[Peace-discuss] New Draft
C. G. Estabrook
galliher at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu
Tue Apr 6 18:09:40 CDT 2004
I agree with the first point because I don't agree with the second: a
truly egalitarian draft might make it more difficult to set out on
imperial adventures. --CGE
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, Morton K.Brussel wrote:
> Another reason why the draft is problematical for this administration
> is that it may greatly increase opposition to Bush's policies; during
> the Vietnam days, the students were foremost among those against the
> war, for it concerned them directly. That could occur again, as the
> administration is no doubt aware.
>
> On a more philosophical basis, the draft is a form of servitude, and
> making that servitude egalitarian (which I doubt would be achieved)
> does not make it less obnoxious. Moreover, it would give this
> government greater freedom yet for its hegemonic agenda; as is they are
> strapped for manpower.
>
> MKB
>
> On Apr 6, 2004, at 3:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>
> > I think a general draft might be one of the quicker ways of ending the
> > Iraq occupation, so I don't think the Bush administration will do it --
> > although they have been talking about a "skills draft," whereby they
> > can
> > avoid some of the problems a general draft would produce (e.g.,
> > drafting
> > women) and still deal with some of their staffing problems -- which are
> > great. Most of the US military is in Iraq, on the way, or on the way
> > back.
> >
> > But neither the administration nor the Pentagon want a general draft, I
> > think. (That's why at least some of the sponsors of this bill put their
> > names on it.) The US found in Vietnam what the French had found out
> > there
> > before -- you can't fight a colonial war with a conscript army. The
> > revolt of the US military in Vietnam is an untold story from more than
> > 30
> > years ago, but it was a principal reason that the war ended as it did
> > --
> > and why the Pentagon was so happy to go to a "volunteer" army.
> >
> > The volunteer army is of course an economic draft, as we know, but
> > then so
> > was the draft. (See the famous "channeling memo" from the head of SSS
> > during Vietnam.) Any US government moves toward a draft (which are
> > unlikely, I think) shouldn't be opposed so much as the current use of
> > the
> > military should be condemned -- "end the occupations" should be the
> > response to the Bush administration war policy. And then of course no
> > draft would be necessary. --CGE
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, Alfred Kagan wrote:
> >
> >>> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 15:23:48 -0400 (EDT)
> >>> From: Frederick W Stoss <fstoss at buffalo.edu>
> >>> X-Sender: fstoss at callisto.acsu.buffalo.edu
> >>> To: SRRT Action Council <srrtac-l at ala.org>
> >>> Subject: [SRRTAC-L:13247] New Draft
> >>> X-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
> >>> Reply-To: srrtac-l at ala.org
> >>> Sender: owner-srrtac-l at ala.org
> >>> X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more
> >>> information
> >>>
> >>> Peace,
> >>>
> >>> Fred Stoss
> >>>
> >>> PLEASE REPOST THIS IN YOUR BULLETIN BOARD SO THAT EVERYONE READS
> >>> THIS!
> >>>
> >>> This is an important message. It is about the efforts being
> >>> undertaken in
> >>> Washington to reinstate The Draft-conscription of US men and women
> >>> for
> >>> compulsory service. Read this and share this with those you think
> >>> need to
> >>> be informed.
> >>> -----
> >>>
> >>> House sponsors are: Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr.
> >>> CONYERS,
> >>> Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the
> >>> following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed
> >>> Services.
> >>> Senate Sponsors are: Mr. HOLLINGS introduced the following bill;
> >>> which was
> >>> read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services
> >>>
> >>> ALL DEMOCRATS!!!
> >>>
> >>> Why would they fall into Bush's trap like that! He can now say it was
> >>> introduced by the democrats and he had nothing to do with it. I can
> >>> see it
> >>> now: VOTE FOR KERRY AND REINSTITUTE THE DRAFT.
> >>>
> >>> If it doesn't' come out, Bush WILL jump on it if he is reelected.
> >>> This is
> >>> TERRIBLE.
