Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Most high schoolers think draft will return--55% see DRAFT in their future

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Dems Will Win Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 10:09 AM
Original message
Most high schoolers think draft will return--55% see DRAFT in their future
Poll: Most high schoolers think draft will return

A majority of American high schoolers think the government will bring back the military draft during their lifetimes. That's one of the findings in an annual survey by the Horatio Alger Association. Fifty-five percent of the teen-agers polled say young Americans will be required to serve in the military, up from 45 percent last year. Most say they would be opposed to a mandatory two-year hitch. More young people than not said the US was right to go to war in Iraq. Forty-four percent said the decision was correct, 33 percent said it was wrong, and the rest had no opinion or were unsure. The poll also finds fewer high school students are optimistic about the country's future. Last year, 75 percent said they were hopeful. Now, it's 68 percent.

http://www.fox19.com/Global/story.asp?S=2153715
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Nambe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
1. The draft would be a sure end to war prone politians.
Apple pie eating youth in coffins changes the menu.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Hell No "We Won't Go"
Aah the good old days
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
23. Let 'em spend a few days patrolling in 118 fahrenheit ...
to see how much the Iraqis love their "liberators." That should take care of that majority approving the war. At least most are wise enough to know their asses will be in the bush with a Bush victory.

"If You Like It In The Bush - Vote Bush !"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denverbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. If you really think politicos kids would be shot at, you're dreaming.
Yes, MAYBE everyone will get drafted, but a quick call to General Bigshot and sonny boy is working at the Pentagon or doing intelligence work in Hawaii.

Don't ever expect to see the name Bush or Cheney or Limbaugh in the casualty lists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lebkuchen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
4. The current cyclical unit rotation in/out of Iraq and Afghanistan
is wearing out our active duty. This is what the Bushies are doing now. Put one unit in for a year, give them a year of "rest," and send them back in. Repeat process.

Obviously a draft is just too dangerous, politically, for the Bushies to broach in an election year, but it most certainly will come. There's a mass exodus from active duty now, and somebody has to fill those slots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trogdor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Reserves, too.
Just retired a couple months ago, thank God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lebkuchen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #8
21. Is there any way they can rerecruit you, involuntarily?
Or are you past the age?

Congrats on your retirement. Many troops overseas are wishing for the return of the partial retirement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #8
24. Thanks!
Kee - rist that's a long time in. I could only hack ten years before I'd had enough.

I hope these younger folks realize how close we are to the draft. I know some recruiters and they tell me numbers are way down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hobarticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
5. Then ask them how many intend to vote, or would if they could...
Wonder how that would pan out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DinahMoeHum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
6. But if they support *, then I have no sympathy for them. . .
...and they's betterr pack all their shit in one bag for the call-up.


:evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComradeOgilvy Donating Member (8 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Congress can only enact a draft and
right now the only bill that would reenact the draft is the one supported by 13 or 14 Democrats. As a high school student I am praying that whoever gets in power does not find invading Syria or Iran the best idea, because although we have reserves I think a draft would become necessary to secure such countries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OK_DemX2 Donating Member (33 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. A draft may become necessary just to secure America
with the exodus from the military that is happening now. Two of my cousins that have been out of the army for 3 and 4 years have just been recalled to duty "not to exceed 545 days, except at the discretion of the commanding officer", which is BS to say, you are back until I want to let you go. So, the draft is already here, it just hasn't gotten to anyone except prior service personnel yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dems Will Win Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #7
16. This is essentially incorrect but its no wonder you're confused.
Many rumors have been floating around the Internet about the possibility of the draft restarting on June 15, 2005. The press meanwhile has not reported the actual facts, just as they have “somehow” ignored that Bush invaded Iraq for its oil and is letting his oil industry cronies make off with all the booty by the tankerful.

Here are the actual facts on the possibility of the draft returning.

