Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Man Injured By Tree Limb Files Suit Against City
Charles Barron Will Run For Council Speaker
Alleged Tiger Mistress Is Unrecognizable To Dead Fiancee's Dad
New Jersey State Senate To Vote On Gay Marriage
Congressman Charles Rangel is in the news again, but this time he's not upsetting Southern states - he's scaring the bejesus out of young Americans! He told CBS's Face the Nation that he will will propose legislation to bring back the draft. Why? Because it might act as a war-deterrent, as well as fulfill the need for more troops.
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. 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.Additionally, when speaking to Baruch College, Congressman Rangel said, "If the country's in danger, everyone should share in the sacrifice."
Naturally, there is little support for bringing back the draft, though many agree that U.S. policy in Iraq has been unsuccessful. Rangel would be introducing the legislation in January, but even if it passed the House, it would need to be passed by the Senate and approved by President Bush.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I think that Rangel's heart is in the right place and he's right in the sense that the children of the wealthy and powerful aren't fighting this war (for the most part), but won't those offspring find a way out of it? Witness how Bush went AWOL during Vietnam and never suffered any consequences.
I think Rangel is realistic; he doesn't expect this legislation to come close to passing. It's a political statement, meant to demonstrate how important the decision to go to war should be.
This is the most asinine idea I've seen a congressman have in a long time. And that is saying a lot considering what we've been dealing with.
Is he out of his mind?!? Even if he is doing it for the right reasons the draft in this country shouldn't even be joked about. Look at the disaster Vietnam was. It destroyed an entire generation of American men. Obviously something like WW3 would be an extenuation circumstance, but bringing back the draft because of a self-adopted "policeman of the world" policy and as a pool of talent to fight frivolous ego driven wars would be reprehensible. This is exactly the kind of thing that shouldn't even be brought to the table because if for some unknown reason it backfires it's going to be average Americans who are going to pay the price. Just wrong wrong move and something like this could catch a lot of innocent people.
Charlie Rangle really needs to shut his hole on this and stop trying to use the draft as a way to teach George Bush a lesson. He's not the one who's going to have to go to war in the end.
He's been talking about this since January 2003. I think he's right, in a way. If the hawks want to invade Iran and N. Korea, there is no way to do it without a draft. Our volunteer Army is stretched thin and exhausted and our allies don't really trust us under the Bush Administration. It's a Catch-22 that only leads to the draft... or more bluster from the White House.
Rangel is an asshole who should be tarred & feathered, then ridden outta NY on a rail.
If GW Bush was willing to go to war with limited troops just IMAGINE the crap he would pull if he had an UNENDING supply of young people to send-off to fight for Halliburton, which is exactly what the draft would provide him with.
BELIEVE THIS-
It's gonna happen and you heard it here first...
In the future,
As an 18yr old American, you will be asked one question:
Where will you serve?
You will have many options between The US Military(war on terror, ie: occupation of conquered lands, which will in time re-focus efforts to building that pipeline across the Middle East) The Department of Homeland Security (securing airports, seaports, public transit) and AmeriCorps (addressing domestic concerns), Peace Corps (concerns abroad):
1. Active Military Service
2. Reserve Military
3. Faith based service
4. Service to US Urban Communities (in education, healthcare, finance, youth, employment, etc)
5. Service to US Rural Communities (in education, healthcare, finance, youth, employment, etc)
6. Global service
SOME FORM OF THIS WILL PASS. JUST WATCH.
The only 'draft' Rangel should be talking about is the windy breeze that's blowin' thru his empty head.
ARRRRRRRMMMMMMMYY TRAAAAAINING.
Don't matter, draft or no draft, they'll get what they usually get. NO rich kids and a bunch of Hillbillies. (no offense meant by that)
Haven't you guys seen Stripes?
Anyway, hope third times a charm. And By the way, did you or your son register with Selective Service?
"...the draft in this country shouldn't even be joked about."
I don't think he's joking. While it won't matter since it will never go to a vote: This country was mainly for invading Iraq when there was no Draft.
Would people have been so willing if it was there Sons and Daughters on the line?
Anyone that believes the US plans to invade Iran or North Korea is smoking crack.
Oh really? and you know this How?
I happen to know there was one time when we were on alert and ready to go. Ask anybody who served on active duty.
not gonna happen, I think you're missing the point.. no one said it would... but the people who your leader listens to want it to happen...
This country seems to have a legacy in forcing its young to clean up after its old. It's true with global warming, and it's true with even the suggestion of this measure. Why not send all the baby boomers over to fight? We seem to have an excess of them, and it's not like they're going to be hired anywhere else. Why should the young have to pay for their mistakes and bad decisions?
Whether or not this is likely should be irrelevant. The country has shown in these past weeks that it's capable of banding together to change things - we need to stop this asshole and his moronic ideas in his tracks by whatever means necessary - protest, letters, anything.
Let's hope he gets embroiled in some kind of awful scandal and has to resign in disgrace.
What's with all these posts calling Rangel an "asshole"?
dumb krackas. cowards can't even handle a simple 3 year enlistment.
Rangle's on the right track, but rather than sending 18 year olds let's send everyone over 50. Frankly the Boomers could use a good thinning of the herd.
As if on cue - here comes Rangel to prove that its not just Republicans who come out with ridiculous and asinine ideas.
Anyone who thinks for one second that the children of the privliledged, rich, connected and/or powerful would ever end up serving even with a draft is absolutely ridiculous. But instead of making the politicians "think" (there's a contradiction in terms) about sending troops to battle it will just give them scores more unvoluntary troops to fight ever more unpopular wars.
It took us 20 years to get rid of the draft and this putz wants to bring it right on back. For the name of equality. Isn't that nice...