> >>> -----
> >>>
> >>> See Pete Stark's letter of support below:
> >>>
> >>> Supporting H.R.163 the Universal National Service Act of 2003
> >>>
> >>> January 8, 2003
> >>>
> >>> Mr. Speaker:
> >>>
> >>> I am an original cosponsor of the Rangel/Conyers bill, the Universal
> >>> National Service Act of 2003 (HR 163), which would reinstate a
> >>> national
> >>> draft. I would like to explain my support for this legislation. I
> >>> ardently
> >>> oppose war with Iraq. The evidence simply does not exist to warrant
> >>> sending our nation's young people to sacrifice their lives in Iraq. I
> >>> believe America ought to be an advocate for peace, not imperialism.
> >>>
> >>> Yet, war is on the horizon. The President is intent on invading Iraq
> >>> whatever the cost. Thanks to the President's brand of hotheaded bully
> >>> diplomacy, war with North Korea may also be imminent. The only real
> >>> question that remains is whether or not Americans are ready and
> >>> willing to
> >>> bear the cost?
> >>>
> >>> I commend my colleagues Mr. Rangel and Mr. Conyers for their wisdom
> >>> in
> >>> authoring this bill. I'm honored to be an original cosponsor.
> >>>
> >>> This bill requires all young Americans men and women between 18 and
> >>> 26
> >>> to perform a two year period of national service in a military or
> >>> civilian
> >>> capacity as determined by the President. For those who
> >>> conscientiously
> >>> object to war, the bill assures that any military service would not
> >>> include combat. Otherwise, there would be no preferences, no
> >>> deferments,
> >>> no chance for the well-off or the well- connected to dodge military
> >>> service for their country, as did our President.
> >>>
> >>> Reinstituting the draft may seem unnecessary to some. But, it will
> >>> ensure
> >>> all Americans share in the cost and sacrifice of war. Without a
> >>> universal
> >>> draft, this burden weighs disproportionately on the shoulders of the
> >>> poor
> >>> the disadvantaged and minority populations.
> >>>
> >>> It is my understanding that out of the 435 Members of this House and
> >>> the
> >>> 100 members of the Senate, only one-only one-has a child in active
> >>> military service. Who are we to know the pain of war when we
> >>> ourselves
> >>> will not directly bear the brunt of that action? It won't be us
> >>> mourning
> >>> the loss of a child or loved one. Maybe some of you in this Congress
> >>> would
> >>> think twice about voting for war in Iraq if you knew your child may
> >>> be
> >>> sent to fight in the streets of Baghdad?
> >>>
> >>> If our nation is to go to war, it is only right that all Americans
> >>> share
> >>> in the sacrifice of war. It is time we truly comprehended the
> >>> consequences. I urge my colleagues to support a universal draft
> >>> which I
> >>> believe will make votes for war much more real for many of my
> >>> colleagues.
> >>> -----
> >>>
> >>> US Preparing for Military Draft in Spring 2005
> >>> by Adam Stutz Wednesday January 28, 2004 at 09:50 AM
> >>>
> >>> The current agenda of the US federal government is to reinstate
> >>> the
> >>> draft in order to staff up for a protracted war on "terrorism."
> >>> Pending
> >>> legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills S 89 and HR 163)
> >>> would
> >>> time the program so the draft could begin at early as Spring 2005 --
> >>> conveniently just after the 2004 presidential election!
> >>>
> >>> Reinstatement of the draft
> >>>
> >>> Dear Friends and Family,
> >>>
> >>> I urge you to read the article below on the current agenda of the
> >>> federal
> >>> government to reinstate the draft in order to staff up for a
> >>> protracted
> >>> war on "terrorism."
> >>>
> >>> Pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills S 89 and HR
> >>> 163)
> >>> would time the program so the draft could begin at early as Spring
> >>> 2005 --
> >>> conveniently just after the 2004 presidential election! But the
> >>> administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed NOW, so
> >>> our
> >>> action is needed immediately. Details and links follow.