First of all, the draft never really left us. Selective Service has been registering people for over twenty years and at any moment the President can go to Congress and ask them to reauthorize conscription. It doesn’t take much to imagine a re-elected Bush going to Congress and saying “We cannot cut and run from Iraq or the War on Terror. I need you to reauthorize conscription.” Would a re-elected Republican Congress give it to him? You bet. An article in the July 13 issue of Family Circle reported that Rove surveyed Republican members of Congress to see if they would support the President if the draft needed to be reinstated. The answer was they would.

And they would not have to pass a whole new draft law to do it. All that is needed is a “trigger resolution”, which could be passed in an afternoon—and bingo! No debate, no regular bill, just a short resolution passed quickly in the dead of night and the draft is back for men 18 to 26.

That is why the Democratic draft legislation being offered by Rangel and Hollings is not the only thing that could bring the DRAFT back, in fact the Dem bills are totally irrelevant. These are known protest bills and actually propose drafting women, just to make sure they will never see the light of day. Rangel and Hollings offered them to raise the issue and confront Bush. Hollings even said he wouldn’t vote for his own bill!

They are not needed—and the press and the Republicans will bring them up as red herrings to distract everyone from what is really going on: Bush is spending $28 million this year to reduce draft activation time from the usual 193 days all the way down to 75 days. He is quietly, behind the scenes, oiling up the draft machinery—getting ready to reinstate for the Spring of 2005.

Only in this draft there will be NO student deferments, other than finishing out the semester, or the year if you are a senior. Divinity School students, however, get full four-year deferments. We might see a lot of young men getting religion. By the way, Canada has also tightened up the border and signed the Smart Border agreement after 9/11, and it is doubtful that going north will be an answer.

What is the proof? The government’s own document, the SSS Performance Plan for Fiscal Year 2004.

BUSH '04 = DRAFT '05
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #7
18. read dems will win posts
bush has already begun getting things ready. if bush is elected it comes back for invasion of syria nad iran. if kerry wins no draft. don't let your self be decieved by repubs. they're liars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
10. Count my son in. He'll be 17 soon
He and his friends believe a draft is coming. As to the 68% hopeful, optimistic, whatever, no way according to him. No way.

My daughter is 24 and a recent college graduate. Her circle of friends conclude that they all need to vote to keep their younger siblings and themselves from being drafted.

Despite the source, I think this sentiment is for real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
11. Well, I hope it does come back.
Edited on Tue Aug-10-04 06:08 PM by TahitiNut
Even though I strongly prefer a Universal Service Obligation (12-48 months), I'm sick and tired of the 60% of 18-24 year-olds who don't vote and those who vote for endless war and obscene militarist spending that's effectively more than the rest of the world combined. Well, climb aboard the bandwagon of death, fucktards! Just send their sorry, spoiled asses to some combat hell-hole and let them see what global corporatism buys up front and personal.

I don't buy into the "Love it or leave it" bullshit, but I sure do buy into the "Be part of our democracy or get the hell out!" fundamental of what democracy is all about.

Don't like war? Then help get us the hell out of that business or go die along with the rest.

If you're not against exporting death, then you're for it. The "collateral damage" of those who're against it and still must serve is an order of magnitude less than the "collateral damage" of dropping death and destruction on a city from 40,000 feet.

:grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

Send Jenna and Barbara, the Crisco Kidz, to Fort Polk for basic training first!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #11
25. I agree. Universal service implemented during peacetime.
Seems to work for Europe. I believe universal service would have the effect of deterring war, reducing racism, and building true patriotism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. As a draftee in 1968, I have absolutely no patience ...
... with those who complain about "involuntary servitude" as though there's some "runaway slave act." In every household I've ever lived, everyone shared in the labor. Washing dishes, cleaning, taking out the garbage, closing doors, turning out the lights, and a host of other household duties were and are shared. Those homes in which such sharing doesn't take place produce the most sociopathic humans on the planet, imho.

