John Edwards Lashes Out at Draft Revival

Source: NewsMax.com

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards lashed out Saturday against the suggestion by President Bush's new war adviser that it is worth considering a return to a military draft.

The adviser, Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, suggested Friday in an interview with National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" that a draft might relieve the frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan that have stressed the all-volunteer force.

Edwards, a former North Carolina senator said that Lute's remarks show "the true danger of the administration's breathtaking failures in Iraq and around the world," according to a campaign statement.

"Now, instead of ending this war and doing what is right for our troops, their families and the nation, President Bush is floating the idea of a draft that would send more young Americans to Iraq," Edward said.

Read more: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/8/11/165707.shtml

And all of those young men attending Christian seminary. Their preacher fathers got out the Vietnam War by proclaiming Jesus. They can all proclaim Jesus as they go on patrol in Fallujah!

Don't forget the YAFers and Young Republicans.

I thought they were neo-Nazis during the Vietnam War, they are probably worse by now.

must go before there is a draft.

That will end this nonsense right freakin' now.

They should all be at the front of the line.

Remember the facebook incident w/ Giuliani's daughter? And we have Democratic leaders responsible for this war too... where is Chelsea?

http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/08/web-2-point-doh.html

while they are making the situation worse so that when the Dems take office things will be set where the Dems will have no choice and then the Repugs will start beating the drums for a draft, we will hear it come out of there mouth each and everytime they appear on one of these talking head shows.

Senator Durbin was talking today about good progress in Iraq. :puke:

they bring this up...

I thought they were keeping their Powder Dry?

:kick:

than NewsMax. We don't want to raise their click count because they are a wingnut operation.

This isn't PRAISE from those guys. They're posting it to get their base all riled.

cuz an ol buddy of mine who was pro-gay and anti-war, started going to a church in southern fl and started turning against all that he was for and started spewing RW filth and sending newsmax.com as a source... I went there once and had to use brillo to remove the gunk on my skin after I left... that upset me deeply, considering it was a good friend... they gotta be hypnotizing them or scaring them with TERRA!

Overnight they turn into Pod People and there is no reasoning with them after that.

yes, like that! he totally changed, it made me very "ill" to say the LEAST. It's like, just b/c some guy up behind a pulpit says something is bad, it makes the lesser minded bow down in fear! I'm not saying he was a dunce, he's a relatively intelligent young man, but definitely not willing to stand up for what his heart & brain was telling him enough to say, "bullshit!" to the dribble he was hearing. I feel sorry for the millions of people of various faiths who want to accept people but are told the differences from "them" to "us" makes it that you cannot be friends with them...

just shameful!

Thanks for the laugh! BODY SNATCHERS! maybe I should go de-brainwash him.... naw... I might not make it out, there's so many of them! LOL

DON'T FALL ASLEEP!!!

Line from Wait Wait Don't Tell Me Today on NPR was Buddhists say that you don't have to get special permission to come back as an invertebrate like a jellyfish, an earthworm or a Congressional Democrat. We need backbone.

Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/us/politics/12dems.html?ei=5065&en=0281d59a4ddca8e0&ex=1187496000&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

"John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, would keep troops in the region to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries."

Apparently Edwards and Clinton haven't heard of the movie coming out 'No End In Sight'

Documentary explores why there's 'No End in Sight' to war in Iraq
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_6580948

Someone needs to tell Edwards to go back to his gut instincts and leave Iraqis to themselves for awhile; at least until they themselves invite us back in. Occupation is a fiaso and failure. Continuing Bush's policy of surge and referee in a civil war is STUPID. DU needs to send Edwards a wake up call.

Right now, I'm leaning Dennis Kucinich's way.

http://web.archive.org/web/20021214041757/edwards.senate.gov/statements/20020912_iraq.html

"The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event – or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse – to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

and

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=106&subid=122&contentid=250935

"First, this means making the strongest possible case to the American people about the danger Saddam poses. Months of mixed messages, high-level speculation and news-leaks about possible military plans have caused widespread concern among many Americans and around the world.

I am encouraged that the President has overruled some of his advisors and decided to ask for the support of Congress. From the support of Congress, this effort will derive even greater and more enduring strength...

Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies -- including our vital ally, Israel. For more than 20 years, Saddam has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every possible means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today, that he has used them in the past, and that he is doing everything he can to build more. Every day he gets closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability. We must not allow him to get nuclear weapons."

and NYT's active promotion of those same lies. Hell, the whole WMD/Saddam link is now a laughingstock on YouTube's "What's So Funny ?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0TnqUlB4Gg

The entire media was carrying this to us without allowing any contradictions.

