Everyone take a look at this.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c ... 108dHzGh6::

Congress is trying to pass this bill quitely while everyone is focused on the election. If this goes through it could be enacted as early as June 2005!
This is horrible.
We all need to stand up and oppose this bill by contacting our state legislators.

link doesnt work

Sorry about that,
Go here: http://thomas.loc.gov/
and type in "HR 163" and click on the first link

Something like this thread came up last year if I remember correctly. And in my humble opinion, its the Republicans trying to cover their asses because while the armed forces have exceeded the number of recruits they expected to get this year, reports say the number of recruits they get next year will be well below expectations. Suffice it to say, the Bush administration has fucked up in Iraq and now they want more people to be sent over and since they're not getting enough volunteers, they feel the need to take as many people as possible and turn them towards the militant groups in Iraq.

Just another attempt by the Republicans to limit the amount of freedom we have. Yes, I'm well aware other countries like Israel and Sweden have implemented policies like this to great effect. It won't work here. Just my opinion. I mean, how amny of us are willing to possibly risk our lives by being forced to serve in the military and be sent to Iraq or Iran or North Korea (when we invade them and you know we will)?

I'd consider myself a fairly patriotic US citizen, but I'm not willing to put my life on the line for something I think we were wrong to do in the first place. Afghanistan, we had reason to go there. Iraq, that was FUBAR from the start.

Granted, I probably shouldn't be speaking because I'd probably end up being exempted for medical reasons but I sure as hell don't want to see my friends being made to perform military service, even in a simple civillian capacity, if they never wanted to in the first place. We've got one of the largest fucking militaries in the world, why do we need to increase its size?

I have a possible reason why. I alluded to it earlier. If Bush gets re-elected in November how much would all of you be willing to bet that we invade Iran and/or North Korea before the end of his second term? This little piece of legislation is an insurance policy to make sure we have enough meat for the grinder should we have to fight both countries at the same time AND continue the peacekeeping role in Iraq.

All this coming from a guy who supported Bush in 2000, despite not being able to vote at the time. Over the last four years, I realized what an idiot I was. I'm not saying Kerry is a better alternative, but Bush needs to have his ass thrown out of office.

Just my two cents.

Before you blame this on the Republicans, look at the first two sponsors for this bill. (Charlie Rangel and Jim McDermott if you don't want to look.) These two "gentlemen", and I use the term loosely, are two of the most liberal people on the planet. They just want to stir up trouble and make it look like the Republicans are trying to do it. People just assume that Republicans want a draft because they are the political party that usually uses the armed forces. This is just the Democrats getting free political fodder. It's much ado about nothing.

I went looking for the sponsers and this is what I found

Rangel - Democratic Rep from New York
McDermott - Democratic Rep from Washington
Abercrombi - Democratic Rep from Hawaii
Stark - Democratic Rep from California
Lewis - Democratic Rep from Georgia
Conyers - Democratic Rep from Michigan

What was that about being a Republican conspiracy again?

OWNED

Nicely done, GMFSUCKS!

I don’t understand why people would be offended by this. Everyone that lives willingly in this great nation has an obligation to help with the common defense.

In addition this is not the first time a bill like this has been introduced in the House. For those who dislike the idea of the military, don’t worry, every time it has failed. After all we don’t want to loose more dodgers to Canada. Heck, I believe that I heard the other day that the Canadians were coming up with plans to honor Vietnam draft dodgers with a statue.

Some of the strongest nations of this world already have some form of this bill in place. Now don’t quote me on this but I believe that Brittan is one of them.

I honestly can't see there being a draft. Things aren't quite that dire yet. We've lost 1000 or so in Iraq in about two years (I think it's two). The last draft, for Viet Nam, the numbers were much more severe.

Ok, I read this thing, and it doesn't look like a draft to me.

It looks more like a revision of the SSS program to include females AND a more streamlined way for teh president to enact the manditory service requirement IF it is necessary. I don't see anything blatantly stating that everyone will be forced to enlist for 2 years if they are between 18-26, as of such-and-such a date for the current conflict in the middle east.

Basically, those are the only things I see. If this passes, the only things that will happen is the Females have to register with SSS (this is what all that feminist equality activistism got you girls) and the president can say, "Hey! We need more troops, grab some high school grads"

You tell me how attacking Iraq is helping with the common defense.

saddam doesn't have uranium refineries any more.

saddam isn't giving nerve gas to terrorists any more.

saddam isn't using nerve gas on (insert people here) any more.

saddam isn't funding terrorism against the US any more.

It's just politics. No one thinks its going to pass. They all know it will fail and are planning on it failing. The only reason it was introduced was make a statement.