas. He wrote a theory on government that all people have a natural right to Life, Liberty, and Property. The purpose of government is to protect those rights. Since then, this theory has been expanded upon, but this is the core of it.

 

Governments have a duty to protect the life of their citizens. Thus, terroristic acts shouldn't be interpreted as a sign of bad policy, but should be viewed as an act which warrants retaliation.

 

By all means, Iraq shouldn't just forgive the US either. We violated some of their natural rights. If we are just, these violations are for a greater moral good, but that shouldn't help much from the Iraqi point of view. They should retaliate until it their actions don't help anymore. The only reason they should stop is that that point has been reached months ago.

 

 

 

As for that last point, you are completely wrong about that. By and large, our actions are in Latin America. Latin Americans have to most reason to hate the US, Europeans in fact hate the US the most, and its the Middle Easterns who are bombing the US. Why would a Middle Eastern want to die for a European's hatred over an action that occured in Latin America? In order for your theory to work, one of these groups should be carrying all three, or all groups should be equally.

 

It is really a part of the beliefs terrorists have. They don't hate the things they bomb; they bomb the things they hate. Hatred is secondary to getting themselves blown up for Allah. Yes, if the US was nicer to people, maybe we could get them to stop bombing us. Most likey though, terrorists will just find someone else to hate and suicide bomb them.