We need a complete pull out from Iraq to the old Gulf War I staging areas and leave Iraq to settle its scores internally. THEN they will invite us back in to do whatever needs doing with the oil etc. Until then, no security is sustainable or politically settled while US troops are stuck in the middle.

What Edwards is saying is leaving a limited presence and even that isn't 'doable' which is why a 'surge' was deemed needed (if only to provoke Iran, which is more likely).

I think Edwards knows better now. At least I hope so.

were not taken in by Chalibi, Bush and the media?

Edwards not only voted yes, he cosponsored the bill and, through his speeches, tried to convince other members and the American people that a war against Iraq was needed. Edwards admits he did not read the classified NIE report before he cast his vote for war, apologies are great but reading all material available before casting one's vote is even better.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/5/112517/6424

"The two Senators who pushed hardest to have the US intelligence community compile an NIE, Senator Bob Graham and Senator Dick Durbin, both voted against authorizing military force against Iraq - largely because the full classified 96-page NIE contained many more caveats and dissents than any of the summaries."

This makes my stomach turn. Furthermore, from an UPDATE on the above MYDD post:

Sen. Bob Graham's floor statement urging his fellow Senators to read the full classifed NIE. Here is Sen. Graham's statement:

"Friends, I encourage you to read the classified intelligence reports which are much sharper than what is available in declassified form," Sen. Graham reports stating on the floor of the Senate in October 2002.

"We are going to be increasing the threat level against the people of the United States." He warned: "Blood is going to be on your hands."


And if I did not know better this paragraph connecting 9/11 and the need to remove Saddam could have been written by Bush, Cheney, Rice etc.

"The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event – or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse – to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

from the same speech

"First, this means making the strongest possible case to the American people about the danger Saddam poses."


And more recently on Iran, it is hard to imagine what the diplomatic efforts would be in the phrase "going for Iran."

As a mother of children who would be involved if a draft took place I am glad to hear Edwards is against the draft, more importantly though I would like the US to take a new direction with respect to war for resources and that is why I support Kucinich over Edwards.


http://www.herzliyaconference.org/Eng/_Articles/Article.asp?ArticleID=1728&CategoryID=223

"Question and Answer:

Cheryl Fishbein from NY: When you do learning of Jewish texts, you give credit to ideas of scholars who have helped you ask questions, I would like to give credit to my friends and colleagues who have had this same overriding question of shared a existential threat: Would you be prepared, if diplomacy failed, to take further action against Iran? I think there is cynicism about the ability of diplomacy to work in this situation. Secondly, you as grassroots person, who has an understanding of the American people, is there understanding of this threat across US?

.....As to the American people, this is a difficult question. The vast majority of people are concerned about what is going on in Iraq. This will make the American people reticent toward going for Iran. But I think the American people are smart if they are told the truth, and if they trust their president. So Americans can be educated to come along with what needs to be done with Iran."


In comparison here is what Kucinich said before the IWR

http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2002/10/03_kucinich_vote-no.htm

Vote "NO'' On Iraq War Resolution US
Statement by Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), October 3, 2002

"So, Mr. Speaker, today, I intend to do a number of things. I intend to present to this Congress an analysis of the joint resolution which was offered to this Congress; and, after presenting that analysis, I want to put in perspective where we are in this moment in history...

But the key issue here that the American people need to know is that U.N. inspection teams identified and destroyed nearly all such weapons. A lead inspector, Scott Ritter, said that he believes that nearly all other weapons not found were destroyed in the Gulf War. Furthermore, according to a published report in The Washington Post, the Central Intelligence Agency, yes, the Central Intelligence Agency, has no up-to-date accurate report on Iraq's capabilities of weapons of mass destruction...

The American people deserve to know that the key issue here is that there is no proof that Iraq represents an imminent or immediate threat to the United States of America. I will repeat: there is no proof that Iraq represents an imminent or immediate threat to the United States. A continuing threat does not constitute a sufficient cause for war. The administration has refused to provide the Congress with credible evidence that proves that Iraq is a serious threat to the United States and that it is continuing to possess and develop chemical and biological and nuclear weapons.

Furthermore, there is no credible evidence connecting Iraq to al Qaeda and 9-11, and yet there are people who want to bomb Iraq in reprisal for 9-11."


http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:beNaqr2xk_4J:news.findlaw.com/prnewswire/20070308/08mar20071721.html+Kucinich+%2B+analysis+against+the+Iraq+War+vote&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us

"An October 2002 pre-Iraq-war analysis of intelligence and information by Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich that was widely circulated to members of Congress accurately predicted subsequent events, discoveries, and consequences, according to documents released today by the Kucinich for President Campaign.

