What did I say?!

IceWolf20

New member
U.S. draft may be needed by mid-2006, military analysts warn
By Bob Dart
Cox News Service

WASHINGTON - If American forces aren’t pulling out of Iraq in a year, a draft will be needed to meet manpower requirements, military analysts warned Wednesday.

With recruitment lagging and no end in sight for U.S. forces in Iraq, the ’’breaking point’’ for the nation’s all-volunteer military will be mid-2006, agreed Lawrence Korb, a draft opponent and assistant defense secretary in the Reagan administration, and Phillip Carter, a conscription advocate and former Army captain.

The U.S. military cannot deploy and sustain enough troops to succeed in countries like Iraq while still deterring threats elsewhere, Carter said at a symposium where he debated Korb.

Korb is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, and a senior adviser to the Center for Defense Information. Carter is an attorney who writes on military affairs for Slate.com and other media.

While conceding that the Army, Marines, National Guard and Army Reserve - the branches serving most in Iraq - face recruitment difficulties, military officials have denied any plans to revive the draft, which was replaced by an all-volunteer force in 1973.

’’The ’D-word’ is the farthest thing from my thoughts,’’ Army Secretary Francis Harvey said at a Pentagon press briefing last week. He said the all-volunteer force has proven its value and applauded the performance of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

’’When you get over there, there’s no difference between the active, the Reserves and the National Guard. The quality is high across the board. . . . It’s seamless,’’ he said.

During his re-election campaign, President Bush declared flatly that he would not reinstate the draft. And there is little support for conscription on Capitol Hill.

’’Today, no leading politician in either party will come anywhere near the idea - the draft having replaced Social Security as the third rail of American politics,’’ wrote Carter.

However, the analysts said that the all-volunteer army is on the verge of ’’breaking’’ under current circumstances. The 3rd Infantry Division based in Fort Stewart, Ga., and the 4th Infantry Division based in Fort Hood, Texas, are among the units that are being sent back for a second tour in Iraq.

The National Guard and Reserves historically depend on men and women leaving active duty to fill their ranks, Carter pointed out. But they’re not going to join if it means they will be sent right back to Iraq in an activated unit, he said.

Military people and machines are all suffering from repeated deployments. ’’What keeps me awake at night is what will this all-volunteer force look like in 2007,’’ Richard Cody, the Army vice chief of staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 16.

Korb, assistant secretary defense for manpower from 1981 through 1985, said the current rotation is unfair to the ’’patriotic’’ men and women who volunteered for military service and are stuck on a cycle in and out of Iraq. Since only a tiny segment of the populace is sacrificing, there is no political pressure to change the system, he said.

’’If you had a draft right now, I think you’d be out of Iraq,’’ Korb said.

<P ID="signature"><div align="center">
ZMD.gif

...the way to be!</div></P>
 
First of all, I want numbers. If the breaking point of the all-volunteer army is the middle of 2006, I want to know precicely why, and how this "liberal think tank" (as referenced by the article) came to these conclusions. After some searching, the only news I'm finding on this subject is from the Cox News Service-- the same article is simply duplicated around various sites. There are certainly difficulties in recruiting, but the military is compensating. Many headlines talk of a "crisis" because the army failed to meet it's February quota. For the year, the goal is 80.000 recruits (3,000 more than previously).

The "crisis" is speculation. The fluctuation is standard and generally flows with the economy. I really wish people wouldn't freak out so dramatically with every negative headline. There's a vast disaproval for such a draft in all areas of government, a change in that would require quite an event to change all that.

<P ID="signature">http://www.oz3d.com/
danozguinness.gif
</a></P>
 
> generally flows with the economy. I really wish people
> wouldn't freak out so dramatically with every negative
> headline. There's a vast disaproval for such a draft in all
> areas of government, a change in that would require quite an
> event to change all that.

Eh, I'm not so much after the "freaking" part, but rahter the "I told ya so" part. I've been saying that this will be a realitiy for a looooong time, but no one seems to believe me. Speculation or not, I believe it will happen, and when it does...I get to go "I told you so," and that'll make me feel better b/c when I comes to our president and right wingers, I can be shallow in order to prove a point to them b/c they wont listen otherwise.

