-Draft- READ important

[menewa]

The present White House would never go for the draft. People like Cheney and Rumsfeld have been using more and more mercenaries to fight our current wars. The number of highered guns adn support in Iraq is higher than in any other conflict. Private contractors cook, clean, drive convoys, gather intelligence, interogate prisoners and fight in combat , all the things that once upon a time only regular soldiers once did. It's ironic that during the Vietnam War when Rumsfeld was a US Rep, he vehemently opposed the presence of a small number of Halliburton employees working for the DoD in Vietnam. He said that it was a waste of money as well as a security problem. Oh how he's changed. However, I think if this trend continues it will seriously undermine our national defense. Private contractors can leave at any time and they are not held to the same standards as our men and women of honor. The Roman Empire began to fall shortly after it began replacing more and more of its standing army with mercenary soldiers.
One thing that ticks me off about this most, is that someone working for a private company like KBR makes at least $70,000 a year. However, our privates in the Army make less than $20K. This is the most unfair thing we can do to our troops.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by NewGuy
There is no mandate for cancelling Martial Law.

I'd be willing to bet that 200 million citizens acting in concert would put an end to martial law right quick.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by proud_savagette
And besides, I kinda wish women could serve on the front lines. I understand why they can't because of hygiene and all, but still. What better way to die is there than dying in service for the freedom of fellow Americans? Of course, I could only rest in peace if it was clear that the liberals weren't going to destroy the nation...

I am glad women dont serve on the front lines. Not that i dont think you ladies could do an awesome job its just that I dont really like the fact that us men have to serve on the front lines. War is hell. And not every man can handle it. And not that women couldnt handle it but i think it would be alot more difficult and if you get captured i dont want to think about what the enemy would do to a female soldier. What can i say im a sexist pig.

 

[proud_savagette]

What can i say im a sexist pig.

No, i don't think so. Most guys wouldn't even consider that. I know you're right, it just stinks having to sit here and support the war and all that when I'm a girl, and I often get told to "eat my words" since I can't fight in the front lines anyway. *sigh* BUt I have a cousin, who's also my godfather, who is a Navy SEAL, and despite the fact that I worry about him 24/7, I still think he made a good choice.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I'd be willing to bet that 200 million citizens acting in concert would put an end to martial law right quick.

Oh really?

How would you match the weaponry and forces of the US military backed by the UN?

Strategic targeting of civilian homes initially for registered gun users followed by large deployments to city areas will squash and real resistance in 3 days.

 

[proud_savagette]

Strategic targeting of civilian homes initially for registered gun users followed by large deployments to city areas will squash and real resistance in 3 days.

actually, though this is really a small percentage is suppose, all the people I know who are registered gun owners support the draft, and they are willing to fight to protect our country. Interestingly enough, everyone who is for gun control around here is also against the draft...honest!

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by proud_savagette
actually, though this is really a small percentage is suppose, all the people I know who are registered gun owners support the draft, and they are willing to fight to protect our country. Interestingly enough, everyone who is for gun control around here is also against the draft...honest!

But the issue is that if the draft goes through and the system takes over suspending the Constitution in a martial law type scenario, what would be the outcome?

That, I think, was the issue here.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by NewGuy
Oh really?

How would you match the weaponry and forces of the US military backed by the UN?

Strategic targeting of civilian homes initially for registered gun users followed by large deployments to city areas will squash and real resistance in 3 days.

the military is 4 million strong at the most? lets see, 4 million to 200 million.....do the math.

 

[proud_savagette]

i don't know if you have as many supporters as you think you have...200 million? I don't know...and I bet the army could whup y'all pretty fast, even if they only have 4 million. How many of the 200 million are adults? How many have been trained? Um...yeah.

 

[NewGuy]

I might add that if you take the adult population and weed out those who are elderly and diseased heavily, then weed out those who would not have any defense with a range weapon, factor in the lackof body armor and so forth............


And then pit them against state of the art technology with trained assassins IN body armor, with grenades, missiles, automatic rifles, laser and sound weaponry, and all of the other goodies.......

I have to be close to dead -on.

 

[DKSuddeth]

i guess overwhelming numbers mean nothing to anyone.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
i guess overwhelming numbers mean nothing to anyone.

They didnt to the Spartans when the Persians came a calling. They eventually fell but superior tactics and better weapons gave far gretaer losses to the PErsians and forced them to turn away from greece.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by insein
They didnt to the Spartans when the Persians came a calling. They eventually fell but superior tactics and better weapons gave far gretaer losses to the PErsians and forced them to turn away from greece.

but how many other battles or wars worked the other way around?

 

[menewa]

Originally posted by proud_savagette
i don't know if you have as many supporters as you think you have...200 million? I don't know...and I bet the army could whup y'all pretty fast, even if they only have 4 million. How many of the 200 million are adults? How many have been trained? Um...yeah.

Yeah, military weaponry is far superior to the weapons held by common citizens. But don't you think some people in the military and people working for mercenary camps would splinter off and balance off the fighting in the hopes of attaining some high status in whatever new type of government would form after such an epic battle.