I didn't object to being drafted because of any specious claim of "involuntary servitude" - I objected due to its appalling inequity. There's no reason on earth that national service - including non-military service - shouldn't be shared by every individual in our 'national household': male and female, gay and straight, rich and poor, abled and disabled.

If we object to exporting death, then we should export peace. If we're not part of a solution, then we're part of the problem. If we object to human rights abuses by our military, then we should get in there and stop it. It's no accident that the civil (and economic) rights advances that ceased in the 70s coincided with the termination of a shared exposure to national service.

I would like to envision a day when 99.44% of 'national service' is in building our national infrastructure, exporting peace and well-being, and caring for our needy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baltimoreboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
12. So what?
Most high schoolers think current music is good.

I care more how Congress thinks on this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
13. smart kids
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayavarman Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
14. Considering that most high schoolers do not even know
their way around a map of the world (according to similar polls & studies), these poll results don't seem to mean a whole lot to me . . .



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
15. They'd better begin work on getting Chimpy out of the White House.
Or get ready for PNAC occupation of Iran/Syria in 2005.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
17. I saw two recent high school grads asking for application forms
at a local university today. They were applying because they are worried about a draft. I didn't have the heart to tell them the draft rules have changed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happynewyear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. my niece is starting a local univ. soon
She plans to become a biology teacher (big plans for 18 years old). I didn't know what to say to her. She is definite draft bait. She actually got a bunch of scholarships by claiming that her father is a disabled Vietnam war vet.

He never left the country and has flat feet.

What a pile of crap IMO.

:dem: :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Outward Bound Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. Is'nt this all just propaganda tho?
The only ones talking about the draft have been from our side?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dems Will Win Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-04 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. Never watch what Republicans say, only what they do!
Here is what they are doing:

The Selective Service System, or the SSS, has for decades operated at a low level of readiness. Readiness Exercises are conducted on a multi-year cycle but historically these have been little more than getting draft board volunteers together and going over the procedures of what would happen under reinstatement and training new members every summer. And the draft boards themselves have become 80% vacant over the decades.

In the current 5-year cycle of exercises, however, the SSS is clearly ramping up the draft machinery to an unprecedented level. In fact, the mission of the Selective Service is to be ready to conscript within 193 days of reauthorization, over 6 months before any lottery could be held and report orders issued. The 2004 plan reduces that time to 75 days.

By March 31, 2005, a report must be issued by the Director of the SSS to the Pentagon that the system will be ready to hold the first draft lottery within 75 days, rather than the usual 193 days.

“Strategic Objective 1.2: Ensure a mobilization infrastructure of 56 State Headquarters,
442 Area Offices and 1,980 Local Boards are operational within 75 days of an authorized
return to conscription.”
Tie that to this objective:

“An annual report providing the results of the implementation of these performance
measures will be submitted by March 31, 2005.”


75 days from March 31, 2005 is about June 15, 2005. If Bush asks for reinstatement on April 1, Congress could pass it that night and the first batch of over one million 20 year-olds would face the lottery as soon as that date.

Here is how the $28 million is being spent according to the official document:

“Strategic Goal 1: Increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the Manpower
Delivery Systems (Projected allocation for FY 2004 – $7,942,000)

Strategic Goal 2: Improve overall Registration Compliance and Service to the Public (Projected allocation FY 2004 – $8,769,000)

Strategic Goal 3: Enhance external and internal customer service
(Projected allocation for FY 2004 – $10,624,000)

Strategic Goal 4: Enhance the system which guarantees that each conscientious objector is properly classified, placed, and monitored. (Projected allocation for FY 2004 – $955,000)”

It should be noted the $28 million is not a huge increase, as the 2003 SSS budget was around $26 million. Yet reducing activation time from 193 to 75 days is clearly laid out in the document. The SSS also began a crash recruitment drive last summer and fall to fill those 10,000 plus board vacancies by Spring 2005. That has been noted by the press.

