A Way to Use Their Fear-Mongering Against Them: The Draft

[Rintrah54]

Alright, what do you guys think about this?

Its been my position for quite some time now that if the government were move for a draft today, the war would be over tommorow. I think people are more than willing to sleeplily support the war when its not their children at stake, but snores would give way to screams of protest were the Draft to come about.

Now from what I understand the US Armed Forces recruitment is way down and current troops are getting redeployed constantly(backdoor draft). Tie this to McCains 100 years statement or the idea that we go into Iran/Pakistan and I would assume a fairly strong case could be made for the likelihood of a draft. Something like "Blah blah McCain, blah blah 100 years, blah Iran.........to support that kind of military involvement at current recruitment levels will require a draft".

I could certainly be way off base here. What do you think?

[Knut Schreiber]

I had this in mind, too. The campaign should definately consider it.

[jaumen]

I think a case could certainly be made that if we continue to fight in Iraq, and the war spreads to Iran and/or Pakistan, that a draft is a near certainty. To be honest, I would like to hear in the debate tonight, Paul say something to that effect... like when the whole "aren't you afraid?" thing comes up, as it usually does, for him to respond with "I'm afraid that if this war spreads that the American people will face a military draft, and even more of our sons and daughters will die in a war that doesn't serve our interests."

People need to think about the possibility of a draft... because the possibility exists.

[MsDoodahs]

There is even more ammo to create a great ad contrasting Ron with the warmongers: the ABC debate, opening segment, when the others all went after Dr. Paul and then spent a few minutes discussing how THEY would handle the situation.

Huck said some bull$#@! about going in with more troops at the start, he mentioned 600,000. He said you don't go in with what you have you go in with what you need or something like that - a flat out indication that he's a draft starter IMO.

Also Rudy said that stuff about how we need 10 new divisions. That's over a million new recruits. Rudy can't get that WITHOUT a draft.

[Richie]

I've used this against a neocon before. It makes them crumble, fall back, and never politically challenge you again.

[micahnelson]

Here is a good Ron Paul response.

"Rudy in the last debate you said we would need 10 more divisions. Mike, you said you would have gone into Iraq with 600,000 men- or a little over half the population of Rhode Island. Do any of you have a plan to pay for that? You may be more right than you know, we simply cannot afford the foreign policy we are currently following if we intended to do it "right". Arguments about wisdom and morality aside, we cannot afford it. And don't use the canard that we "Can't afford not to". Lets take home security, for instance. If we all had 24 hour bodyguards, a Duncan Hunter fence surrounding our perimeter, a state of the art intrusion detection system and more... we would be secure, but we would be bankrupt and homeless in months- making us more vulnerable than if we had simply been more practical in the first place. A foreign policy that bankrupts our country, please understand this, is counterproductive to our safety. Most of us understand where inflation is going, if we can't pay for heating oil and food- how is the government going to pay for a military. So, even if you think we should have a military base in every hotspot around the world, unless you have a plan to pay for it- we shouldn't be discussing it. My foreign policy defends the borders, restores diplomacy which is essential to stopping the spread of backwards ideologies, and preserves an American National Defense that will be strong enough to counter any military threat against this nation without spreading ourselves too thin or bankrupting our economy. I would ask you gentlemen, what is your plan and how do you plan on paying for it?"

[texnofobix]

That is a wonderful response!

[MsDoodahs]

I've used this against a neocon before. It makes them crumble, fall back, and never politically challenge you again.

I brought this up with a family member who is a minister. He said the war is a spiritual war, and that Christians know that they/their sons and daughters must be sacrificed in order to defeat Islam. So it won't work every time.

[micahnelson]

I brought this up with a family member who is a minister. He said the war is a spiritual war, and that Christians know that they/their sons and daughters must be sacrificed in order to defeat Islam. So it won't work every time.

My dad is a minister and would deeply disagree. Looks like nobody has a monopoly on God here. Blessed are the peace makers... He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.

If this is the case, what will he say when a "heathen" is at the helm of our spiritual war?

[Kade]

I brought this up with a family member who is a minister. He said the war is a spiritual war, and that Christians know that they/their sons and daughters must be sacrificed in order to defeat Islam. So it won't work every time.

A bountiful harvest of righteousness.

[Deborah K]

Alright, what do you guys think about this?

Its been my position for quite some time now that if the government were move for a draft today, the war would be over tommorow. I think people are more than willing to sleeplily support the war when its not their children at stake, but snores would give way to screams of protest were the Draft to come about.

Now from what I understand the US Armed Forces recruitment is way down and current troops are getting redeployed constantly(backdoor draft). Tie this to McCains 100 years statement or the idea that we go into Iran/Pakistan and I would assume a fairly strong case could be made for the likelihood of a draft. Something like "Blah blah McCain, blah blah 100 years, blah Iran.........to support that kind of military involvement at current recruitment levels will require a draft".

