Skip to main content

Pseudo-progressives in congress will join the GOP in coming call for selective service activation. Is the freedom of the young Americans so unimportant to ''liberals'' they don't choose this issue to fight. Or are many ''liberals'' in congress just conservatives in camourflage. The goverments most holy duty is ensure that young people are not forced to fight for wars for nation building dreams of the neocon hawks. Is the progressive movement going to betroy those who need it most?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I think some progressives hold the position (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steve in the Library

    that if we have a selective service and anyone could imagine themelves or their kid/grandkid being drafted, we will be less inclined to support going to war.  

    I'm not sure about the real-world application of that view, but it makes sense.  Personally, I think today's military requires so much training and specialization that we would probably degrade the quality of our forces by drafting people...but it's not a topic I'd ever claim expertise on.  

    Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

    by Mark Mywurtz on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 04:20:51 AM PDT

  •  Who is pushing for a new draft? (7+ / 0-)

    I don't think the GOP has any interest in a new draft at all. They know it is political suicide.

    Do you have a link to any reputable, non-partisan, source who identifies the leaders of the "new draft" movement in Congress?

    Here at DKOS provocative, definitive, statements such as yours are usually accompanied by multiple links to sources.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 04:53:02 AM PDT

  •  There isn't going to be a draft over Syria. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VClib, worldlotus

    The current discussion is about air strikes and cruise missiles—which don't require a lot of personnel, and certainly not draftees.

    And even if our leaders were talking about a personnel-intensive operation like an invasion, why would Republicans push for a draft for invading/occupying Syria, when they didn't push for one to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time?

    Any party that seriously pushes the draft, thereby risking the sons of middle-class families, will lose. The Republicans may be stupid, but they're not that stupid.

    "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

    by JamesGG on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 05:20:19 AM PDT

    •  I agree - the party that advocates for a new draft (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      worldlotus

      will be out of power for a generation. It has become a political third rail. Neither party has any interest in a new draft because it is politically radioactive.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 05:44:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  GOP proposing the draft (0+ / 0-)

        The Republican party has been searching a way to reinstitate the compulsory military conscription for years. Reps Weldon R-PA and Smith R-MI proposed the Universal  Military Training and Service Act of 2001. Around that time current Secretery of Defense Hagel R-NE called also a military draft. Rep Rangel D-NY has then proposed a general national service for all to combat the GOP call for forced military conscription. Rep Owens D-NY proposed to limit the use of selective service only in cases of national emergency without success.

        •  And they were re-elected (0+ / 0-)

          Rep Smith was re-elected in 2002 and rep Weldon in 2002 and 2004 so it is really a myth that the draft would be politically a suicide.

        •  And the vote on the 2004 Rangel bill was (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nextstep

          402 -2.  Rangel is proposing a new bill and if it came to a vote wouldn't do much better than it did in 2004. No bill to reinstate the draft will be allowed up for a vote unless it is to have a vote like 2004 to put a stake in the heart of this worthless idea.

          The GOP leadership has NO INTEREST in reinstating the draft because it is radioactive. The only reason any Dems like the idea, and they are a very small minority, is because they believe it would reduce the use of military force because of increased public awareness.

          If there was a time in recent memory when the draft might have made some sense is when both Iraq and Afghanistan were going all out at the same time. We are now out of Iraq and on our way out of Afghanistan.

          The military leadership does not want a draft, the Congressional leadership does not support a draft, and the White House opposes a draft. Why are you writing diaries about this topic? No one in the leadership of either party supports this idea.

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 06:49:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

            Rangel amendment was rejected because it had females also including and it had option of service outside the military that is consider being against the constitution. A real use for selective servise system is just situations than the current in Syria. When there is lack of troops and need for rapid increase for ''troops that can be easily sacrified''. It will of course be ''supporting our troops and etc.''. I am really skecptical that the White House has guts to say no when the Republicans and Dinos are going to ask it.  When Rep. Dellums D-CA wanted to the end the selective service system it wasd defeated 273-125.

            •  Why is Syria different from Iraq/Afghanistan? (0+ / 0-)
              A real use for selective servise system is just situations than the current in Syria. When there is lack of troops and need for rapid increase for ''troops that can be easily sacrified''.
              You mean, like when we invaded and began occupying Afghanistan and Iraq—which, combined, cover five times as much land and have three times the population of Syria—within the span of two years?

