Thread: REINSTATE DRAFT

has anyone else heard of them reinstating the draft?

H.R.393
Title: To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the favorable treatment afforded combat pay under the earned income tax credit, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/10/2007) Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 2/26/2007 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.

ALL ACTIONS:
1/10/2007:
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
1/10/2007:
Referred to House Armed Services
2/26/2007:
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
1/10/2007:
Referred to House Ways and Means

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legisl ... ws_current

I have heard Rangel on talk shows mentioning reinstating the draft. His view is that it would level the playing field i.e., rich kids would then go rather than the less fortunate, as he puts it. I doubt this will go anywhere, at least lets hope there isn't a "reason" for it. He proposed this bill some time ago by the way.

Thanks I hadn't heard anything about it!!

I ALWAYS HATE IT WHEN THEY ADD "AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES" IT MAKES ME DISTRUST THE ENTIRE BILL. BUT YES I HAVE HEARD THAT THEY WANT TO DO THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE HAVING HARD TIMES RECRUITING.

I also have heard about low recruitment numbers.

I worry about Bush and Iran! I don't trust the man at all!

Rep. Rangel's argument was not because of low numbers but that now as it stands most people entering the military are the poor and the minorities. That is what he says and feels the rich guys need to go too. However yes I have also heard that recruitment is very low.

I firmly believe ALL young people, 18 to 26 years of age, should have to give one or two years of their lives in community service to America. Hopefully this would enable them to have greater respect for our freedom and instill patriotism in them.

Originally Posted by pjr40

I firmly believe ALL young people, 18 to 26 years of age, should have to give one or two years of their lives in community service to America. Hopefully this would enable them to have greater respect for our freedom and instill patriotism in them.

I agree with that community service is always good!!

wolfbaby wrote:

I also have heard about low recruitment numbers.

Everyone but the Army is making their monthly goal. The Army has missed goal during the last two months, however, they're currently on track to make their annual goal.

Personally, I don't think the bill will ever reach the House floor. Furthermore, I don't support the draft. We currently have the finest military in the world and I'd hate to see it degraded by forcing people in that absolutely don't want in. How dedicated and loyal are people when forced into a position that they have no desire to be in? An all volunteer force is what made our military what it is today. Trust me, our country doesn't want to face the headaches that come with a draft.

Drafted citizens could be forced to kill and die despite moral and political objections to war. Fifty-three percent of Americans believe that the current war in Iraq is not justified, according to a CBS poll conducted in April (www.cbsnews.com). The poll reveals that over half of the drafted soldiers could be questioning exactly what they are fighting for.

A draft would not solve the problems America is facing right now; it would only divert American efforts from truly resolving the conflict in Iraq. The nation should not repeat the mistakes of the Vietnam War, escalating conflict and expending human lives; instead we should learn from the past, and seek out alternatives to a draft. Increasing compensation for service would be the place to start in my opinion.

Now, in spite of everything I've said - there are situations that would absolutely necessitate a draft. For example, if were forced into a war with China or North Korea, assuming the Iraq conflict was still going on, I don't see how we could avoid a draft. Two separate theatres of operation would require huge resources, including more manpower than we currently have available.

For the record, I served in the United States Navy for over 20 years.