Um, yeah, did anyone bother to read "g"s comment? If you missed it, here it is again:
I think Rangel is realistic; he doesn't expect this legislation to come close to passing. It's a political statement, meant to demonstrate how important the decision to go to war should be.
Reading is fun!
"Oh really? and you know this How?
I happen to know there was one time when we were on alert and ready to go. Ask anybody who served on active duty.
[12] Posted by: 1990 minus six | November 20, 2006 3:22 PM "
You probably believed everything you 1SG told you.
We are never going to invade North Korea or Iran without a massive build up beforehand. Maybe you were being told, "being ready to re-act" to Iranian or NK attacks-unless of course you served in Korea in 1950.
I'm betting you never served.
This is sad, Rangel hates the military. He hasn't proposed anything to improve the military, he often votes against spending for important militay programs. Drafting people to serve in the military will lower the quality of the personnel in the service. That's why it's volunteer-that's why most nations (even the Russians) are abandoning conscription and why the US military is the world's best.
Rah rah, Max. We're #1!
He doesn't hate the military. If you're reading that into it, then your reading comprehension isn't good. I suggest you go and read "Guy's" comment reiterating what "g" said. There was no real conversation in this country about what it really meant to go to war, which was declared on us in 1998. We've been physically at war since 2003, dropping bombs on people. We didn't think before we went in Iraq. We listened to a President who really would not have a SERIOUS conversation with we nebulous "American people." Sorry, can't do that then you are comtemplating taking your military somewhere where they could die. It was all, "they hate us for our freedom, heh heh." Yea, they might, but we've done a lot of fucking shit to them, too.
As far as I can see, we made the wrong move in 2003 and are now reaping that 'benefit.' Yet there are more comments in the thread regarding Michael Richards than about a draft. (Of course, this isn't a political blog, understood. I'm not saying that Richards isn't an important topic, I'm saying this forced conversation that Rangel is pushing is one of the only ways (right or wrong) to get people in this country to think for themselves, and be involved. And we should have done it a few years ago.
What else is going to do that except for snapping people out of whatever new trend they are into for the moment? This certainly got the attention of at least four or five people.
Ugh. People are dying by the thousands in Iraq. I'm not advocating sending more troops. I'm advocating (as Rangel is) that we need to get up off the crapper and start being involved in what's going on.
Sorry, end of rant.
A review of "Assholes in History" Vol. I.;
Samuel Colt, "This invention of mine will DISSUADE mankind from wanting to wage war, once they see it's destructive power! It will help make peace!"
Alfred Nobel, "This invention of mine will DISSUADE mankind from wanting to wage war once they see it's destructive power! It will help make peace!"
Manhattan Project Guys, "This invention of ours will DISSUADE mankind from wanting to wage war once they see it's destructive power! It will help make peace!"
Rangel, "This invention of mine (bringing back the draft) will DISSUADE GW Bush from wanting to wage war once he sees it's destructive power! It will help make peace!"
I guess the draftees during world war 2 were sub-standard according to Max. I bet you never served and is one of those .mil geeks and your toy models of the panzer. We all know your nerd type.
It's better than doing nothing. GW's doing a lot of "dissauding peace," and look how much it's done. Booyah.
To all the people calling Rangel an "asshole":
How are draftees' lives worth more than volunteers? Draft or no, Bush is the one who's sending people to die in war. The draft-or-no-draft argument is semantics, because real people are still dying, regardless of how they entered the military in the first place.
And, just for arguments sake, many major countries require ALL men to serve in the military. We're lucky we have a choice.
"To all the people calling Rangel an "asshole":
How are draftees' lives worth more than volunteers?"
I'll tell you. Draftees are more valuable than volunteers because draftees have the God-given common sense to AVOID signing over their lives and destinies in order to fulfil the criminal aspirations of personal vengeance by our currently residing Asshole-in-Chief. They understand the stupidity of this so-called 'war on terror' in the wrong place and against the wrong people and refuse to be a part of it.
Volunteers on the other hand don't have the sense that God gave asparagus and naively swallow all the bullshit they're fed by their owners. They question nothing and even if they did they couldn't handle the answers anyway. Besides, they oftentimes sign up just for the college money and/or to 'learn a skill'.
Yeah, Murder 101.
Next question....
"How are draftees' lives worth more than volunteers?"
Draftees and their families make up a much larger voting block.
"Volunteers on the other hand don't have the sense that God gave asparagus and naively swallow all the bullshit they're fed by their owners."
Are you so linear that you think all people in the military joined up because they are delighted to be cannon fodder and fight the "war on terror"? I know several people (including my father) who joined the military at a young age because it was the best option available to them. I am not implying that nobody chooses to be in the military or that it's an uninformed choice, but I think that construing it as an unfettered choice ignores the fact that this is a war that's being fought by this country's working and lower classes.
Draftees' lives are not more valuable than volunteers' lives. However, servicepeople's deaths in Iraq would be a hell of a lot less abstract to this country's upper class if its sons and daughters were among the casualties. I suspect the administration's willingness to send troops would have been a bit more tempered if their children were at risk of heading to Fallujah or Baghdad.
While extremely anti-war myself, I'd like to point out that there are still countries in existence that have mandatory military service. Quite a few actually.
One with which you might be familiar, and whose military is universally recognized as well-trained, is Israel.
I don't think a draft is a bad thing. At least it's fair (on paper).
The idea is just silly. Drafting personel into service and expecting them to have a fervor for a fight same as a man or woman who has consciencely choosen to inlist is plain silly. Draftee's will be bitter to the hand who has forced them to leave the lives they have begun to build...inturn i think you have a lesser solider. The long term result will mirror our vietnen vets. We only need one of those in the history of this country.
Nothing good can come of this...Rangel should think be fore he speaks on national television.