• Right Place Photo Caption Contest Hall of Glory Top 25

    meister.jpeg About Me
    BlogmeisterUSA's Guidelines for Commenting
    My Blog at Newsbusters
    My Writings at Family Security Matters
    My Writings at The American Thinker
    I Also Blog at Lifelike Pundits
    National Summary Interviews Me
    Read "The Americans" by Gordon Sinclair
    PELOSI_DEMOCRAT_TREASON-1.jpg More About the Fighting 101st Keyboardists

November 20, 2006

Charlie Rangel's Draft Replay

UPDATE: Nancy Pelosi says no.

From the Washington Times:

The incoming Democratic chairman of the House Ways and Means panel says he will introduce a bill to reinstitute a military draft in order to provide the U.S. with more troops, while Sen. John McCain continued his call for increase of troop levels in Iraq.

Rep. Charles B. Rangel of New York first called for a draft in January 2003, when Democrats were the minority party in both houses of Congress. Now that his party controls Capitol Hill, he was asked yesterday on CBS' "Face the Nation" if he was still serious about the proposal.

"You bet your life. Underscore 'serious,' " he said.

"I don't see how anyone can support the [Iraq] war and not support the draft," said Mr. Rangel, alluding to Mr. McCain's call for increased troop levels in Iraq and to the need to combat threats elsewhere in the world. "If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft."

Of course it's possible to support the war and not support a draft. A draft should be a last-ditch effort, and to my knowledge, we haven't reached that point.

Gone are the days when you could push a guy through six weeks of basic training, shove a gun in his hands and say, "Fight!" The Pentagon opposes a draft for that very reason. Today's complicated weapons systems need soldiers who are specially trained to use them. In other words, it's not your grandfather's Army anymore. The only way it would work would be to require draftees to stay in the military longer than a couple of years, and in that case, Canada's population will see a sudden upsurge in its population.

What's hypocritical is to say you support the troops but don't happen to support what they're doing right now, which is fighting in Iraq. It's also hypocritical to have voted for the war and then say it was a mistake, which is what many Democrats have done. (Rangel, at least, is not hypocritial in this instance.)

In my opinion, this whole thing is meant to make our presence in the Middle East even more divisive than it is now. It's got nothing to do with sharing the sacrifice, and everything to do with giving aging hippies and their protgs more ammunition for something to which they are already opposed.

Michelle Malkin weighs in.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:49 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Military


Rangel also said the draftees would not necessarily have to serve on the battlefield. Well, what does he mean? Would he have them "serving their country" working on social programs?

Methinks it's a clever ruse to use the draft to yet again serve the objectives of the socialists -- bigger government.

Andrea / Mark
Radio Patriots

Posted by: Andrea & Mark - Radio Patriots at November 20, 2006 09:00 AM

I believe you are right! I've been reading more about this on the web and I've come to that conclusion as well. Rangel and his ilk won't be satisfied until we are all government automatons...

Posted by: Pam at November 20, 2006 02:28 PM

Please don't be stupid! The only reason Rangel even brought this up was to generate a dialog where by EVERYBODY in our great country sacrifice something for the vanity war dubya started. He doesn't want a draft. He simply wants everybody to understand that the War on Terra (accodring to Dubya) will last forever and there needs to be an awareness that someones kids must serve so we can kill the furriners. The thinking is that if donors to the republican party thought maybe their own children will be sent to die in this illegal war, maybe - just maybe, they would re-think their stance on the war. After all, I am for war as long as someone elses kids fight it for me. So please don't be naive. I give you folks much more credit than that. Is that credit misplaced? I hope not.

Posted by: tom at November 20, 2006 04:43 PM

    ENDORSEMENTS "Your stupid requirements for commenting, whatever they are, mean I'll not read you again." ~ "Duke Martin", Oraculations
    "One of the worst sites I've read." ~ Frank A. Niedospial