LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Senate Chambers (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=445)
-   -   New legislation supporting a military draft brought before congress (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=124243)

taoistimmortal 03-03-2004 09:47 AM

New legislation supporting a military draft brought before congress
 
The Bush administration is quietly trying to push two bills through congress S.89 and H.R.163 to ensure that their future wars against offending nations, and the protracted war on terror will succed, and they have been busy.

you can go to this site for information on the selective service systems which is the agency in the government that orginizes and runs the operation of a military draft
http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

If you dont want to read the whole report the most interesting portion I found was the strategic goals listed on page 2

For the actual details of the 2 bills mentioned above you can go to http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108.h.r163:
actually that link is for 163 but there is a link on that page for 89

If those links don't work I will try and fix them in the next 12 hours. If there not working by then a little help from someone more knowledgable would be highly aprreciated.

This is something that far exceeds the bounds that I ever thought the Bush admin would go to and it is extremly perturbing to me, although I should not have been so naive. I am curious what the rest of you think, and I also believe you have the right to know this is happening. I am pretty sure that these bills were very recently submitted to congress and I urge all of you that share my horror of this news to write your congressmen and senators and send emails to media outlets and ask them why they have failed to report on this in any meaningful way

taoistimmortal 03-03-2004 09:51 AM

The 1st link is fine and I think I know what I botched in the 2nd one so here goes.
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.163:

I highly recommend that all of you read the text of the legislation which is the last link on the bottom of the page. It is detailed and has a new classification for concientious objector among other interesting things.

ET Warrior 03-03-2004 02:02 PM

WHAT? I dont even know how to respond to this but.....I'd like to say several curse words...

obi 03-03-2004 03:36 PM

*moves to Canada*

*leaves a sticky note that reads-

Let me know when Kerry is in office.

-thx

El Sitherino 03-03-2004 06:02 PM

I though we'd learned our lesson about the draft.... this sucks. :( I will be writing my congressman yet again.

Hiroki 03-03-2004 06:49 PM

Hmm, seems America might be becomeing an expansionist soon. Oh well.

Tyrion 03-03-2004 10:07 PM

:thmbup1:

I'm happy Bush did this..because once it gets leaked out to the media, there's no way he'll win the next election.

:thmbup1:

Hiroki 03-03-2004 10:27 PM

*sigh* I wish I had another Republic, other than Bush to vote for, I REALLY do. I guess I won't vote this year...

the_raven_03 03-03-2004 10:35 PM

This is crap. That is all I have to say about it for now.

Kain 03-03-2004 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrion
:thmbup1:

I'm happy Bush did this..because once it gets leaked out to the media, there's no way he'll win the next election.

:thmbup1:

:wstupid:

ET Warrior 03-04-2004 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hiroki
*sigh* I wish I had another Republic, other than Bush to vote for, I REALLY do. I guess I won't vote this year...
Or you could vote independant, or you could vote democrat. Being registered republican doesn't mean you have to vote republican. It just gives you the ability to vote in the preliminaries.

Hiroki 03-04-2004 01:39 AM

I'd rather not vote at all than say I help place a libral in office, sorry. After all, just becouse Bush himself is evil, doesn't make the democrats any less evil. Before you flame me AGAIN, let me explain why I say they're evil.

They are caniveing. They don't care at all to cheat. They'll drag up stuff about someones past, wich has very little to do with there modern character, just to make them look bad. They'll do anything to win, they might even break the law in some places. They use some of the most rotten tactics I've seen.

A good example is Al Gore. Though Bush is an awful president, he did win that election fair and square, and Al Gore was such a horribly sore loser, that he drug it out by demanding recount after recount after recount. I've never seen such a discraceful man...

ET Warrior 03-04-2004 02:09 AM

Welcome to Politics Hiroki. Democrat or Republican, it makes no difference. It's just as if not more important to make your opponent look bad as it is to make yourself look good.