Among the points raised by Kucinich in his Oct. 2, 2002 analysis of the war-authorization resolution (http://kucinich.us/files/pdfs/Oct2002Analysis.pdf), which he presented to members of the House and the Senate eight days before they voted to give President Bush the war-authorization he sought, Kucinich advised his colleagues:"


Dennis Kucinich Discusses Iraq War Vote and Funding on CNN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPXMJWM7aF0

things now in his campaign, sadly I just doubt the sincerity of his words.

:-)

i don't. good for edwards.

voting kucinich.

those pushing and cheerleading the war and their kids aren't the ones having to fight and die. He's against the minorities and kids from the lower income groups having to bear the burden.

I'm an Edwards support, btw -- Go Johnny!!

:yourock:

and that's what he'd like you to think.

From one newbie to another. :)

And if this thing is still going on 4 years from now, I'm taking him to Canada myself!!! No fucking way are they going to get my son as a sacrificial lamb!!!

I'm 17 myself, and I know if they bring the draft back, then i'll be going to jail before I go off to kill Iraqis for GWB's regime.

It really pisses me off these people on D.U. that say "bring back the Draft". I say Hell No they're not taking my Kid. Easy for them to say when they have nothing at stake. Maybe they should volunteer to serve then. :grr:

...but no big deal. I admire you for taking a stand in an illegal, immoral war you do not believe in.

Skinner wrote a few days ago whether we were tired of hating, and I thought that was a weird question. Because it's not the hate that is tiring. What's tiring is the constant high anxiety of being under the thumb of an incredibly crooked society. So, when someone like Edwards comes in and attacks the source of that anxiety, and sweeps it away, it's like someone takes the load of my shoulders, if even for a little while.

If I wanted an ally or a president, it would be someone who had that kind of power.

Interesting to see whether a draft is on Hillary's table, or not, or whether she would have one table with a draft and another without a draft, or would criticize Obama for his table while having the same table, or just what she has to say about a draft. Of course, it would be nice to get a yes or no answer from Hillary instead of a yes and no one. We will see....or not.

While we are waiting for an answer from Hillary, do any of the Hillary supporters have a quote from Hillary that would put her opposed to instituting the draft?

asking Bush and Gates to "clarify" their position on a 'draft':
http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=280746&&

Hillary can't sh*t without having a meeting about any poll indications that it might be unpopular to do so.

J

can't stand hillary but give credit where it's due.

she would consider national service, one of her 'play it safe' statements.

But I am really ok with national service, particularly if a guaranteed college 4 year ride or equivalent vocational training/SBA loan came with it.

When you introduce a large pool of very cheap labor into whatever activity you would
have people do as "national service", what happens to the existing labor force in that area?

Would they lose their jobs?
Would their pay go down?

We might have enough folks available to handle national emergencies, perform minor first aide and do home health visits, with the elderly and infirm.

We might have a civil service that wasn't completely riffed to the bone.

And afters, we'd have folks who didn't have to continue working at the bottom of the pay scale, because they got a good education/training/startup capital out of the deal...

And fewer jobs for illegal aliens. Because nothing would have helped George W. Bush quite as much as two years doing laundry, picking strawberries or mowing the weeds on the side of the highway or at govt facilities...

I meant community gardens and food for soup kitchens...

But thanks for showing how little you can find wrong with my suggestion.

really, your objections are purile, and pretty goddamn insulting to anyone who has actually been under such a system.

On a Soviet work farm, you didn't get to move on in two or three years, with a college degree or a nest egg.
If you found yourself on a Soviet Era workfarm, the only perk was that you might eat real food through the winter.

In a volunteer service, you might have an entire range of assignment choices.

It's a small, but significant difference, don't you think?

It is primarily the INvolunatary nature of "national service" that is at issue.

If you are making it voluntary now, I withdraw my objections, provided it the program contains safeguards
to prevent it from being used to the disadvantage of regular paid workers.

i am vehemently opposed to all forms of compulsory service GIVEN THE CURRENT STATE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT!

when we cease our imperialistic policies, then we can TALK about compulsory service, and not one moment before.

She should state her position! Is she a leader or a whiner?

What part of Hillary's letter didn't you understand?

We have had a President who didn't inquire, didn't look at bulletins, didn't think before acting. Are you advocating that we have another one who doesn't question?

You can be for your own candidate without making up stuff about one you aren't supporting. Leave the swiftboating to the scum that run the Republican party.

I think they're pushing the draft idea right at the moment because they know they can't keep a lid on this other stuff any more and they need some suggestion to counter it that doesn't involve ending the war.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2147052,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12

Lieutenant Clay Hanna looks sick and white. Like his colleagues he does not seem to sleep. Hanna says he catches up by napping on a cot between operations in the command centre, amid the noise of radio. He is up at 6am and tries to go to sleep by 2am or 3am. But there are operations to go on, planning to be done and after-action reports that need to be written. And war interposes its own deadly agenda that requires his attention and wakes him up. . . .

A whole army is exhausted and worn out. You see the young soldiers washed up like driftwood at Baghdad's international airport, waiting to go on leave or returning to their units, sleeping on their body armour on floors and in the dust.

Where once the war in Iraq was defined in conversations with these men by untenable ideas - bringing democracy or defeating al-Qaeda - these days the war in Iraq is defined by different ways of expressing the idea of being weary. It is a theme that is endlessly reiterated as you travel around Iraq. 'The army is worn out. We are just keeping people in theatre who are exhausted,' says a soldier working for the US army public affairs office who is supposed to be telling me how well things have been going since the 'surge' in Baghdad began.

They are not supposed to talk like this. We are driving and another of the public affairs team adds bitterly: 'We should just be allowed to tell the media what is happening here. Let them know that people are worn out. So that their families know back home. But it's like we've become no more than numbers now.'

n/t

I always enjoy when any of our guys takes it to the enemy. :toast:

Julie

I think reinstating the draft, along with rolling back the Bush tax cuts, is exactly what we need right now. For most Americans the Iraq War is a "free war". If you're not in the military you are in no danger of being sent to the front. Plus, you don't even have to pay for the damn thing. Future generations are going to pick up the bill. Reinstating the draft and rolling back the tax cuts would impress upon Americans that this war is not free. Somebody has to fight it and pay for it. I think the fighting and paying should be shouldered by all Americans, but the Bush administration doesn't think so. Conducting a war the Bush way is a lot easier because people don't have to think about it too much. It's easy to cheer lead a war that your country doesn't ask you to fight or pay for. War is not easy and should never be made easy. Reinstate the draft and roll back the Bush tax cuts and we'll finally see a real debate about the Iraq War. I'm betting we'd see a peace movement, too.

would have been the level of public outrage that brought the war to its ultimate conclusion. Really with all the belly aching that goes on about the war I think it would turn up the volume quite a bit if sons and daughters (?) were over there in a war that nobody wants

If DEMOCRATS pass the draft, DEMOCRATS will get the blame!!!!

Do you want to see the Repiggies sweep the elections?

and that was in the mid 60's during the first Texas presidents admin.

:nuke:

yet another brave position for john edwards to take.

:eyes:

Since your avatar would seem to indicate you like him.

What would you prefer him to say? You bitch when he's against the draft, and i can't imagine the shit you'd fling his way if he said he was for it.

Not getting into the pros or the cons, the fact is we have been asking an unfair sacrifice of the few, while the many go about their merry way.

Coming out against the draft (again, not getting into the pros or the cons) is politically expedient, not politically brave.

We have a tyrant in control. Worst thing in the world we can do is give him more cannon fodder. My kids should NOT be used as pawns in this insane power struggle!

If he thinks this insane war is worth fighting for, make him find volunteers to step forward.

NO draft. NO funds for Blackwater or other private contractors.

Then if nobody volunteers, end of story -- and end of this insane war.

Nobody has the right to kill my kids for a war that is based on lies!!!!!

It's immoral for the whole country not to be making sacrifices in time of war. If the draft or just the idea of a draft turns more people against the war, so much the better.

I certainly understand your view. If enough people share it, the war will end. A draft, or merely consideration of a draft, could dramatically change the political landscape and turn even more people against the war.

Is that like how it's "immoral" to criticize the "Commander in Chief" in a time of war?

BS, the solution is to END THE WAR......not send MORE people there to die!!

When Republicans start jumping on Rangel's bandwagon and pushing for a draft what is he going to do? Will he say "just kiddin'?" It's a fine line he walks.

Volunteers work for free. The US has a PROFESSIONAL army. The good boys and girls in the forces made a career choice. Without a monthly paycheck there would be a bigger recruitment challenge then there is today.

Can you say, "neo counter culture?"

