The Draft
Guest
Posts: n/a
Salty, you seem to me a bit self righteous, as you seem to think the only way to "really accomplish" anything is to join the military. You're an infinitely looping Army commercial. Accomplishment is a relative term. If were to go through that training, I don't know if i would consider it to be my greatest accomplishment - maybe i would, but i doubt it. I've done some things that you would consider almost invisible, but consider them the most important things I've ever done. Salty, please knock off your crewcut machismo, because its starting to seem like overcompensation. We get it, you were in the military, and you fancy yourself pretty tough because of it. Anyone who disagrees is a hippie liberal, ok, thanks, we get it.
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by Fatal Velocity
Salty, well put.
oh and WTF's a DLPT? :-)
oh and WTF's a DLPT? :-)
Sighborg, you post that ignorant comment in a thread i've posted twice on. to think i wouldn't take offense is ignorant too.
Last edited by Salty; May 24, 2004 at 04:58 PM.
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Right, but you make it seem like all Army Rangers are blood lusting savages that want to kill everything with a rag on it's head or on a camel. This isn't the case in the slightest and all Rangers are professional soliders.
Your type of ignorant babbling is no different from the media saying all soldiers are bad because some stupid PFC ***** took some pictures of prisoners, handed out blow jobs like candy and has a bun in the oven.
I could really care less if we weren't at war but unfortunately i need to address that YOUR military consists of men that are professional and are willing to do the job they're paid to do. Don't generalize them as redneck yahoo's with guns a blaze. As petty and insignificant as your comment was is besides the point. We just don't need it in this day and age...
To be honest i really didn't take offense. I'm just sticking up on behalf of those in the sand box without access to your comments
Your type of ignorant babbling is no different from the media saying all soldiers are bad because some stupid PFC ***** took some pictures of prisoners, handed out blow jobs like candy and has a bun in the oven.
I could really care less if we weren't at war but unfortunately i need to address that YOUR military consists of men that are professional and are willing to do the job they're paid to do. Don't generalize them as redneck yahoo's with guns a blaze. As petty and insignificant as your comment was is besides the point. We just don't need it in this day and age...
To be honest i really didn't take offense. I'm just sticking up on behalf of those in the sand box without access to your comments
Guest
Posts: n/a
Right, but you make it seem like all Army Rangers are blood lusting savages that want to kill everything with a rag on it's head or on a camel. This isn't the case in the slightest and all Rangers are professional soliders.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,494
From: Petaluma, CA
Car Info: 1942 ford pinto
ive wanted to go into the military for awhile bro. just havent felt it to be the right time yet.
and if i do go in it will be airborne rangers, im not saying i will make it as a ranger, i will just TRY and make it as one
oh and im not saying that all airborne rangers are cowboy lunatics, ive met a bunch of them, im just saying if i went in i expect id probably die if i do go to war. and i wouldnt be so much as a lunatic killer as more of a do whatever they tell me to do type o guy
and if i do go in it will be airborne rangers, im not saying i will make it as a ranger, i will just TRY and make it as one
oh and im not saying that all airborne rangers are cowboy lunatics, ive met a bunch of them, im just saying if i went in i expect id probably die if i do go to war. and i wouldnt be so much as a lunatic killer as more of a do whatever they tell me to do type o guy
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,256
From: Blue-faced in a red state
Car Info: 04 Silver WRX Wagon
a hippie vs. soldier discussion without me? j/k
you guys both make valid points. salty, i respect your perspective. i come from a family whose elders have served in every war over the last 65 years. but i also agree with earlier posts, in that it helps your argument when you concede to the opposition if they are indeed correct (just like Bush should have conceeded the fact that we unprepared for the occupation efforts). i'm not talking about this thread specifically, nor I am at all saying this to you specifically. i am as guilty as the next of sticking to my guns, unwilling to see the truth in another's argument.
btw, quick story... i used to be in a bible study with a high-ranking officer in the army (he went on to lead a squad of humvees in Iraq). long story short, after the 9/11 attack, i gave a speech at a peace rally on campus re: my feelings of Christ being a man of peace. the next morning i had breakfast with some of the guys in the study, my army friend being one of them. it was hella awkward at first, but then he looked at me and said he was cool with it. we are all men of different convictions, and we should follow those convictions so that we are also men of action.