El Sitherino 03-04-2004 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hiroki
I'd rather not vote at all than say I help place a libral in office, sorry. After all, just becouse Bush himself is evil, doesn't make the democrats any less evil. Before you flame me AGAIN, let me explain why I say they're evil.

They are caniveing. They don't care at all to cheat. They'll drag up stuff about someones past, wich has very little to do with there modern character, just to make them look bad. They'll do anything to win, they might even break the law in some places. They use some of the most rotten tactics I've seen.

A good example is Al Gore. Though Bush is an awful president, he did win that election fair and square, and Al Gore was such a horribly sore loser, that he drug it out by demanding recount after recount after recount. I've never seen such a discraceful man...

All politicians do it. It's how they boost their ratings, by appearing better than the other candidates.

Uber_Saber 03-04-2004 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ET Warrior
Welcome to Politics Hiroki. Democrat or Republican, it makes no difference. It's just as if not more important to make your opponent look bad as it is to make yourself look good.
Quite frankly, until a politician proves themselves worthy of it, I automatically distrust them. Anyone who would willingly ge tinto politics has something wrong in their head. ;)

ET Warrior 03-04-2004 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Uber_Saber
Anyone who would willingly ge tinto politics has something wrong in their head. ;)
That's one of the smartest things i've heard all night.

SkinWalker 03-04-2004 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hiroki
*sigh* I wish I had another Republic, other than Bush to vote for, I REALLY do. I guess I won't vote this year...
I was really behind McCain in 2000, but I think Bush had so many greased palms and back room deals that he didn't stand a chance at getting the GOP nomination. Too bad... I think he would have done a fine job.

Uber_Saber 03-04-2004 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SkinWalker
I was really behind McCain in 2000, but I think Bush had so many greased palms and back room deals that he didn't stand a chance at getting the GOP nomination. Too bad... I think he would have done a fine job.
I didn't vote for anyone during that race. (Matter of fact, I won't vote in this race, either. I turn 18 Nov 12th. (Grrr.)

But it's true, Bush had more heavy-weight support than McCain did. Kind of like Edwards vs. Kerry this year.

Quote:

Originally posted by ET Warrior
That's one of the smartest things i've heard all night.
Thank you. I pride myself on a general air of cynicism towards politics.

taoistimmortal 03-04-2004 06:47 PM

I brought this subject to the attention of a friend of mine last night and because he tried to convince me that the reinstating of a military draft would be a good thing, we got caught up in a very heated debate.

His view was based on the idea that a military draft would add an infusion of discipline into a lazy and lethargic or complacent society, and for that reason, in addition to meeting the needs the Department of Defense, it would be an action that would help more than it would harm.

Needless to say I could not agree with him, and I don't think I convinced him to perceive it from my point of view, which is unfortunate because if this bill is passed it would ultimately change the fabric of our society, because it would be extremely invasive to the lives of those people that would not wish to serve a mandatory two years in some capacity, and in this way it would obstruct our freedom to personal choice, just for the simple purpose of allowing the government to wage it's multilateral campaigns across the world.

Under the conditions or circumstances that the Bush administration is operating, namely against the war on terror, from their point of view, a military draft would solve a great many of their logistical and staffing problems, but in a free democracy one has to have the ability to boycott the actions of a government that one cannot support ideologically, and the provisions in the two bills make sure that dissent will be an extremely difficult stand to take.

I also discovered that the 2 bills were not recently introduced but instead were brought before congress on Jan. 7th 2003, or at least one of them was. Could someone tell me why a bill such as these would sit idle in the house for over a year. I'm just not sure what the significance of that is, and I would like to know.

The S.S.S. OR Selective Service System as far as I understand has sat idle for the last 30 years or so, operating in a very minimal manner. But starting in the fiscal year 2004 they were given about 54 million dollars in federal funds to begin gearing up for full operational capacity which means that someone plans for the S.S.S. to be ready to go sometime in the next year and a half. Very frightening

Hiroki 03-04-2004 06:58 PM

I'll be getting out of this country soon. I never liked it much anyhow, and I'm defenatly not going to die for, and defenatly not for Bush.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.