Go figure. This asshole is going to hold off on the hottest issue in war until it's time to turn it over to the Democrats to clean up. He'd be glad to start up the draft, leave office, and then have the whole sleepy ass American public wake up to the horror of this f*cked up mess he's made.

I've always said right along, there are TWO THINGS this prick will avoid like the plague....taxes and the draft, because they have the effect of waking up this stupid ass sleeping public. Once he leaves office, it is all that is left. He will have left us a country so deep in dept, it will take the next five generations to work our way out....and a war that is being run by a military that has bare knuckles and bleeding ulcers. You KNOW the draft is in the wings.

What a prick head. And he will dance away as the "no tax, no draft preznit". What a prick!!!!!!

First of all, I don't think a draft would come to fruition because people would riot in the street (and in principle, rightly so).

I just believe if all of these neocon chickenhawks (and other Republican cowards) realized it would be their children/grandchildren being sent to war, suddenly Iraq wouldn't be so important and the troops could come home immediately.

Outraged scumbag Republicans would join Democrats and not only demand that the war in Iraq end...I bet they'd all of a sudden be opposed to bombing Iran and other countries that are on the bogus global war on terra to do list.

In my opinion, an actual draft, or talk that one could become a reality would have a profound effect on our aggressive foreign policy, and in a very good way.

After all, we know the most hawkish people in the administration are war mongers because it's not their family's blood that's splattered all over the place when a solider is shot to death or blown up by an IED or car bomb.

Again, I don't obviously favor a draft per se because I might have to go...but I think getting the ball rolling on implementing one would sure make a lot of people come to their senses.

I have friends in the military who actually justify us fighting in Iraq because all of the troops "volunteer to go and are reenlisting." :eyes: (my stupid friends, who I still like for some reason, don't like to hear me talk about stop loss and how it's really a back door draft.)

I'm not sure any of this made makes sense because I can barely keep my eyes open.

But the bottom line is I think moving toward a draft (but stopping short of one) would put an end to our aggressive foreign policy, because the kids of chickenhawk cowards would be facing combat.

You'd suddenly see Republicans take to the streets!

There was a poll about a draft and I said I support it. Not because I want more Americans to die, but because I think that will wake up the outrage in this country over the war. Right now, it's very passive. A lot of people oppose the war, but few are doing anything to actively end it. There's a lot of reasons for it, but whatever the justification, a lot of people are unwilling to do anything.

If we had a draft, more people would be outraged enough to take action.

Of course, I am in my mid to late thirties and don't have any children. I have two first cousins once removed (female, which I presume the draft would include) of draft age and one friend has a seventeen year old son. So, maybe it's easy for me to play "chicken" since I have no stake.

chicken meaning the dangerous bluff game, not being cowardly or a chickenhawk

it's bluffing when the stakes are too high.

But hey, when they debate continued funding of the war, don't you think they are playing chicken with the lives already over there? See, I actually understand the Senators who continue to vote for funding the war and don't hold it against them. Commander Cuckoo Bananas probably would leave the troops over there - funded or not. He'd leave them to die to make his point. I think that's why Clinton and Obama hesitated to vote against it. They didn't really want to abandon our troops without funding, but didn't want to be seen as enabling Bush.

So, it's all just a big bluff and that's a tragic crime.

allow it to happen and (B) I hope you're not getting the impression that I have nothing to lose saying this.

After all, I'd be the one going with your child, so it affects my life profoundly.

Sounds like all these pro-Draft Mongers should volunteer themseslves.

so, you're right.

Let me get this straight. Are you advocating that the US allow the deaths of approximately 58,000 Americans to make a point?
That was the result of Viet Nam.

A draft provides more fodder for a loony leader to send to war to make himself appear macho, it kills more Americans. How many Americans would you allow to be killed before you stepped forward and stopped the draft once again?
58000?

Put your children out on the freeway so people will obey the speed limits. Troopers aren't enough. If everyone's children were in harms way people would stop speeding and driving drunk. Jaysus.

like they did in the 60's & 70's or get a cushion job far far away
from any kind of war zone. Thats the way it is, thats the way it's
been since the Civil War and before. Chickenhawks never have to face
combat because they know how to get around it. Always have.

there is no such thing as a no exceptions draft. just doesn't exist. it's a pollyanna argument.

no soldier should have to do 4 or 5 tours of duty in one fight,we live in contentious times,there should be a draft,a draft of everyone,if one doesn`t want to be in the military then they can empty shitpans or something else.we list our troop strength as 1.2 mil.thats bullshit,we have around 750,000 troops available,the chinese have 2.3 mil.yes they have no navy and their air force is not much better,but as bush and the rethugs have caved into their ass` they will be formidable in 10-20 years.all citizens 18-45 should have to do 2 years of some kind of duty for their country,that way we don`t get some dweebs like bush/cheney who know nothing of running the military.in the past the rethugs owned the military vote i venture to say rethugs we be lucky to get 50%,generals have come out against the rethug party.i say a stronger internal usa makes us stronger in the world,take care of our own first,build up our infrastructure,put wes clark on the ballott somewhere.krj,cpousnret.