              There was never any serious effort by the Republicans to reinstate the draft then, and from 2003-2007 they controlled both houses of Congress and the presidency, so it's not as if they couldn't have gotten it done if it were really a priority of theirs.

              "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

              by JamesGG on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 09:43:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Real hawks have awaken (0+ / 0-)

                At that time GOP considered old paleo-hawks too extreme.
                Neocons believed in democratic peace theory and were not even considered ''real hawks'' from the far-right. The Tea Party Movement has  given a real oppurtunity for the real superhawks, that were disappointed when the Cold War ended without ''a hell of a war against the Evil Empire of the Soviet Union. '' The wet dream was orginally Armageddon against Soviet Union, China and the whole communist block. A total mobilization of the whole Western society to war that ends only after ''the last communist is dead''.  The same superhawks are now flying around the Capital Hill.  Some were against Bush, because they think he did to little after the 9/11.

                •  Tea Party and Libertarians generally oppose (0+ / 0-)

                  the use of the military unless to directly defend US territory - they don't believe in high taxes and big government - the military goes against both of these principles.

                  The anti-military adventure aspect of the Tea Party types is a major point of friction with the Republicans who prefer military actions in foreign policy.

                  The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                  by nextstep on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 12:04:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

                    Tea party is very pro-military. It claims to support only strong national defence not national building but what one claims to do is not always what really thinks. As I have said the whole conservative movement after the Vietnam war has been a movement to build an optimazed society for military and security agencies not more not less.

                    Fishmongers sell fish. Warmongers sell war.

                    by LimitedGoverment on Sun Sep 01, 2013 at 12:54:25 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  LG - keeping the Selective Service system (0+ / 0-)

              in place is a completely different issue than re-instituting the draft. You are a year too soon. The "draft is coming" craziness doesn't start until just before the election.

              Any federal politician who supports re-instituting the draft is politically tone deaf.

              "let's talk about that"

              by VClib on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 01:10:04 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Your first example undermines your claim. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          worldlotus
          Reps Weldon R-PA and Smith R-MI proposed the Universal  Military Training and Service Act of 2001.
          I seem to recall something else significant happening only a few months before Reps. Weldon and Smith introduced that bill... and even then, when the nation was itching for war and the scope of the geopolitical struggle was not yet known, with a Republican Congress and a Republican President, the bill didn't even make it to the floor.

          That was an environment almost tailor-made for the Republicans to reinstate compulsory military conscription—in the wake of the 9/11 attacks with patriotism and jingoism at their peak, with the war in Afghanistan having just begun and Iraq already on the horizon, and holding the presidency, complete control of the House, and a slim minority in the Senate, with the Democrats all too eager to support any kind of pro-military bill for fear of appearing "weak on terror" going into the midterm elections.

          If the Republicans were really as eager to reinstate the draft as you suggest, then why did they kill in committee a bill doing exactly that, with conditions more favorable to the reinstatement of the draft than at any point since the end of Vietnam?

          "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

          by JamesGG on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 06:59:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  It is same as in Vietnam (0+ / 0-)

    They say it would be only bombarment, in Vietman they said first only militaryinspectors. It is the Vietnam era hawks forcing Obama govement to intervene by suggestin otherwise militar coup like superhawk Gates did.

  •  Rangel D-NY wants the draft reinstituted (0+ / 0-)

    Rep. Rangel D-NY has issued a statement advocating the reinitution of the military draft because of the Syria war plans. While I don't agree with that there are some issues to be considered. It is much more honest to have the draft before the war than just activate it without warning when the generals need more ground troops using the selective service system. Also law made with the cooperation of liberal members of the congress is probably more equal relating to issues  like gender and age and it would probably allow service outside the military. However the Selective servie activation (That would be backed by Republicans at least) will only take mostly those with the poor, just over 20, blacks etc. However the DOD may use Rangel's proposion for same purposes. For example making the service voluntary for females and the DOD lawyers would argue that the service outside the military is against the constituion. I think also that one meaming of Rangel's proposal is to make people to think issues before the GOP gives it own proposal.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site