Rep Rangel introduces Draft Bill (for Iran?!):

Rep Rangel introduces Draft Bill (for Iran?!):

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=53409

On 29 May 2006 15:14:30 -0700, wrote:

Rep Rangel introduces Draft Bill (for Iran?!):

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=53409

Rangel has done this before--about three years ago. At that time the
bill went nowhere until just before the presidential election at which
time it was defeated something like 425 to 5. Rangel didn't vote for
his own bill.

If you won't "cowerfromthetruth" you should note that Rangel is a
Democrat, exceptionally liberal (bordering on socialist), from a
heavily minority district in Detroit and adamantly against the
administration. A draft bill is totally ludicrous. Conscripts don't
have the retainability or the necessary skills for the configuration
of the current US military establishment. If you've watched operations
recently you might have noted that we no longer depend upon massed
forces marching in lock-step across the plains of Waterloo.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

Ed Rasimus wrote:

On 29 May 2006 15:14:30 -0700, wrote:


Rep Rangel introduces Draft Bill (for Iran?!):

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=53409


Rangel has done this before--about three years ago. At that time the
bill went nowhere until just before the presidential election at which
time it was defeated something like 425 to 5. Rangel didn't vote for
his own bill.

If you won't "cowerfromthetruth" you should note that Rangel is a
Democrat, exceptionally liberal (bordering on socialist), from a
heavily minority district in Detroit and adamantly against the
administration. A draft bill is totally ludicrous. Conscripts don't
have the retainability or the necessary skills for the configuration
of the current US military establishment. If you've watched operations
recently you might have noted that we no longer depend upon massed
forces marching in lock-step across the plains of Waterloo.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

Ed, Rep. Charlie Rangel actually represents New York's 15th
Congressional district. The district covers Upper Manhattan and parts
of the Bronx. The district also includes Rikers Island, make of that
what you will.

ALV

Ed Rasimus wrote:

A draft bill is totally ludicrous. Conscripts don't
have the retainability or the necessary skills for the configuration
of the current US military establishment. If you've watched operations
recently you might have noted that we no longer depend upon massed
forces marching in lock-step across the plains of Waterloo.

Who says conscription has to be non-selective?

There's already something of a seperate draft for medical personel.

If a general draft were implemented again, why could it not be set up
to cherry pick only those with the skills / general education /
maturity the military thinks they can work with.

IMHO a draft is a bad idea because getting into situation that would
require it are bad ideas.

But I don't see why one could not be workable, if it were designed
around the same personel needs that the military is currently
struggling to find voluneteer applications for.

wrote in
oups.com:

Ed Rasimus wrote:

A draft bill is totally ludicrous. Conscripts don't
have the retainability or the necessary skills for the configuration
of the current US military establishment. If you've watched operations
recently you might have noted that we no longer depend upon massed
forces marching in lock-step across the plains of Waterloo.

Who says conscription has to be non-selective?

There's already something of a seperate draft for medical personel.

Huh? Please explain. There are no draftees in service.

If a general draft were implemented again, why could it not be set up
to cherry pick only those with the skills / general education /
maturity the military thinks they can work with.

We don't have any need for a levee en masse on the scale of WWII
or even Korea. Nor has the decision been made to fight any
potential Iran operation with conscripts per Vietnam.

IMHO a draft is a bad idea because getting into situation that would
require it are bad ideas.

Sometimes its not our call.

But I don't see why one could not be workable, if it were designed
around the same personel needs that the military is currently
struggling to find voluneteer applications for.

I say draft lawyers first. We'll all be the better for it.

IBM

Ian MacLure wrote:
wrote in

Who says conscription has to be non-selective?

There's already something of a seperate draft for medical personel.

Huh? Please explain. There are no draftees in service.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. There is already the
structure of a seperate, targeted program in existence, but it has not
been "turned on".

"The Health Care Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS) is a standby plan
developed for the Selective Service System at the request of Congress.
If needed it would be used to draft health care personnel in a crisis.
It is designed to be implemented in connection with a national
mobilization in an emergency, and then only if Congress and the
President approve the plan and pass and sign legislation to enact it."

The point is not that it's not active, but that the idea of having a
targeted draft program has already been developed. If it can be done
for one job need, it can be done for another.

If a general draft were implemented again, why could it not be set up
to cherry pick only those with the skills / general education /
maturity the military thinks they can work with.

We don't have any need for a levee en masse on the scale of WWII
or even Korea.

The phrase "cherry pick" implies going through a large pool of
candidates to find the small fraction who have what you need. In
short, don't lower the standards for enlistment, but actually raise
them a lot, then virtually march everyone through the recruiting office
and keep the phone numbers of the small fraction who meet your
standards.