BTW, people, stop quoting the right-wing NewsMax, who automatically uses the phrased "lashed out" to paint Edwards as a ranting-MAD LIB!! Don't support this site.

And WHAT is UP with all of the DU people who think the draft is a great idea?

Even scarier are the people on DU, usually those far past draft age, are the ones that go beyond the heavily-mistaken "it would get the country fired up" notion and honestly believe that we should actually stop the military meat grinder by throwing more innocent children into it BY FORCE.

Never mind the issue of how you would fund such a debacle, or the fact that enforcing it would divide the country so horribly and turn it into a true police state that you only read about in fiction novels.

Never mind the fact of the country being thrown into political, economic and societal upheaval. Are we going to pull kids from universities, jobs and families, and then stick all of these unprepared, physically unfit and forced-to-serve people in a boot camp to go and fight an occupation of a sovereign nation which was based on LIES?

I think people who propose this idea have resigned themselves to the notion that peace simply isn't possible in this day and age. It's practically a given that America is never, ever going to kick it's screwed-up addiction to militarism because war is far too profitable an opportunity to pass up for it's corporations and crony capitalists. War with someone is inevitable no matter who we put in office.

I'm just not seeing how a draft would cure that addiction rather than exacerbate it.

Like sending poor and middle class people off to die in profitable wars is going to make the "betters" see the error of their ways?

The "betters" have no stake in anyone but themselves.

"Lose your job? PFFFFT. I'll just get an Indian or Malaysian to do it for me, and you'll still buy my product with your little credit card because you need it NOW. "All-inclusive" draft? PFFFFT. We'll find loopholes. If not, we'll create them. You silly little fool; if you think my kids will even set foot on an Army base by force, then you really ARE as naive as we paint you out to be."

You think ANYthing that asks the people who only care about themselves to sacrifice for a nation whose people they couldn't care less about will ever pass? And if such a proposition DID pass, does anyone HONESTLY believe that the "betters" or their kin will see hour ONE of boot camp? :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray:

Personally, I'm against a draft, simply because I don't believe in giving my life to a country that taxes the shit out of me and others, yet:

* allows 46 million people to go without health insurance
* spends damned near ZILCH on what we NEED to spend money on (schools, health care, infrastructure repair, safety net for unemployed workers, etc)
* gives the castle keys, welfare and tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy and corporations that offshore jobs
* pours all of that tax booty to the Pentasewer and their worthless failure of a bloodbath that's only designed to make more money for American corporations.

You start correcting that and the nearly 9-trillion dollar national debt and then we'll start talking about "skin in da game". You stop rigging the political system so my choices are a rich pro-war, pro-free-trade Republican versus a rich pro-war, pro-free-trade Dem and then we'll talk.

No Iraqi ever did anything to me or my family.

In six years, my stepson will be of draft age. He isn't getting tossed into any corporate meat grinder, and I'll have words with any sumbitch who thinks he SHOULD be.

Edwards is a great speaker.

Now is the time for him to ratchet up the criticism and the rhetoric.
This is John's last chance at the White House.
He must remember the lesson learned from the '04 campaign - do not be quiet!!

Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/us/politics/12dems.ht...

"John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, would keep troops in the region to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries."

HOW MANY troops ? Why continue Bush's fiasco ? Why give the GOP a finger to point at you in this upcoming election ? How stupid can Edward's and Clinton's advisors be ? Edwards gut instincts are being trumped again. Fool me once....

WAR IS A RACKET

by Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Recipient:

Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/53-left.html
In 1933, Butler was approached by men representing a clique of multi-millionaire industrialists and bankers. They hated U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) with a passion, and saw his “New Deal” policies as the start of a communist take-over that threatened their interests. FDR even had the temerity to announce that the U.S. would stop using its military to interfere in Latin American affairs! Wall Street’s plutocrats were aghast! They had long been accustomed to wielding tremendous control over the government’s economic policies, including the use of U.S. forces to protect their precious foreign investments. Because of Butler’s steadfast military role in upholding U.S. business interests abroad, the plotters mistakenly thought they could recruit him to muster a “super-army” of veterans to use as pawns in their plan to subjugate or, if necessary, eliminate FDR.

