Sound Politics Public Blog: Senior Democrat wants to reinstitute the draft!

November 19, 2006

Senior Democrat wants to reinstitute the draft!

Fox news is reporting that Congressman Rangel is planning on introducing legislation that will reinstitute the draft.

WASHINGTON -- A senior House Democrat said Sunday he will introduce legislation to reinstate the military draft, asserting that current troop levels are insufficient to sustain possible challenges against Iran, North Korea and Iraq.

There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," said Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.

So I guess this is the new Democrat plan for dealing with the war on terror. I would love to hear how the anti-war nuts feel about their beloved Democrats wanting to reinstate the draft.

Posted by TrueSoldier at November 19, 2006 11:47 AM | Email This

Comments

1. As one who has been in the forces(Viet Nam) and retired for wounds, no draft. I do not want slaves serving next to me. There will be all the exceptions in the world for the rich but not for the rest. If we need a draft, tell your childern, Mr Rangle, to serve four years in the Forces.
Mike H.

Posted by: Mike Harmon on November 19, 2006 01:02 PM

2. Sorry for misspelling Mr. Rangel's name.

Posted by: Mike Harmon on November 19, 2006 01:05 PM

3. This was circulated in Small Government News,
http://www.centerforsmallgovernment.com

Milton Friedman, Thank You for Helping to End the Draft

The Chicago Tribune tells this story about Milton Friedman:

When Nixon appointed Friedman to a panel examining whether to abolish the draft, Friedman found himself at odds with Gen. William Westmoreland, the Army chief of staff and former Vietnam commander.

At one point, Westmoreland declared that he did not want to command an army of "mercenaries."

"I stopped him and said, 'General, would you rather command an army of slaves?' Friedman later recalled. "He drew himself up and said, 'I don't like to hear our patriotic draftees referred to as slaves.' I replied, 'I don't like to hear our patriotic volunteers referred to as mercenaries.'"

- Milton Friedman, 1912-2006 R.I.P.

Posted by: DraftThis on November 19, 2006 02:29 PM

4. He thinks if there's a draft, they can re-create the whole Vietnam protest thing, as Michael Medved mentions. As the Vietnam protests were less about the war and much more about kids not wanting to go, period.

We are much better off all around with people who volunteer to serve.

Posted by: Misty on November 19, 2006 04:14 PM

5. Watching the Democrats in their early actions like this, I am glad they will be in charge for the next few years. They will in those two years propose a Draft, Massive Tax increases, Gun elimination, a massive Goverment health insurance boondoggle, just to name a few..

Hillary will even have to step in to these Libs because even she knows they will blow their chances by the 2008 election.

Queen Christine and her court will plow a 9% income tax into the state

Gotta love this.....it's more fun than saturday night live....

Posted by: GS on November 19, 2006 07:52 PM

6. If Gregoire gives us a 9% state income tax, you will see so many democrats thrown out of the legislature SO fast, your head will spin. The Queen will be kicked to the curb right after them. The republicans who replace them will only be too happy to repeal such an increase.

Posted by: Misty on November 19, 2006 09:26 PM

7. Canada had a similar problem with the draft in WWII. The French (need I say more) protested vociferously about being drafted to free the (you guessed) French.

The Canadian military solved the problem by having draftees serve in support roles and had volunteers as front line troops (most of whom by the way were regarded as elite fighting units in their time).

SO I say to Mr. Rangel - Fine have your draft, but keep the draftees in Germany, South Korea, the Mexican Border, etc. - anywhere but where the real fighting is going on. If any draftee volunteers to fight allow the extra training and send them up too.

Posted by: deadwood on November 19, 2006 10:52 PM

8. I do not believe it will stop at a draft, but rather an entire model of national service for both genders. This will orient the masses to accepting the "government" way of doing things and exposing them to "the system".

Service could include time in the education system as assistants. Perhaps working government nursing facilities or other health care oriented positions. Just think of all of the jobs they could throw the youth of America into for national service. While allowing illegal aliens to "fill in" the labor short fall in the private sector in jobs that Americans won't do. Hmmm maybe we should press illegal aliens into national service for a couple of years.

Posted by: Smokie on November 20, 2006 07:42 AM

9. The wisdom of Americans on the whole never ceases to amaze me. The corrective action of the Madisonian design is near perfect. After six years of screaming tantrums and hatred, and constant passenger seat criticism from the left, what the American electorate has effectively said is, "OK, if your so good behind the wheel, show us that you can do better."

And of course, they can't. Watching the disaster that will be the 110th Congress is going to be quite entertaining and enlightening.

Posted by: Jeff B. on November 20, 2006 10:13 AM

10. I thought they were going to "Bring all the Troops home from Iraq"

So Why would they need a draft?

Did they sell the American people a bill of goods?

with no package to deliver it in I presume..

Posted by: GS on November 20, 2006 10:35 PM

11. There won't be a draft. If the purpose was to bring additional people in - to increase the size of our military - the Dems won't want to spend the money because it's money they would rather spend (not save) elsewhere.

Using Charlie's reasoning, why don't we force Congress to have to abide by ALL the laws they pass for us? After all, if they had to suffer as we do under some of these laws, then maybe they would put more thought into passing better laws - or even avoiding some legislation altogether....

Posted by: SouthernRoots on November 21, 2006 04:38 PM

12. This is just the beginning.

Rangel's original bill was to draft everyone between the ages of 19 and 42.

Obviously, this is not just to fill in the military, but rather, to make sure that the government has control over everyone's life.

They will start small, but gradually expand until everyone is under control.

I don't think the Smart Borders Agreement with Canada, and the fence with Mexico are designed to keep cheap labor out.

Posted by: Margaret Bartley on November 22, 2006 03:38 PM

13. There are those within the right and left who support re-instating the draft.
Disgusting.
Here's what Reagan said about the draft:
Conscription "... rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state. If we buy that assumption then it is for the state - not the parents, the community, the religious institutions, or teachers - to decide who shall have what values and who shall do what work, when, where and how in our society. That assumption isn't a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea." Ronald Reagan 1979, Human Events Magazine

The lack of a draft is another check and balance on the power of government. And if there is ever a war that we must fight in order to survive, and we can not find enough Americans who are brave enough to volunteer, then we don't deserve our liberty anymore anyway.
War is the health of the state.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 24, 2006 05:11 PM