Everyone assumes a draftee army would be composed of high school
dropouts, but there's no reason the process could not be structured to
produce a smaller army composed exclusively of scholar athletes, or
whoever the generals think would be the best recruits.

IMHO a draft is a bad idea because getting into situation that would
require it are bad ideas.

Sometimes its not our call.

Perhaps, but the current administation is not exactly known for
creative thinking when it comes to seeking alternatives.

In article .com,
wrote:

Ian MacLure wrote:
wrote in

Who says conscription has to be non-selective?

There's already something of a seperate draft for medical personel.

Huh? Please explain. There are no draftees in service.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. There is already the
structure of a seperate, targeted program in existence, but it has not
been "turned on".

"The Health Care Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS) is a standby plan
developed for the Selective Service System at the request of Congress.
If needed it would be used to draft health care personnel in a crisis.
It is designed to be implemented in connection with a national
mobilization in an emergency, and then only if Congress and the
President approve the plan and pass and sign legislation to enact it."

Sort of like registering for Selective Service when there is no draft.

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On 29 May 2006 15:14:30 -0700, wrote:

Rep Rangel introduces Draft Bill (for Iran?!):

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=53409

Rangel has done this before--about three years ago. At that time the
bill went nowhere until just before the presidential election at which
time it was defeated something like 425 to 5. Rangel didn't vote for
his own bill.

If you won't "cowerfromthetruth" you should note that Rangel is a
Democrat, exceptionally liberal (bordering on socialist), from a
heavily minority district in Detroit and adamantly against the
administration. A draft bill is totally ludicrous.

Last time I checked our military was stretched extremely thin. Whicha has
allowed the Iranian version of Hitler to thumbs his nose at us while he
acquires nukes. And making the assumption that military action (if required)
against Iran can be limited to airstrikes is ludicrous.

Conscripts don't
have the retainability or the necessary skills for the configuration
of the current US military establishment.

That depends on who and how long you draft them for. Although it might be
quite possible to add some division the old fashioned way... with
volunteers.

If you've watched operations
recently you might have noted that we no longer depend upon massed
forces marching in lock-step across the plains of Waterloo.


One of the worst mistakes we can make is to assume that we will fight future
wars like the last one.

In the case of Iraq they were weakened by a previous war, had an arms
embargo and were studied in minute detail for the twelve years before we
invaded.

If we are really lucky the next major war will be fought after the next
Presidential election. The present fools have show themselves to be
completely incompetent.

BTW Have you read Cobra II yet?



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

The point of these commie-libs introducing and advocating conscription isn't
to get more sodliers for the military. The point of it all is to get more
people mad at "the man."

Ed is right, there is zero potential for these half-hearted attempts to
accomplish conscription. It's the commie-libs version of "you're either
with us or your're with [the administration]." You have to wonder when the
same people that alaways want to cut funding for DoD suddenly want to hang
some millstone around the neck of DoD, if these people do actually want us
to win against the terrorist.

Scott

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On 29 May 2006 15:14:30 -0700, wrote:

Rep Rangel introduces Draft Bill (for Iran?!):

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=53409

Rangel has done this before--about three years ago. At that time the
bill went nowhere until just before the presidential election at which
time it was defeated something like 425 to 5. Rangel didn't vote for
his own bill.

If you won't "cowerfromthetruth" you should note that Rangel is a
Democrat, exceptionally liberal (bordering on socialist), from a
heavily minority district in Detroit and adamantly against the
administration. A draft bill is totally ludicrous. Conscripts don't
have the retainability or the necessary skills for the configuration
of the current US military establishment. If you've watched operations
recently you might have noted that we no longer depend upon massed
forces marching in lock-step across the plains of Waterloo.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

On Mon, 29 May 2006 22:26:15 GMT, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

If you won't "cowerfromthetruth" you should note that Rangel is a
Democrat, exceptionally liberal (bordering on socialist), from a
heavily minority district in Detroit and adamantly against the
administration. A draft bill is totally ludicrous

Well, not from Rangel's point of view. The intent is to keep up the
fear factor among university students. Perhaps your institution is
different, but the local campus believes with the fervor of the newly
converted that the Bush administration is about to institute the draft
the minute they divert their eyes.

Another fervent belief, though perhaps not so widespread, is that
soldiers are being stationed on the borders so that, when the time
comes, they can turn their rifles in the other direction and complete
the fascist takeover.

To judge from reading the student newspaper, as I do from month to
month, is to wonder anew at the gullibility of the young, and their
lack of any historical sense. You regularly read about how wars are
always started by Republican presidents (presumably including WWI,
WWII, Korean, and Vietnam, to name the major American military
conflicts of the 20th century).

-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com