American Liberty League - logoButler played along in order to determine who was behind the plot. He later testifying under oath before the MacCormack-Dickstein House Committee on un-American Activities. During that testimony Butler named those who were directly involved in the plot. He also identified an powerful organization that was behind the scenes coordinating and backing the plot. This organization, the American Liberty League, was comprised of some of America's wealthiest bankers, financiers and corporate executives. (Click the American Liberty League link for details on the League's main backers.)

Gen. Butler exposing the plot at a press conferenceHowever, the House Committee did not properly investigate the coup plot. In fact they helped to cover it up. The powerful fascists plotters behind the coup were never questioned, let alone arrested or charged with sedition or treason. The Committee even dropped from their report of Butler's testimony most of the names of these wealthy bankers and corporate presidents whom Butler had identified. Butler was of course outraged and he went on national radio to name the names of those behind the coup plot. A sympathetic reporter from the Philadelphia Herald, Paul Comly French was one of the only mainstream journalists to help Butler expose the plotters. George SeldesJohn Spivak, a reporter, from the socialist magazine New Masses, interviewed Butler and helped him to put the coup plotters' names onto the public record. (Click here to read Spivak's account of the fascist plot: "The Plot and the Main Players.") For the most part, the mainstream media either ignored the story or went to great lengths to ridicule General Butler. (In his book 1000 Americans, anti-fascist journalist and media critic, George Seldes, described the media's coverup of Wall Street's plot. Click here to read an excerpt.)

Although Butler's patriotic efforts did thwart this fascist coup plot, the Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders who sponsored it continued to conspire behind the scenes to rid America of FDR and to smash his “New Deal.” Evidence of continued efforts by powerful U.S. fascists to regain control of the White House is illustrated by a 1936 statement by William Dodd, the U.S. Ambassador to Germany. In a letter to Roosevelt, he stated:

William Dodd“A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime.... A prominent executive of one of the largest corporations, told me point blank that he would be ready to take definite action to bring fascism into America if President Roosevelt continued his progressive policies. Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there. Propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare. We should be aware of the symptoms. When industrialists ignore laws designed for social and economic progress they will seek recourse to a fascist state when the institutions of our government compel them to comply with the provisions.”

Many of the plotters exposed by Butler, had been boosting their fortunes by investing in the fascist experiments of Mussolini and Hitler. Some of them even amassed great profits by arming the Nazis, both before and during WWII.

How is this history of relevance today?

Although all of the top U.S. fascists behind this 1930's plot are now dead, their corporations carry on. These companies, with their roots firmly planted in the fascist milieu of the 1930s, are now among the world’s wealthiest corporations. They continue to exert enormous influence over U.S. government policies, and – by extension – over global matters of war, peace and human rights.

Although those within the highest echelons of U.S. corporate power were willing to instigate a coup to take control of the White House, their plot against FDR was called off. As it turned out, an overt fascist coup was not actually necessary to attain their goals. The fascists behind the plot did eventually succeed in regaining their long-standing influence over the White House and American politics.

Prescott Bush President George Walker Bush’s grandfather (Prescott Bush) and great grandfather (George Herbert Walker) were among Wall Street’s ultra-right wing elite. Before WWII, they were among the key players who coordinated the flow of investments from American multimillionaires into Germany. They profited by helping to coordinate the American financing behind Hitler’s rise to power. During the war, they even profited from companies that armed the Nazi war machine and used slave labour at Auschwitz. Then, after the war, Prescott Bush was instrumental in helping to launder Nazi loot for Fritz Thyssen, who was one Hitler’s earliest and richest industrialist backers.

George W. Bush & George H.W. Bush The Bush family's illicit fortune, and their intimate connections to Wall Street and the intelligence community, were essential in launching Prescott Bush, his son George H.W. Bush and grandson George W. Bush, into politics and the oil industry.

Issue #54 of Press for Conversion! (August 2004) is called "All in the Family: The apple does not fall far from the BUSH." This issue focuses entirely on the Bush family’s historic complicity in fascism. Click above to find out more about the contents of this issue.

:thumbsup:

This is in response to all of you who, in all good faith, think that instituting a draft or national service is appropriate, either

(1) Because national service is somehow a character-building exercise;

(2) Because a draft will cause riots, resistance, and end to the Iraq war, etc.

