Becuase Everything Else Sucks

Top Democrat Wants to Reinstate the Draft

By Manila Ryce
Published Monday, November 20th, 2006, 8:00 am
Filed under: World: Asia, War, World Issues, Society/Culture, US Politics

Yesterday, Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel called for a reinstatement of the draft as a way to boost US troop levels and draw a broader section of the country into public service. The lawmaker said he would introduce the legislation as soon as Congress convenes in January. When asked if he was serious about the proposal for a universal draft, Rangel said, “You bet your life. Underscore serious.”

Rangel opposed the invasion of Iraq, and said he did not think the US would have invaded if the children of members of Congress were sent to fight. This legislation is a possible form of protest on Rangel’s behalf, as he also introduced legislation to reinstate the draft in January 2003 before the invasion.

“If we’re going to challenge Iran, and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can’t do that without a draft,” he said. Though nationwide disapproval of the Iraq War led to a Democratic takeover of Congress, the White House and most Republican congressmen are still unwilling to commit to a redeployment of US troops. Congressman Rangel has called it hypocritical to “support the war and not support the draft”.

All males living in the United States, including most male non-citizens, are required to register with the Selective Service when they reach 18 years of age. Federal benefits, including financial aid for college studies, are dependent on registration. Democratically-sponsored or not, if this draft legislation passes, the Largest Minority may soon be based out of Canada.

source

Related Posts

2 Responses to “Top Democrat Wants to Reinstate the Draft”

  1. Go die stupid man! You can be the first and the last drafted!

    Melissa
    11/20/06 at 9:31 am

  2. I think we can file this under “No Shit.” The Neo Cons have been flapping on about “no draft” and “volunteer army” for the last 5 years, yet during that time they have been pushing further and further forward with their militarized foreign policy. You don’t have to be head cashier at the Walmart to be able to do the math on this one.
    Believing that a nation, even if it is the most powerful nation in the world, can sustain one invasion after another with an ever shrinking enlistment is the same as believing the people being invaded would “greet us as Liberators” and succumb to “shock and awe.”
    Sadly, with the numbers of troops and the condition of the equipment provided for the initial invasion, those ridiculous notions were literally the necessary conditions for victory. Glad to see that worked out, aren’t you?
    I’ve been against the Iraq war from the start, but still I don’t advocate just pulling out. I don’t believe that a country can just invade another, destablize the entire region, and just leave without cleaning up the mess. And if the government came up with a plan like that, to fix the disaster it caused, while ceasing its current foreign policy, that is perpetual invasion of oil rich countries under the false pretenses of “fighting terror” or “stopping nuclear proliferation,” then I would actually support the draft. Anyone think that’s what they actually have in mind? Yeah, me neither.

    PapaFigue
    11/20/06 at 8:34 pm

Leave a Reply

Tired of filing this information out everytime you leave a comment at the Largest Minority? Why not register as a user? You also get full access to our forum!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>