I could certainly be way off base here. What do you think?

I got into a heated debate with someone about this issue recently. This ignorant person said that most parents would probably welcome a draft because American kids are so spoiled and out of touch that a good stint in the military might straighten them up!

HA!!!!

I replied by saying, so because parents have screwed up at raising their own children - you think handing them over to this corrupt government and sacrificing their lives is the answer to your failure as a parent?????

We don't speak anymore.

[smoke.stack]

from what i understand, and I'm an atheist btw, but god was going to kill mankind for it's sin, and it was Jesus who said, "no, they know not what they do.." and died in our place.. thus saving mankind from god's wrath. so, it seems that the minister advocating "sacrificing sons and daughters in a spiritual war" follows god, and the peace minister follows jesus, because by all accounts.. god will destroy you if you cross him.. jesus on the other hand was about peace and unity, and even died for it.. i might be wrong on this.. not an expert.. maybe someone could elaborate on why these two ministers would take such different positions.

I ask because I have to deal with alot of religious types in my area, and I try to make connections to jesus's peace loving nature and being anti-war, but I always make sure to explain to them that there is such a thing as "just war," and being anti-war doesn't mean that you are a pacifist, cause that scares them.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

I brought this up with a family member who is a minister. He said the war is a spiritual war, and that Christians know that they/their sons and daughters must be sacrificed in order to defeat Islam. So it won't work every time.

So wait, which one is the religious radical?

We got to get those terrorist who will kill themselves in the name of Christi... I mean Islam.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

from what i understand, and I'm an atheist btw, but god was going to kill mankind for it's sin, and it was Jesus who said, "no, they know not what they do.." and died in our place.. thus saving mankind from god's wrath. so, it seems that the minister advocating "sacrificing sons and daughters in a spiritual war" follows god, and the peace minister follows jesus, because by all accounts.. god will destroy you if you cross him.. jesus on the other hand was about peace and unity, and even died for it.. i might be wrong on this.. not an expert.. maybe someone could elaborate on why these two ministers would take such different positions.

I ask because I have to deal with alot of religious types in my area, and I try to make connections to jesus's peace loving nature and being anti-war, but I always make sure to explain to them that there is such a thing as "just war," and being anti-war doesn't mean that you are a pacifist, cause that scares them.

This should answer your question nicely: http://youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

[Rintrah54]

I think the point here is that, sadly, fear of personal safety trumps intellectual/rational thought process every single time. Its basic psychology. Ron Paul needs to break it down very simply that:

100 years + Iran + Pakistan + Middle East in general = DRAFT

I think this would plant a very powerful seed in the minds of people who would then have their kids at the wrong end of a gun barrel.

We all know that the economic argument is very viable, but in my mind presents a less realistic and less personal threat to the average voter than putting their kids under the gun. Additionaly, the economic argument is much easier to counter with a "I will cut spending retort" while the draft point packs more of an emotional punch and it would be harder to explain where the troops are going to come from to support an extended presence.

NOT TO MENTION!!!! That it could get these neocons spouting similar 100 years arguments on national TV which would shine a different light on things in itself.

I think he needs to wage a direct attack on these guys tonight using the 100 years point.

[MsDoodahs]

So wait, which one is the religious radical?

We got to get those terrorist who will kill themselves in the name of Christi... I mean Islam.

Exactly.

[mavtek]

I brought this up with a family member who is a minister. He said the war is a spiritual war, and that Christians know that they/their sons and daughters must be sacrificed in order to defeat Islam. So it won't work every time.

That's the kinda of $#@! Huckabee is spouting and that's the kinda $#@! that makes we want to move out of this country, I mean high tail it!

[Chase]

I brought this up with a family member who is a minister. He said the war is a spiritual war, and that Christians know that they/their sons and daughters must be sacrificed in order to defeat Islam. So it won't work every time.

$#@! that noise. If I was the son or daughter of one of those pro-war kooks you better believe I'd tell them off for a comment like that.

[familydog]

The only places draft fear-mongering would work is college campuses. Although I don't know. I remember in 04, it was chalked all over my campus that if you vote for Bush, you will spend your Spring break in Iraq (with the draft). Of course, that never happened or even came close to happening. So it really depends on who you target I guess.

[Rintrah54]

The only places draft fear-mongering would work is college campuses. Although I don't know. I remember in 04, it was chalked all over my campus that if you vote for Bush, you will spend your Spring break in Iraq (with the draft). Of course, that never happened or even came close to happening. So it really depends on who you target I guess.

I dunno. How many mothers want to send their kids to the Middle East. Mine sure doesnt. Thank Mom!!!