you guys both make valid points. salty, i respect your perspective. i come from a family whose elders have served in every war over the last 65 years. but i also agree with earlier posts, in that it helps your argument when you concede to the opposition if they are indeed correct (just like Bush should have conceeded the fact that we unprepared for the occupation efforts). i'm not talking about this thread specifically, nor I am at all saying this to you specifically. i am as guilty as the next of sticking to my guns, unwilling to see the truth in another's argument.
btw, quick story... i used to be in a bible study with a high-ranking officer in the army (he went on to lead a squad of humvees in Iraq). long story short, after the 9/11 attack, i gave a speech at a peace rally on campus re: my feelings of Christ being a man of peace. the next morning i had breakfast with some of the guys in the study, my army friend being one of them. it was hella awkward at first, but then he looked at me and said he was cool with it. we are all men of different convictions, and we should follow those convictions so that we are also men of action.
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
A buddy of mine emailed me with the following... No he's not another "YEHAWWW KILL'EM ALL WOOHOOO!" Ranger... go figure, he's a lawyer too. 
Originally posted by airbornelawyer
Um...
Did these idiots actually read the article and check the sources? The author is conveniently not identified, but it is Adam Stutz, who wrote this in January 2004 for the newsletter of a group called Project Censored, a left-wing "media research" organization. Go here to see a list of Project Censored's "Our Favorite Web Sites" to get a flavor of the group. Also, go read Stutz's original article at this Indymedia site: http://www.vancouver.indymedia.org/n.../01/105146.php. Note especially the paragraphs missing or changed from what was in the Congress.org article (especially the line: "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.")
As for the actual legislation cited, the two bills, S.89 and H.R.163, are both called the "Universal National Service Act of 2003" and may be found on the Library of Congress Legislative Information database. S.89 was introduced by Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) and has no cosponsors. H.R.163 was introduced by Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and has 14 cosponsors:
- Neil Abercrombie, Neil (D-HI)
- Corrine Brown (D-FL)
- Donna Christian-Christensen (D-VI) (that's the U.S. Virgin Islands)
- William "Lacy" Clay (D-MO)
- John Conyers (D-MI)
- Elijah Cummings (D-MD)
- Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
- Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)
- John Lewis (D-GA)
- "Baghdad" Jim McDermott (D-WA)
- Jim Moran (D-VA)
- Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC)
- Fortney "Pete" Stark (D-CA)
- Nydia Velazquez (D-NY)
Reps. Abercrombie, Brown, Clay, Conyers, Jackson-Lee, Lewis, McDermott, Holmes Norton, Stark and Velazquez are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, chaired by Dennis Kucinich (D-Tinfoil Hatland) and Barbara Lee (D-USSR) (Lee, BTW, is the only person to vote against the "war on terror" resolution in September 2001). The Progressive Caucus is the coalition of the Congress' most leftist members.
The non-Progressive Caucus members here, such as impeached former federal judge Alcee Hastings and CBC Chair Elijah Cummings, are just as far out of the mainstream. Here is Rep. Cummings on the President's trip to Africa last summer: "One must never imagine that this Republican president could ever care about black people!" In April 2003, Jim Moran, former mayor of Alexandria, infamously blamed the Jewish community for the war in Iraq.
BTW, H.R.163 was introduced on January 7, 2003. It was referred to a subcommittee on February 3, 2003. S.89 was also introduced on January 7, 2003 and referred to committee. No action has been taken since on either bill. The only thing that has happened since February 2003 is that the Virgin Islands delegate joined as a cosponsor last week.
There may or may not be talk in the Administration on whether to reinstate the draft or take other measures to alleviate manpower shortages, but these bills have nothing to with it. Charlie Rangel, who served with the 2ID in Korea, earning a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart, has been pushing conscription for several years precisely because he sees it as an anti-war measure: "I truly believe that decision makers who support war would more readily feel the pain of conflict and appreciate the sacrifice of those on the front lines if their children were there, too." (source).
In summary, my "professional opinion on this article" is that it is a piece of steaming crap, based on false information and disingenuously edited to hide the true source and bias of its author.
Um...
Did these idiots actually read the article and check the sources? The author is conveniently not identified, but it is Adam Stutz, who wrote this in January 2004 for the newsletter of a group called Project Censored, a left-wing "media research" organization. Go here to see a list of Project Censored's "Our Favorite Web Sites" to get a flavor of the group. Also, go read Stutz's original article at this Indymedia site: http://www.vancouver.indymedia.org/n.../01/105146.php. Note especially the paragraphs missing or changed from what was in the Congress.org article (especially the line: "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.")
As for the actual legislation cited, the two bills, S.89 and H.R.163, are both called the "Universal National Service Act of 2003" and may be found on the Library of Congress Legislative Information database. S.89 was introduced by Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) and has no cosponsors. H.R.163 was introduced by Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and has 14 cosponsors:
- Neil Abercrombie, Neil (D-HI)
- Corrine Brown (D-FL)
- Donna Christian-Christensen (D-VI) (that's the U.S. Virgin Islands)
- William "Lacy" Clay (D-MO)
- John Conyers (D-MI)
- Elijah Cummings (D-MD)
- Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
- Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)
- John Lewis (D-GA)
- "Baghdad" Jim McDermott (D-WA)
- Jim Moran (D-VA)
- Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC)
- Fortney "Pete" Stark (D-CA)
- Nydia Velazquez (D-NY)
Reps. Abercrombie, Brown, Clay, Conyers, Jackson-Lee, Lewis, McDermott, Holmes Norton, Stark and Velazquez are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, chaired by Dennis Kucinich (D-Tinfoil Hatland) and Barbara Lee (D-USSR) (Lee, BTW, is the only person to vote against the "war on terror" resolution in September 2001). The Progressive Caucus is the coalition of the Congress' most leftist members.
The non-Progressive Caucus members here, such as impeached former federal judge Alcee Hastings and CBC Chair Elijah Cummings, are just as far out of the mainstream. Here is Rep. Cummings on the President's trip to Africa last summer: "One must never imagine that this Republican president could ever care about black people!" In April 2003, Jim Moran, former mayor of Alexandria, infamously blamed the Jewish community for the war in Iraq.
BTW, H.R.163 was introduced on January 7, 2003. It was referred to a subcommittee on February 3, 2003. S.89 was also introduced on January 7, 2003 and referred to committee. No action has been taken since on either bill. The only thing that has happened since February 2003 is that the Virgin Islands delegate joined as a cosponsor last week.
There may or may not be talk in the Administration on whether to reinstate the draft or take other measures to alleviate manpower shortages, but these bills have nothing to with it. Charlie Rangel, who served with the 2ID in Korea, earning a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart, has been pushing conscription for several years precisely because he sees it as an anti-war measure: "I truly believe that decision makers who support war would more readily feel the pain of conflict and appreciate the sacrifice of those on the front lines if their children were there, too." (source).
In summary, my "professional opinion on this article" is that it is a piece of steaming crap, based on false information and disingenuously edited to hide the true source and bias of its author.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,256
From: Blue-faced in a red state
Car Info: 04 Silver WRX Wagon
unfortunately the article above chose to throw in some quips and barbs (D-USSR, D-Tinfoil Hatland). For such an astute observer, it is surprising that they would resort to name calling (unless this piece was written for entertainment)
VIP Member
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,709
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Car Info: CRZ EX-Navi/6MT & Vue Redline
I remember the news was talking about a similar bill just after 9/11. That bill was acknowledged by its Democrat creators as simply being created to make war less appealing to those with children. If I remember correctly, an african american congressman (sorry, don't remember his name) who was also a vietnam vet, was the main backer of the bill. I really don't see this type of bill making through congress, especially with stipulations, such as drafting women, attached. Or, maybe I'm just in denial? 
-Chris
-Chris
Last edited by bassplayrr; May 25, 2004 at 11:10 AM.