<P ID="signature"><div align="center">
ZMD.gif

...the way to be!</div></P>
 
He is young and out of touch. Frankly, if there is a draft instituted and he still feels that way, he needs a good swift beating. This is no laughing or gloating matter. He should be ashamed of himself.

He also needs to remember that there is still a risk that Canada will get dragged into the Iraq mess too - especially if the Reform/Canadian Alliance/Conservatives get their act together, stop the infighting, and knock the Liberal party out of power.



<P ID="signature"><center>
<IMG SRC = "http://www.angelfire.com/droid/google/temp.txt">
</center></P>
 
> He is young and out of touch.

Yes, but at the moment it doesn't bother because I'm enjoying my freedom before I figure out I need to settle down.

> and knock the Liberal party out of power.

Which WILL happen if Canada becomes in any way involved in Iraq. It's been said. Paul Martin has a minority government in power, and won't be able to hold that position, especially when everyone else is against everything to do with the War in Iraq.

<P ID="signature">
colorisin.jpg
</P>
 
Aye,
You forget the Federal Conservatives are for more involvement with the US as far as Iraq is concerned. It is not inconcievable with the ADSCAM fiasco and Liberal corruption that the Conservatives will come to rule next election.

Minority governments are unstable. If the Conservatives thought for a minute that they could win power than they would hold a vote of noconfidence and cause an election tommorrow.




<P ID="signature"><center>
<IMG SRC = "http://www.angelfire.com/droid/google/temp.txt">
</center></P>
 
Well, maybe the Conservatives, but as far as I know it's the NDP who want nothing to do with the War. I had no idea the conservatives were looking for more involvement with the US that way.

Ty for the info though :)

<P ID="signature">
colorisin.jpg
</P>
 
Futher evidence...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7397842/


Army recruiting falls short for 2nd month
Service has not missed full-year goal since 1999
The Associated Press
Updated: 7:33 p.m. ET April 5, 2005

WASHINGTON - The Army fell almost one-third short of its recruiting goal in March, its second consecutive month of shortfall amid concerns that the Iraq war is discouraging young people from enlisting.

Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey had said recently that internal forecasts indicated the Army was likely to miss its monthly recruiting goals in March and April, although he and other Army officials have said they remain cautiously optimistic of reaching the full-year target of 80,000 recruits.

The Army has not missed its full-year target since 1999.

The last time it had missed a monthly goal, prior to February, was in May 2000. Opinion surveys have indicated that a growing number of young people and their parents are wary of the Army’s recruiting pitch at a time when soldiers in Iraq are killed and wounded virtually every day.

Early spring is typically one of the more difficult periods of the year for military recruiters.

The Army has responded to the slump by increasing the number of recruiters and offering bigger signup bonuses.

The Army’s goal for March was to enlist 6,800 recruits, but it fell short by 2,150, or 32 percent, according to official statistics released Tuesday. That was slightly worse than in February when a goal of 7,050 enlistees was missed by 1,936, or 27 percent. The target for April is 6,600.

The Army Reserve did even worse in March than the regular Army. It recruited barely half the 1,600 soldiers it wanted for the month. It has not met a monthly goal since December 2004, and for the period from October 2004 through March it has met only 82 percent of its goal.

The regular Army, as of March 31, is at 89 percent of its full-year goal.


Hrmm....still isn't looking good....

<P ID="signature"><div align="center">
ZMD.gif

...the way to be!</div></P>
 
Re: Futher evidence...

Gosh, you’re being pessimistic. Wait for the cards before you throw in the hand. This isn’t evidence, it’s a correlation that jumps to a far from certain conclusion. Fluctuations in recruiting percentages won’t be the cause for a draft; it would take a full scale war and a threat to our very existence to end our all-volunteer system. Congress is virulently opposed to the option as anything but a last resort, as are American citizens overwealmingly. This was a propaganda tool during the election, why are you still pushing it?

