Rangel Wants Draft

[MoBushwhacker]

I can not believe the amount of stupidity that is being displayed by the Democratsnot even two weeks after they were elected.


They were elected because people were sick of the war and the way the country has been heading.


In the past two weeks, Charles Rangel has griped about the amount of aid that was sent to Mississippi following hurricane Katrina and asked, "Who the hell wants to go to Mississippi"


Now he appears on Face the Nation advocating a draft, but right beside him was Lyndsay Graham , a Republican from South Carolina.


I have posted my feelings on this subject on my blog:


http://mobushwhacker.bravejournal.com/entry/18615


Edited by: MoBushwhacker

[Adolar]

I never thought I would live to see the day that I'd ever agree with anything Charley Rangel said, but when it comes to the draft--no deferments for any reason (except maybe missing limbs or such-like), no wriggling out of it by means of National Guard duty, etc., it might--just might--make our politicians hesitate to vote in favor of attacking some God-forsaken country 10,000 miles away if they have to consider that their own kids might have to take part.


Also, the crazier the Democrats behave, the better; it might demonstrate, absolutely and positively, that neither party can be trusted, and (hopefully) strengthen the prospects for a truly representative third party.


Live in hope and die in despair?

[MoBushwhacker]

Who said anything about banning deferments? Charlie Rangel hasn't, Lindsay Graham hasn't... it will be just like drafts always are, the poor and middle class will fight, the rich and elite will get out of it , so that they may gain power someday, to send more of those who aren't to fight.

[Michael]

Basically, rather they have deferments or not the elites children will only go into combat zones if they demand to and very very few will do that! They are saying that Congress would think twice about sending troops into combat if there was a draft. What a joke! The Zionist would give Congress their marching order and they say, "Yes Master!" and do as order. By what has been written wars are planned for Lebanon, Syria and Iran. Millions of more troops particularly frontline White middle and working class troops, will be needed to accomplish this. If Russia or China enters the conflict reads tens of millions. The only reason that they want a draft is so that they can fight more wars not less.

[Don Wassall]

I don't think the draft will be revived unless the rulingclass thinks it's absolutely necessary. A draft will energize the anti-war movement exponentially. The draft was a major reason why opposition to the Vietnam War became so strong, and it's about the only thing that would cause young Americans to take to the streets in large numbers.


There is another big difference between Vietnam and Iraq besides the lack of a draft. Vietnam fit in nicely with the revolutionary paradigm of the '60s of tearing down all the old institutions in the U.S. and replacing them with ones devoted to Cultural Marxism. That movement, on the streets and from the ivory towers, was dominated by Jews. Reader's Digest, in a rare slip, published the fact that some 80 percent of the leaders of the "New Left" in the '60s were Jews. Iraq, however, is being fought on behalf of not only imperial business interests but also Jewish tribal interests, which is why the contemporary anti-war movement lacks the energy and dedication of its predecessor from the late '60s and early '70s.

Sweet Nancy delivered a strong No-Draft sound bite and interview today


I also believe a Draft trulyis unneeded and won't be tried ... because an endless supply of young Americans with pisz-poore job prospects is available

[Michael]

The "contemporary anti-war movement" lacks press support but may in reality have more grassroots support. Getting the word out is the big problem just like with any third party movement, there are plenty of people whom would support them if they knew about them.


The powers that be are in a tough spot in order to advance their war agenda for "greater Israel" and the New World Order they need more troops but more troops means a draft which as you mentioned would lead to more opposition.

Bill Kristol calls for "more troops" in the Weekly Standard every week. He wants longer tours and more reservists mobilized. Also, I caught Limbaugh for a few minutes today. Rush said that "if we have a draft it'll be like the movie Platoon, you would have people who don't want to be there." Limbaugh thinks every thing is fine as it is without a draft.

[Don Wassall]

The "contemporary anti-war movement" lacks press support but may in reality have more grassroots support.

I agree. The Vietnam era anti-war movement was essentially a top-down affair which had the overt and covert support of much of the establishment. The current anti-war movement doesn't, which makes the U.S. loss in Iraq far more stinging than Vietnam, which was never waged to win.

I have read a few pieces by neocons in which they let slip the fact that they were opposed to the Vietnam War in their youth. They are all for "American Intervention" in the Middle East, strangely enough.


There is another difference between Iraq and Vietnam. The Vietnam War never had the kind of hardcore supporters that Iraq has. This includes Limbaugh, Hannity, etc, as well as the entire neocon publishing and media industry.


Basically, the neocon war hawks would be satisfied with a permanent American military presence in Iraq. It remains to be seen if either party can withdraw from Iraq. Much of the Democratic Party's financial support is not especially against the Iraq War.

Now, come on all you big strong men


Uncle Sam needs your help again


Got himself in a terrible jam


Way down yonder in Vietnam ....


Where's Country Joe McDonald when you need him? A draft would be magnificently unpopular, and won't be tried 'cause it's unnecessary. Unc Sam can merely torture those unfortunates currently on active duty, and those who can't wriggle out of the reserves or Guard. Recruiter speaketh with forked tongue! Indeed!.


One of the Marines who tore down Saddam's portrait in the Imperial Palace in Baghdad (for all the TV cameras) was an alumnus of my military academy, in fact a guy I went to school with. Gung-ho and sadistic, he was the perfect fellow for the job, the Iraq "cake walk." I imagine his tune is just a shade different today.


I wish no G.I. or sailor poorly! But a major risk of volunteering is working for a pshychopathic Chief Executive who is willing to fling Americans into the meat grinder without batting an eyelashEdited by: Realgeorge

[gardenstate]

In March of this year Charles Rangel once again introduced his signature military draft bill.

Last year the A3P News Team adapted and posted an article I had written detailing the outright lies and distortion of facts by this disingenuous anti-white Harlem politician. In 2010 whites accounted for 73.7% of reported deaths in Iraq. As of July 2011 whites accounted for 72.9% of reported deaths. Still too low for Rangel's liking.
---

Rep. Rangel Wants More Whites To Die In War -A3P News Team | July 17, 2010 |

The American Third Position condemns Rep. Charles Rangel for his introduction of H.R.5741, a universal conscription bill whose intent is the deaths of more Whites in the armed forces.

This hateful legislation is introduced despite the fact that a disproportionate number of Whites already die in service. Rangel’s death wish for Whites has been pervasive, as he previously introduced universal conscription bills in 2003 and 2007.

In an interview with Salon magazine in 2003 regarding his bill, Rangel expressed his views that “the poor, black and brown shouldn’t be the only Americans fighting and dying in Iraq,” and “Fairness dictates that the sons and daughters of the white middle and upper classes share the burden of war.”

"Today’s armed forces rely heavily on minorities, the working class and the poor, he says, who turn to the military because few other opportunities are available to them. Roughly 40 percent of the U.S. military is minority, compared to a quarter of the overall population. African-Americans are particularly likely to join: They make up 26 percent of the military, but only 12 percent of Americans."

As is often the case, Rangel is purposefully ignorant of the facts. As can be seen in the statistics furnished by USA Today: Deaths in Iraq: A look at the American lives lost, it is Whites who have been disproportionately burdened by loss of their loved ones in the war machine.

Stipulating, that if Whites make up just 60% of the U.S. military, Whites account for 73.7% (3,254) of the reported 4,416 deaths. Blacks, who make up 26% of the military ranks, only account for 9.6% (441) of reported deaths.

Take a few minutes and go through this interactive graph where one can select from a range of categories and obtain the correct statistics.

A congressman calling for re-establishing the draft because he has a debased intuitive feeling that a specific race is not dying in sufficient numbers in Iraq? Quite appalling.

The A3P will keep our nation out of foreign disputes that have no bearing on the welfare of our people, as outlined in its policy pages here:
---

Article: Rep. Rangel Wants More Whites To Die In War
http://american3rdposition.org/

Interactive Graph: Deaths in Iraq: A look at the American lives lost
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...sualties_N.htm