> >>>
> >>> If voters who currently support U.S. aggression abroad were
> >>> confronted
> >>> with the possibility that their own children or grandchildren might
> >>> not
> >>> have a say about whether to fight, many of these same voters might
> >>> have a
> >>> change of mind. (Not that it should make a difference, but this plan
> >>> would
> >>> among other things eliminate higher education as a shelter and would
> >>> not
> >>> exclude women -- and Canada is no longer an option.)
> >>>
> >>> Please send this on to all the parents and teachers you know, and
> >>> all the
> >>> aunts and uncles, grandparents, godparents.... And let your children
> >>> know
> >>> -- it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change!
> >>> Please
> >>> also write to your representatives to ask them why they aren't
> >>> telling
> >>> their constituents about these bills -- and write to newspapers and
> >>> other
> >>> media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important
> >>> story.
> >>>
> >>> The Draft*
> >>>
> >>> $28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS)
> >>> budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as
> >>> June
> >>> 15, 2005. SSS must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system,
> >>> which
> >>> has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see
> >>> website:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html
> >>>
> >>> to view the SSS Annual Performance Plan-Fiscal Year 2004.
> >>>
> >>> The Pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350
> >>> draft
> >>> board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though
> >>> this is
> >>> an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential
> >>> members
> >>> of Congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of "long,
> >>> hard
> >>> slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on
> >>> "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to
> >>> draft.
> >>>
> >>> Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and H.R. 163 forward this year,
> >>> entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "To provide for
> >>> the
> >>> common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in
> >>> the
> >>> United States, including women, perform a period of military service
> >>> or a
> >>> period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and
> >>> homeland security, and for other purposes."
> >>>
> >>> These active bills currently sit in the Committee on Armed Services.
> >>> Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam
> >>> era
> >>> remember. College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001,
> >>> Canada
> >>> and the US signed a "Smart Border Declaration," which could be used
> >>> to
> >>> keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's Minister of
> >>> Foreign
> >>> Affairs, John Manley, and US Homeland Security Director, Gov. Tom
> >>> Ridge,
> >>> the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among
> >>> other
> >>> things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing
> >>> each
> >>> country.
> >>>
> >>> Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and
> >>> class
> >>> lines also eliminate higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen
> >>> would
> >>> only be able to postpone service until the end of their cur-rent
> >>> semester.
> >>> Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.
> >>>
> >>> *This article by Adam Stutz is from the "What's Hot Off the Press"
> >>> column
> >>> of the newsletter of Project Censored, a media research group at
> >>> Sonoma
> >>> State University that tracks the news published in independent
> >>> journals
> >>> and newsletters. From these, Project Censored compiles an annual list
> >>> (more than 20 years running) of 25 news stories of social
> >>> significance
> >>> that have been overlooked, under-reported, or self-censored by the
> >>> country's major national news media. The mission of Project Censored
> >>> is
> >>> "to educate people about the role of independent journalism in a
> >>> democratic society and to tell The News That Didn't Make the News and
> >>> why."
> >>>
> >>> "What's Hot Off the Press" includes student synopses of articles
> >>> currently
> >>> being investigated for inclusion in the next Project Censored
> >>> report. For
> >>> more info and/or to receive Project Censored's newsletter, go to
> >>>
> >>> http://www.projectcensored.org,
> >>>
> >>> or email [censored]@sonoma.edu
> >>>
> >>> Don't believe it yet? Go to
> >>>
> >>> www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/g_three_sections_with_teasers/
> >>> legislative_home.htm
> >>>
> >>> and search for "S 89", then later search for "HR 163" where it says
> >>> "By
> >>> Number" and you'll find the articles. I would link you to the
> >>> articles
> >>> directly but that doesn't work for some reason.
> >>>
> >>> ---end of message---
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >> Al Kagan
> >> African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
> >> Africana Unit, Room 328
> >> University of Illinois Library
> >> 1408 W. Gregory Drive
> >> Urbana, IL 61801, USA
> >>
> >> tel. 217-333-6519
> >> fax. 217-333-2214
> >> e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Peace-discuss mailing list
> >> Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
> >> http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Peace-discuss mailing list
> > Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
> > http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> >
>
>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list