Don't worry, if there is a draft, you'll have the unreserved right to say "I told you so" if it makes you feel better. But, you're forgetting just how aware we are of the circumstances. Everybody knows a draft is possible in this "New World Order" somewhere down the line. And as the article said, spring is one of the worst recruiting times of the year. This is like using the hottest day of summer as evidence of global warming.

<P ID="signature">http://www.oz3d.com/
danozguinness.gif
</a></P>
 
Re: Futher evidence...

> Gosh, you’re being pessimistic.

Well, that's what I do....being an optimist is a waste of time, and fucking annoying.

> you throw in the hand. This isn’t evidence, it’s a
> correlation that jumps to a far from certain conclusion.

Yeah yeah yeah, association is not causation, I know. I'm just trying to point out that the "one source" before, is having some correlating facts from more "reputable" sources.

> Fluctuations in recruiting percentages won’t be the cause
> for a draft; it would take a full scale war and a threat to
> our very existence to end our all-volunteer system.

*cough* wait till we go to Iran *cough*

> Congress is virulently opposed to the option as anything but a last
> resort, as are American citizens overwealmingly. This was a
> propaganda tool during the election, why are you still
> pushing it?

1. It wasn't a propoganda tool...what's a propoganda tool was how Bush said he'd never reinstatie it.
2. Who's pushing it...I'm just trying to prove my point that people are going to forget about this and then all of a sudden..."whoops, im in the army"

> Don't worry, if there is a draft, you'll have the unreserved
> right to say "I told you so" if it makes you feel better.

Ya damn right.

> But, you're forgetting just how aware we are of the
> circumstances. Everybody knows a draft is possible in this
> "New World Order" somewhere down the line.

"Possible" and "imminent" are different things....im trying to argue that its more imminent than you think....besides WWIII is going to start in 2009/10 anyway, so we'll need more troops by then at the latest....more likely around late 2007 if you ask me.

> article said, spring is one of the worst recruiting times of
> the year. This is like using the hottest day of summer as
> evidence of global warming.

Well, since it says there's a history of missed goals, not just this month, then I'd say that's cause for a little bit of concern. If it goes back up and they dont miss again after the spring, then fine, I'm wrong.

<P ID="signature"><div align="center">
ZMD.gif

...the way to be!</div></P>
 
Re: Futher evidence...

> *cough* wait till we go to Iran *cough*

Won't be long. Wait till Russia starts shipping nuclear materials to produce power plants. Bushy boy will be all over it, I can imagine.

<P ID="signature">
colorisin.jpg
</P>
 
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

I really wish people wouldn't freak out so dramatically with every negative headline. There's a vast disaproval for such a draft in all areas of government, a change in that would require quite an event to change all that.

<hr></blockquote>
Two words: Media. Sensationalism.

Trumped-up views of possibilities sell better than the actual facts happening around us today.

<P ID="signature"><HR>
Read and review Life of the Silver Tear at Fiction Press.com.</P>
 
Re: Futher evidence...

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Gosh, you’re being pessimistic.

<hr></blockquote>
"An optimist sees the world as it should be. A pessimist sees it as it is." -- Ambrose Bierce

Just something I felt I needed to say.

But to the central topic, I feel it unlikely that the draft will be instituted. Of course, I'm not foolish enough to say IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN, but in the near future (with a moderate amount of certainty, possibly to 2007), I don't think it's going to happen. Unfortunately, the primary reason for that is because it would be political suicide for the draft to be seriously suggested. If it comes to the draft becoming necessary, I seriously hope that Congress has the guts to just do it and get it over with, rather than waiting until it's truly a matter of survival.

<P ID="signature"><HR>
Read and review Life of the Silver Tear at Fiction Press.com.</P>
 
Re: Futher evidence...

> Well, that's what I do....being an optimist is a waste of
> time, and fucking annoying.

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill

In most situations pessimism is the reason for failure. One can be both optimistic and realistic at the same time. But then again, my opinion is biased beacause, well, I'm an optimist <img src=smilies/thumb.gif>

<P ID="signature">http://www.oz3d.com/
danozguinness.gif
</a></P>
 
Back
Top Bottom