But the following has not.

In analyzing each of the 2004 goals in detail it is painfully obvious that there are hidden “activation bombshells” in this so-called “Performance Plan”. Goal number 1 in particular brings the combat induction process up to 95% operational readiness, going so far as to actually hold a mock lottery drawing this year and to issue sample orders to report for the famous medical exam. The document does not reveal the day in 2004 the mock lottery is to be held, but it likely to be any day or week now.

In addition, the Medical Draft, or Health Care Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS in the document), is for the first time brought up to full readiness by next year. This draft would take men and women up to age 44 if they are doctors, nurses or one of 60-some medical specialties. No medical deferments allowed. Previous readiness exercises merely went over what would happen with HCPDS and updated the guide. The 2004 plan actually develops a readiness exercise for the Medical Draft that would be conducted next year. Plus HCPDS must be ready to conscript by June.

“Develop an Area Office Prototype Exercise which will test the HCPDS work flows and its automated support programs. FY 2004.
Prepare, conduct, and evaluate an Area Office Prototype Exercise for health care in FY 2005.”

Goal number two increase registration compliance and actually tries to assign Registrars to nearly every high school, the goal being 85% of the schools. This could very well indicate that Bush plans to have a very large draft indeed. Several hundred thousand men from each year could be inducted, while the Medical draft is designed to induct up to 80,000 per year. At first, the system probably could not stand to draft more than 200,000 to 300,000 per year but after that it could go much higher.

Goal number three makes ready the administration of the draft, down to making sure the system can answer all correspondence within 10 days and that new tracking software is implemented as quickly as possible.

Goal number four is particularly ominous.

“Strategic Objective 4.1: Ensure a mobilization infrastructure of 48 Alternative Service Offices and 48 Civilian Review Boards are operational within 96 days after notification of a return to induction.”

For 31 years, the Conscientious Objector system, called the Alternative Service, has lain dormant. The 2004 plan also calls for this to be brought up to speed and to be ready to decide cases and place COs in the Alternative Service by July 6, 2005 (96 days after March 31, 2005). The SSS is even going so far as to draw up the SOPs, the Standard Operating Procedures which identify local employers eligible to receive cheap AS workers and to also draw up the actual MOU, the Memorandum of Understanding the employer must sign to get their CO workers and allow their mandatory attendance to be monitored. This is the last obstacle to be hurdled before the draft could actually be ready for activation under the law.
So Bush is filling the draft board seats, testing the entire combat draft this year and the medical draft next year (early next year?) and making sure the Alternative Service is geared up—all by March 31 of 2005.

But that’s not all going on quietly behind the scenes.

It turns out that the SSS has presented a secret 6-page proposal to the Pentagon and given to the Congress that calls for the creation of a “Skills Draft”, conscripting men and women up to age 34 for non-combat jobs such as linguist, computer specialist or engineer—the first three occupations the DoD has already identified as being in short supply. Modeled after the Medical Draft, the secret document was obtained only through the FOI Act by a reporter from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

If this is created after Bush’s re-election, DoD could theoretically ask for hundreds of different occupations to be drafted. The SSS, right this very minute is designing procedures and a massive database that would track everyone who had special skills—including their entire skill set and most important, their address.
Why would Bush need such a large draft? The answer lies in the secret plan that Wesley Clark revealed in his book Winning Modern Wars: Iraq, Terrorism, and the American Empire:

“I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, and one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan. So, I thought, this is what they mean when they talk about ‘draining the swamp.’"
Assuming Libya is now off the list, according to Clark Bush and the neo-cons plan to invade 5 more countries. That need does not include trying to defeat the insurgents solely with the U.S. military as a re-elected Bush might attempt. Bush, moreover, is building 14 permanent bases and huge intelligence centers in Iraq and has no intention of ever leaving that oil to the Russians or even worse, the French.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC