Military Draft System To Be Tested

Officials Say Selective Service Apparatus Is Being Checked, Not Implemented

(CBS/AP)  The Selective Service System is making plans to test its draft machinery in case Congress and President Bush need it, even though the White House says it doesn't want to bring back the draft.

The agency is planning a comprehensive test — not run since 1998 — of its military draft systems, a Selective Service official said. The test itself would not likely occur until 2009.

At the direction of the White House, reports CBS News correspondent Mark Knoller, Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson is making it clear he is not advocating the reinstatement of a military draft. He told a news conference that society would benefit from a return to the draft, but a few hours later, after the White House disavowed the remark, Nicholson issued a statement in line with administration policy. He said he strongly supports the all-volunteer military and does not support returning to a draft.

President Bush has repeatedly stated that the all-volunteer army would remain all-volunteer.

"We're kind of like a fire extinguisher. We sit on a shelf," Scott Campbell, the service's director for operations and chief information officer, said. "Unless the president and Congress get together and say, 'Turn the machine on' ... we're still on the shelf."

The administration has for years forcefully opposed bringing back the draft, and the White House said Thursday that policy has not changed and no proposal to reinstate the draft is being considered.

The "readiness exercise" would test the system that randomly chooses draftees by birth date and its network of appeal boards that decide how to deal with conscientious objectors and others who want to delay reporting for duty, Campbell said.

The Selective Service will start planning for the 2009 tests next June or July, although budget cuts could force the agency to cancel them, Campbell said.

President Bush said this week he is considering sending more troops to Iraq and has asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates to look into adding more troops to the nearly 1.4 million uniformed personnel on active duty.

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, increasing the Army by 40,000 troops would cost as much as $2.6 billion the first year and $4 billion after that. Military officials have said the Army and Marine Corps want to add as many as 35,000 more troops.

Recruiting new forces and retaining current troops is more complicated because of the unpopular war in Iraq. In recent years, the Army has accepted recruits with lower aptitude test scores.

In remarks to reporters, Nicholson recalled his own experience as a company commander in an infantry unit that brought together soldiers of different backgrounds and education levels "in the common purpose of serving."

Rep. Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat, plans to introduce a bill next year to reinstate the draft. House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi has said such a proposal would not be high on the Democratic-led Congress' priority list.

Hearst Newspapers first reported the planned test for a story sent to its subscribers for weekend use.

The military drafted people during the Civil War and both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. Reincorporated in 1980, the Selective Service System maintains a registry of 18-year-old men, but call-ups have not occurred since the Vietnam War.

[randalds]

Oh really? What would you call this then:

PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday the solution to the Middle East crisis is to destroy Israel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com
/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/03/AR200
6080300629.html
Posted by robert_in_d at 01:57 PM : Dec 24, 2006


I'd call that playing to his base, just like any good politician would do. Of course he's going to bellow and threaten, it's what the people who voted for him want him to do. He was elected you know, he's not a dictator. Bush says cr*ap all the time too. Sure he'd like to see Israel destroyed someday, but for now it's much to valuable to him as a standing enemy. Without them he'd have a harder time staying in power. After all, just like Bush does, he needs someone else to blame for everything. With him it's Israel, with Bush it's the "evildoers". Different names, same bullsh*it.

[descartes13-2009]

The Iranian President, unless he becomes psychotic, would never use a nuclear bomb against Israel, because Israel and the U.S. would retaliate with their own nuclear weapons on a massive scale, leaving most all of Iran in ruins.

I'm not saying the Iranian President DOESN'T want to destroy Israel, but again, unless he becomes psychotic, he would never use nuclear weapson(s) to do so.

[robert_in_d]

Oh grow up! Iran has no intention of ever launching a nuclear attack on Israel and never has had.

Oh really? What would you call this then:

PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday the solution to the Middle East crisis is to destroy Israel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/03/AR2006080300629.html

[aztecmaya]

Perhaps the Busho-fascists are not serious about reintroducing the draft. The draft is what energized the anti-VietNam war movement and eventually led to the defunding of the war by Congress which shut it down. For small wars, they don't need it. Raygun illegally funded the terrorists, the Contras, through drug and arms sales. Bush has the same gang of felons working for him, Gates just being the latest of Raygun's thugs being added to the crew of war criminals running the US.

Bush will need more troops for his war against Iran, but he'll do it through furthering the privatization of the military. There are already 30,000 mercenaries from private 'security' companies in Iraq paid for by the US taxpayer and the Busho-fascists have already expanded the 'poverty draft' to Central America. Mercenaries have been protecting the civilian and military brass in Iraq since the get-go. Bedsides diverting even more of the US Treasury to Bush, his family, and the other war-profiteers, mercenaries have the added advantage of having no legal responsibility for the atrocities they commit.

[aztecmaya]

Perhaps the Busho-fascists are not serious about reintroducing the draft. The draft is what energized the anti-VietNam war movement and eventually led to the defunding of the war by Congress which shut it down. For small wars, they don't need it. Raygun illegally funded the terrorists, the Contras, through drug and arms sales. Bush has the same gang of felons working for him, Gates just being the latest of Raygun's thugs being added to the crew of war criminals running the US.

Bush will need more troops for his war against Iran, but he'll do it through furthering the privatization of the military. There are already 30,000 mercenaries from private 'security' companies in Iraq paid for by the US taxpayer and the Busho-fascists have already expanded the 'poverty draft' to Central America. Mercenaries have been protecting the civilian and military brass in Iraq since the get-go. Bedsides diverting even more of the US Treasury to Bush, his family, and the other war-profiteers, mercenaries have the added advantage of having no legal responsibility for the atrocities they commit.

[aztecmaya]

Perhaps the Busho-fascists are not serious about reintroducing the draft. The draft is what energized the anti-VietNam war movement and eventually led to the defunding of the war by Congress which shut it down. For small wars, they don't need it. Raygun illegally funded the terrorists, the Contras, through drug and arms sales. Bush has the same gang of felons working for him, Gates just being the latest of Raygun's thugs being added to the crew of war criminals running the US.

Bush will need more troops for his war against Iran, but he'll do it through furthering the privatization of the military. There are already 30,000 mercenaries from private 'security' companies in Iraq paid for by the US taxpayer and the Busho-fascists have already expanded the 'poverty draft' to Central America. Mercenaries have been protecting the civilian and military brass in Iraq since the get-go. Bedsides diverting even more of the US Treasury to Bush, his family, and the other war-profiteers, mercenaries have the added advantage of having no legal responsibility for the atrocities they commit.

[randalds]

Although it can be argued that the Bushies have managed to prevent our being hit with another terror-attack thus far, the fact is, by constantly engaging in behaviors and rhetoric that gets the muslims riled up, he's just INCREASING the chances of our getting hit!
Posted by Descartes13 at 01:03 AM : Dec 24, 2006

I suspect that you and I think the same.

[descartes13-2009]

I mentioned about the possibility of Bush using a nuclear bomb(s) on Iran.
Now let me state what would happen in a worst-case scenario if we were ever hit with just a single 20-megaton nuclear-tipped missile.
Scientists have stated that such a bomb, if detonated at the right height over St. Louis, Missouri, would generate an extremely strong electromagnetic "pulse" that would wipe out every last microprocessor in this entire country, along with any data stored on any magnetic media.
In other words, all the pc's, laptops, mainframes, hard drives, etc., etc., would be irreperably damaged.
Our country, in the space of a heartbeat, would cease to function.

Although it can be argued that the Bushies have managed to prevent our being hit with another terror-attack thus far, the fact is, by constantly engaging in behaviors and rhetoric that gets the muslims riled up, he's just INCREASING the chances of our getting hit!

[randalds]

The last "test" to my understanding was 1992. Funny they're doing it again now.

[intn1]

You guys, this is all a bunch of media hype that got stirred up because there was a slow news day. The article says it will be TESTED in 2009, and it MAY NOT HAPPEN if there are more budget cuts. Do you folks not realize that they probably run tests alot more than we could ever know? The article pretty much says everyone but whats-his-head from New York is opposed to it and doesn't want the draft. This article isn't news, it's a media scare tactic.

[randalds]

The more Bush pushes, the more dangerous the situation becomes.

[randalds]

If Bush launches a nuclear attack against Iran, or any other country in the region for that matter, Americans will riot in the streets. He and his administration will be removed from power forcibly by the people and I doubt anyone would be crazy enough to try to stop them. 80% of the American population opposes his out of control warmongering now and an attack of this type will bring most of the other 20% over to right side. It is possible for a president to defy his own people too much, even to the point of revolution.

[descartes13-2009]

As I said a few days back, Mr. Ritter, a former U.N. weapons inspector who has many contacts in the CIA, the NSA, and the U.S. military has stated that "it's not IF the U.S. will attack Iran, it's WHEN."

And to make matter so much worse, Bush is also strongly considering using nuclear-tipped bunker-busting missiles on Iran.

Imagine how THAT'S going to make us look in the eyes of the world; particulary in the eyes of muslims world-wide : we will have attacked 3 different muslim countries, and we will be the only country to have ever have used nuclear missiles in anger -- not once, but twice!

[randalds]

Oh grow up! Iran has no intention of ever launching a nuclear attack on Israel and never has had. The whole idea is ridiculous and a bunch of cr*ap put out by the Bush people to try to whip up enthusiasm for attacking Iran. Since anyone with any common sense knows it's garbage from the White House they have decided to send another aircraft carrier group to the gulf on one mission, to provoke an attack from Iran to give the warmongering as*shole in the Oval office the excuse he's looking for to go to war with them. Bush has drank the kool-aid of neoconservatism and it's goal is a region-wide war because they believe it'll end with the US in control of the region, no matter how many people end up slaughtered for it. They need to start that war soon as Bush's power is shrinking and they're getting desperate. Once it's started, they don't think anyone here will be able to stop it. They are sick people.

[jdweymouth]

Also, there's a real easy way to deal with the bomb-seeking Iranian government.
The Prez simply tells them, "If you want to get the BOMB, fine. We won't stand in your way.
However, if a nuclear device is EVER detonated in the USA or Israel, whether it is fired in, or smuggled in then detonated, we won't wait to verify that it was indeed, from your country.
We will instantly retaliate by sending an ICBM to each and every city in Iran with a population of 7500 or more.
In short, if we or Israel ever gets hit, there won't BE an Iran afterwards!"

Posted by Descartes13

I agree 100% with the above section of your comment! Only I was thinking the target city should be Mecca, then Medina. That will certainly make them think

[randalds]

Draft the Bush twins. When one (or both) of them come home in a box then maybe the real cost of this war will finally sink into Bush's thick skull.

[randalds]

darkfyreaol :

I suppose it all boils down to...

Will my constitutional rights be violated?

What constitutional rights ?

Posted by missAmerica4 at 07:09 AM : Dec 23, 2006

They've been disappearing at a steady pace since Bush and the neocons took power. If they are not kicked out they will finish what they have started in destroying our rights and take power permanently.

[bluestardad]

With the Selective Service System exercising its Compulsory National Selection System it is important to notice that almost half of the eligible people in the United States are not required to register for compulsory National Service because of an Unconstitutional Gender preference. This inequity is in direct contravention to the strides toward total gender equality within the Nations Education System with such programs as Title 9 that guarantees equity between genders in sports, and the reduction of programs of gender discrimination within the work force. All Americans must share equality the Responsibility of National Service. To ensure that all Americans earn their place within society there should be no preference or exclusion deferments from National Service Registration or Compulsory Service based on Race, Religion, Gender, Education, or Financial Status. Discrimination in the United States of America stands against the very foundation of the Constitution of this great nation. It is very important that All Americans share in the privilege and responsibility of registering for and serving our Nation by Compulsory National Service. It is our Responsibilities as American Citizens to contact our Elected Officials and Require them to guarantee All Americans and those who wish to be Americans this opportunity.

[cosmicd1]

YES - YES, finally someone has come up with the absolute answer to ending this insane and idiotic war mongering.

Have the US Selective Service System send every daft age person in the USA an official letter stating that it is their time to be eligible to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I guarantee that the citizens of the USA will quickly wake up, take to the streets, and everywhere else %u2013 24/7 demanding an immediate end to the current hopeless course.

Obviously, most citizens of the USA will not act in a manner that is consistent with the critical severity of this matter until it is consciously acknowledged, inescapably, to be a personal matter of top priority concern.

Clearly most people are not giving any more than well-meaning to pathetic lip service in discussions, arguments, verbal expressions of disagreement and sadness, or agreement with %u201Cstaying the course%u201D %u2013 as long they are not required to be in the Front Line fighting, and trying to survive.

[descartes13-2009]

I voted democratic this time around, and imagine my shock when Nancy Pelosi made the following 2 statements:

1. Impeachment is "off the table"
2. Cutting off funding for the war is "off the table"

You would think with all these polls out showing how much americans are fed up with this horrible folly of a war, that the democrats would "get it," and get their butts in gear!

What I find especially exasperating is that the democrats are saying that they don't want to cut off funding, because they don't want to make it look like they're not supporting our troops.

Helllllooooo??? That funding is going to Halliburton and all the other war profiteers!

Dennis Kucinich is the only presidential contender (democrat) who seems to actually NOT be hard of hearing; other than that, we americans are just getting ignored, and I'm sooo sick of it!