As for national service, I do not believe in indentured service or slavery in any form. If people like the Bush Crime Family could get their hands on you to use you for whatever nonmilitary "service" they wanted, what do you think they would have you do? I am sure it would not be pleasant. I hope you enjoy cleaning up roadkill and chemical spills. And, speaking as a sixty-year old here, let me tell you that your years as a young person are important. You should not squander them cleaning and toting in nursing homes or picking through garbage or doing anything other than trying to get started in life.

As for a draft, I remember that miserable situation all too well. Those of you who think that a draft will mobilize people and bring about an end to the war are wrong. Have you forgotten that the corporate media does not even cover demonstrations? This is not 1968. Things have changed. Have you forgotten that you have to demonstrate in "free-speech zones"? Have you forgotten how skillful BushCo is at using incrementalism and deception to accomplish its goals? They will figure out a way to draft "just a few" people for "temporary duty" in noncombat zones; then they will start ignoring all of that and will send draftees where they want and for whatever purpose they want. And do not expect any help from Congress. Democrats will cave in and rush off to vacation.

Am I getting through to some of you?

Remove all forces from Iraq (military and mercenary) and most of the other 130 countries where we have legions garrisoned, send 3/4 of them home for good, cut the war budget by at least 3/4...

AND THEN THE U.S. MUST LEARN TO BE A DECENT FUCKING WORLD CITIZEN!!!!

Simple, no draft needed...

But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

John Lennon

Welcome to permanent war...

Welcome to 1984...

War is Peace... Peace is War...

to give relief to those poor troops that continue to get sent back. If a draft in initiated, i think the general public may wake up. Of course there should be one caveat, that all the children of Congress and Administration would be included. Im just sayin'.

old article but the talking points remain the same ( chickenhawks of a feather.... )

Murtha Joins Debate Over Reinstating Military Draft
By Randy Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor
April 03, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - Seeking to boost the movement to reinstitute a military draft, Rep. John Murtha is arguing that the U.S. should have a "citizen's army" in addition to a "volunteer, professional army." However, a critic of the Pennsylvania Democrat on Monday called his statement "ridiculous" and "without merit."

"I voted against the volunteer army because I felt if we ever had a war, we wouldn't be able to sustain ," Murtha said during the March 29 edition of CNN's "The Situation Room."

"This is one of the smallest armies we've had since before World War II, right before the Korean War," added the congressman. Murtha, a frequent critic of the war in Iraq, claimed that the president's handling of the war has depleted the country's strategic reserve.
snip

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070403b.html


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQKspxWa-44

"Smallest army since WW II"...

And we don't even need that war machine!!!

What a dick...

if there is the slightest chance that their debutante daughters might have to go. Any male-only draft is going to wind up in front of the Supreme Court, and even John Roberts remembers the male-only draft of forty years ago.

everyone should have a share in the pain. Especially the rich. And there should be harsh penalties for profiteering. But I agree that the rich repukes don't want a draft because then it would put them in a bind when they get their kids off. Like Cheney, Kristol and all the other rich draft dodgers.

voter apathy is rampant in that bracket.

Just cuz you're in your thirties doesn't mean you won't be drafted. They're taking 43 year olds in now. Also, those Repugs kids will be getting deferments anyway. As a few posters have mentioned, the stakes are too high to play games with the draft.

He's 100% right here.

Sorry, you are wrong!

If there were a draft now, this war would never have happened.Its amazing how quickly people will get involved ONCE THEIR ASS IS ON THE LINE.

Democracy is a participatory process (not just the vote part).

several years ago.

The real objection to Vietnam did not start until college deferments were canceled.

There was a time, years before we got into this terrible war, when I thought that reinstating the draft would be a good idea. I thought it would lessen the chances of engaging in wars of choice, because everyone would be affected. But with this criminal gang in the White House, a draft is the last thing we need. That would just encourage them to attack Iran.

why should the poor die so rich guys and their kids,I say yes bring back the draft,the sooner the better.

You accept the premise that someone has to die and you determine that it is ok to kill the kids of the wealthy.

That sucks!

I'm not referring to Edwards' remarks, but the whole episode.

A general floats the idea out in an interview on NPR that not many people will hear, political opponents bolster the visibility of the story by attacking the suggestion, denials are issued by the administration, but the media covers it, puts it out there. I even just saw a bit on CNN where they asked "what would it take?" for the draft to be reinstated.

Maybe I'm being paranoid here. Maybe the Bushies aren't as on message as the used to be or maybe they aren't as good at controlling the remarks of generals, but it sure makes you wonder.

a draft. And now, so is Edwards. How is this even news?