Fwd: Re: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [SRRTAC-L:13247] New Draft

[Alfred Kagan]

>Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 08:56:41 -0500
>From: "Regina Cassidy" <rcassidy at parkland.edu>
>To: <akagan at uiuc.edu>
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [SRRTAC-L:13247] New Draft
>
>Conscription seemed like a good idea to me, at first.  Lawmakers might
>think twice about getting us involved in military conflicts if they fear
>fragging and insubordination among the troops. 
>
>However, haven't the rich folks always found a way around military
>service?  Won't they always?  Both Bush and Clinton weaseled out of it
>(I say "weaseled" since they didn't object on principal, but merely
>exploited loopholes and connections).  It would probably be better to
>focus on educating potential enlistees about the reality of war, its
>aftermath and what happens to veterans in this country.  They need to be
>convinced not to cooperate.  Our government needs to feel the pressure
>to use diplomacy instead of the bodies of the poor (or poor and middle
>class) and massive armature.
>
>If you really don't want something, don't ask for it.  Do we really want
>our children drafted?  I do not.
>
>Gina
>
>
>
>>>>  Alfred Kagan <akagan at uiuc.edu> 04/06/04 3:19 PM >>>
>>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


-- 


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