Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
The Democrats have had a fine time this month spreading urban legends about the prospect of a reintroduction of the military draft during a second Bush term. Not only have they and their associates started a shadowy e-mail campaign, but several of their party leaders accused Republicans of hiding a "secret plan" to restart the draft, despite the numerous denials from the GOP -- and the fact that the only people to actually propose a new draft are two Democrats, Charles Rangel and Fritz Hollings. CBS helped out, again, by again treating rumors as fact and basing an entire news segment on the hoax.
But lost in the shuffle until now is John Kerry's proposal to require service for high-school graduation, found by Swimming Through The Spin. Brian found the original web page archived, as somehow this proposal has been mysteriously deleted from the John Kerry website. Since the Democrats brought this up, what exactly are the plans for American youth under a Kerry/Edwards administration?
Quote: As part of his 100 day plan to change America, John Kerry will propose a comprehensive service plan that includes requiring mandatory service for high school students and four years of college tuition in exchange for two years of national service.
The more expansive PDF of Kerry's plan doesn't detail how the mandatory high-school service is supposed to work, nor does it clearly explain how they plan to pay for four years of college tuition for the 500,000 students per year they expect to put through this program, other than closing a loophole that allows lenders on student loans to keep extra interest paid. If a "typical public university" charges $5,000 per year for tuition -- a rather moderate amount these days -- then just the cost for the first four years alone will be $10 billion, not the $12 billion over 10 years that Kerry claims. ($20,000 times 500,000 students = $10 billion.)
It seems that Kerry has once again been caught in a severe case of projection, and once again has deleted pages from his web site to cover his tracks. His party squeals about a draft which only they have proposed restarting while trying to back-door a plan for indentured servitude for the teenagers of America.
hey marky mark, instead of reading your right-wing trash rags...just consider the facts... there ARE NOT enough troops in Iraq to complete the job....whatver the job actually is ...enlistment in the military IS down... re-enlistment IS down...hehe non of you hardass tough guy bush voters are signing up, or even better signing your kids up...i wonder why not the only choice bush is gonna have is a DRAFT?? why?? well why do u think iran is being belligerent and building nukes, i mean they know we could beat em, right?? or how bouts N Korea??? why they are still making weapons, even though we could kick their ass?? well guess what, they watch the news too, even republicans say there arent enuff troops. if we have to go into iran or n. korea, which probably is going to happen, we need a DRAFT!!!!!!! look at what these disgusting scum neocons are resorting to, bullying our poor soldiers:
My oh my. What an angry little chap! Hangnail giving you too much pain or something?
The fact of the matter is that no one -- not even the Dems who introduced the bills -- is contemplating reinstituting the draft. The Republicans certainly aren't. The Joint Chiefs certainly aren't.
Of course, CBS wishes there were some substance to the charge. But the only ones talking about compulsory service are Dems -- Kerry being one of them.
In your opinion, there aren't enough troops in Iraq to "finish the job". That doesn't make it a "fact".
well why do u think iran is being belligerent and building nukes, i mean they know we could beat em, right??
It doesn't take troops to eliminate the Iranian nuke threat. Lobbing a few dozen cruise missiles into their nuke plant would do nicely. If the US doesn't do it, the Israelis will.
or how bouts N Korea???
What bouts North Korea? The best thing to do about North Korea is to let them continue the way they're going. At the rate they're starving to death, there won't be enough of them left to worry about by the time they get their first bomb constructed.
Army commanders denied allegations on Wednesday that that soldiers have been threatened with deployment to Iraq if they do not re-enlist.
"It's just not being done," Lt. Col. David Johnson said. "We are a professional army. We want soldiers who want to be in the Army," he said.
Col. Theresa Lever, a human resources officer at Fort Carson. She said about 750 of those accepted re-enlistment bonuses of up to $15,000 offered last month. Johnson said the post has the highest re-enlistment rate in the nation.
The 3rd Brigade Combat Team is one of several Army units involved in a plan to stabilize units by allowing soldiers to request to stay at the same post after their enlistment is up. In the past the army has discouraged this practice, called homesteading.
As part of this new management style soldiers were being asked to state whether they wanted to remain with the unit, stay in the army somewhere else or leave when their tours are up. Some soldiers took this to mean they should re-up or risk going to Iraq.
Lever said any soldier with less than 12 months to go would be able to appeal to upper echelons before being sent to Iraq and that it would be out of the ordinary to send such a soldier.
A soldier present at the briefing, Spcl. Benny Budano, 29, said he had not been threatened. "I don't mind being deployed," adding that he had re-enlisted of "my own free will." He said there might have been some confusion when soldiers first discussed re-enlisting with their career counselors. -------------------------------------------------
Your third link, the one from the Denver newspaper, has exactly the same story -- word for word -- as the one in your first link. Posting the same story twice doesn't prove it is true, it just proves you don't read what you post.
Your fourth link, the one from japantoday.com, is nothing but a few short excerpts from the same story which appears in your first link. Hell, it's even shorter than the excerpts I posted from the first link. Again, you are impressing no one with the quantity of your links. We all know that often a single story is run in many news outlets.
Your fifth link includes this revealing quote from Howard Dean:
"The only place to go for more troops is a draft," warned Dean, who is now an ardent supporter of Democratic nominee John Kerry.
Need I remind you that it was Kerry who said he intends (if elected -- a possibility looking increasingly remote) to increase troops by 40,000? If Dean's appraisal of the situation is correct, that means that the best way to avoid the reinstitution of the draft is to make sure Kerry isn't elected president. As that link goes on to say:
Secretary of State Colin Powell moved to dispel these concerns on Sunday, saying in a television interview that "there are no plans for a draft."
"At least President Bush has no plans for a draft," Powell assured, "nor is a draft needed."
So Powell and Dean both agree with the point raised in my first post in the thread -- it is Kerry, not Bush, who is proposing a draft.
The sixth link rehashes the same story. All of them so far have to do with a Dem congresswoman blathering on about a single army base. A standard partisan grandstand ploy at election time. From the comments of those in charge and of the soldier interviewed in the first link, it appears that some of the soldiers misunderstood their options. This isn't particularly surprising -- after all, anyone dumb enough to enlist isn't smart enough to understand re-enlistment options, right? *sarcasm*
Your final link is so generic as to be useless, and does nothing to address the fact that it isn't Bush or the Republicans who are pushing for a draft, but Kerry and the two Dems who introduced the dormant bills in the House and in the Senate. And Kerry is such a hopeless flip-flopper that he's probably forgotten he ever proposed it in the first place, or when pressed on the question will try to "nuance" his original statement into the opposite -- "I proposed a mandatory service program before I opposed it".
Face it, Kingie boy -- your candidate is a hollow pumpkin.
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil 441 topic views. 4 members, 0 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]