 

[Shazbot]

I'll have to side with DK here. Let's even narrow it to 100-150 million vs. the military. The military forces would have to be spread so thin to cover every threat that they would be bound to lose before the conflict even started. In Iraq, for example, the "street to street" fighting that occured (and occurs) is actually quite minimal. Just think what it would be like to go into a city like Baghdad, and instead of having the civilians celebrate your arrival, having them all shooting at you. Yeah, I guess you could systematically blow up every building, but you only have so many bombs. Heck, during the 3-week invasion, we were already resorting to standard iron bombs as the number of available "smart" bombs and cruise missiles was already exhausted.

It's this very fact that made the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan so very crucial. Japan didn't have as great a population as we have today. However, they were all fighting to the death. If we were to have made an assault on Japan proper, we would have seen Okinawa times 10. We were only able to crush their will to fight with a show of mass destruction. It's also by this very reason that no force on earth will ever bring America to subjection. If the United States falls in the future, it will be from the inside.

Don't get me wrong, the civilians in such a theoretical incident would definitely have a much higher casualty count than the trained military forces. However, those kinds of odds are too great to warrant a military victory.

-Douglas

 

[op3g]

I dought that our own military would fire on its own citizens if the whole country was in revolt.... just thinking that they would would be retarded -.- If the citizens revolted there would be no economy to support the army anyway

 

[gaffer]

First of all lets speak of the draft. Which is not going to happen. The only way a draft is necessary is if we get into a major war with countries that have large modern armies and navies. And a real air force. A country that takes more than three divisions to overrun. At present there is no country like that in the world that we need to be concerned about.

An increase in pay and a few more incentives would be sufficient to maintain the present military and simply allocating more positions would increase the size. Another way is to lower the standards for enlistments, such as accepting high school drop outs. It was done effectively in the past and molded many into good productive citizens.

The draft is for creating a large standing army, not to replace regular troops in an occupation capacity.

The draft is perfectly legal. Its called national defense. In times of war when there is a serious shortage of personnel it can be used to fill the military positions. The draft has been used in every major war this country has been involved in. It will be used again if and when it is necessary.

My grandfather was drafted in WW1. My father was drafted in WW2. I was draft for Vietnam. We all went and did what we had to do. Then came home and restarted our lives again. A little tougher and harder for the experience.

Gee your life may be interrupted for a couple of years while you go off to defend your country and the freedoms you hold so dear. Wouldn't want to miss out on trips to the mall, talking freely here, going to concerts and sports events and all that. Let someone else go lay down their life for your freedom. Its the clinton thing to do.

As for marshall law. once again, there is no need for it. When it is used it is done so sparingly and only in specific areas. A state of high alert is NOT marshall law. Its putting the local authorties on alert to deal with potential threats to their community. Our military is made up of people just like you and me. They watch the same news and do the same things we do here. They do not blindly follow orders. If they judge an order to be illegal they can disobey it. If a president suspended all rights and closed down the congress he would still have to deal with the population and the majority of the military. Those folks are just like you and me, they would never stand for it.

The idea of a draft or marshall law is just a bunch of silly liberal hogwash. When you see such bills take note of who introduced them. For example Rangol introduced the draft bill. Why? Because he wants to see blacks drafted so he can make a racial issue of it. Thats the only thing he does there. He's a racist.

You won't see a draft anytime soon, unless we take on n.korea and china were to step in. N. korea might take five divisions. And nukes are off the table. No one will risk us retaliating.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
i guess overwhelming numbers mean nothing to anyone.

Not when facing a technologically advanced military with WMDS

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by menewa
Yeah, military weaponry is far superior to the weapons held by common citizens. But don't you think some people in the military and people working for mercenary camps would splinter off and balance off the fighting in the hopes of attaining some high status in whatever new type of government would form after such an epic battle.

I would think quite the opposite that many americans would rise up to the challenge of the draft and honorably be willing to serve.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by Shazbot
I'll have to side with DK here. Let's even narrow it to 100-150 million vs. the military. The military forces would have to be spread so thin to cover every threat that they would be bound to lose before the conflict even started. In Iraq, for example, the "street to street" fighting that occured (and occurs) is actually quite minimal. Just think what it would be like to go into a city like Baghdad, and instead of having the civilians celebrate your arrival, having them all shooting at you. Yeah, I guess you could systematically blow up every building, but you only have so many bombs. Heck, during the 3-week invasion, we were already resorting to standard iron bombs as the number of available "smart" bombs and cruise missiles was already exhausted.

It's this very fact that made the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan so very crucial. Japan didn't have as great a population as we have today. However, they were all fighting to the death. If we were to have made an assault on Japan proper, we would have seen Okinawa times 10. We were only able to crush their will to fight with a show of mass destruction. It's also by this very reason that no force on earth will ever bring America to subjection. If the United States falls in the future, it will be from the inside.

Don't get me wrong, the civilians in such a theoretical incident would definitely have a much higher casualty count than the trained military forces. However, those kinds of odds are too great to warrant a military victory.

-Douglas

The Irony of all this is that in order not to fight a war the antidrafters would have to defeat the military in a civil war.