News: US militery draft is back (I'm not joking)

[Virtual_Burlesque]

... Perhaps all these extra troops may not be needed for foreign adventures at all.

You mean domestic MOUT. ( “Militarized Operations on Urbanized Terrain.”)

Not quite, I hope not!



Excerpt from...
Urban warfare: Is Iraq a rehearsal for US hoods?
by Mike Davis, SFBayview.com
April 28th, 2004


... the four armed services, coordinated by the Joint Staff Urban Working Group, launched crash programs to master street-fighting under realistic third-world conditions. “The future of warfare,” the journal of the Army War College declared, “lies in the streets, sewers, high-rise buildings, and sprawl of houses that form the broken cities of the world.”

Israeli advisors were quietly brought in to teach Marines, Rangers and Navy Seals the state-of-the-art tactics - especially the sophisticated coordination of sniper and demolition teams with heavy armor and overwhelming airpower - so ruthlessly used by Israeli Defense Forces in Gaza and the West Bank.

Artificial cityscapes - complete with “smoke and sound systems” - were built to simulate combat conditions in densely populated neighborhoods of cities like Baghdad or Port-au-Prince. The Marine Corps Urban Warfighting Laboratory also staged realistic war games (“Urban Warrior”) in Oakland and Chicago, while the Army’s Special Operations Command “invaded” Pittsburgh.

Today, many of the Marines inside Fallujah are graduates of these Urban Warrior exercises as well as mock combat at “Yodaville.” the Urban Training Facility in Yuma, Arizona, while some of the Army units encircling Najaf and the Baghdad slum neighborhood of Sadr City are alumni of the new $34 million MOUT simulator at Fort Polk, Louisiana.

( For complete article, click HERE )

 

[ruminator]

You mean domestic MOUT. ( “Militarized Operations on Urbanized Terrain.”)

Not quite, I hope not!



Excerpt from...
Urban warfare: Is Iraq a rehearsal for US hoods?
by Mike Davis, SFBayview.com
April 28th, 2004


... the four armed services, coordinated by the Joint Staff Urban Working Group, launched crash programs to master street-fighting under realistic third-world conditions. “The future of warfare,” the journal of the Army War College declared, “lies in the streets, sewers, high-rise buildings, and sprawl of houses that form the broken cities of the world.”

Israeli advisors were quietly brought in to teach Marines, Rangers and Navy Seals the state-of-the-art tactics - especially the sophisticated coordination of sniper and demolition teams with heavy armor and overwhelming airpower - so ruthlessly used by Israeli Defense Forces in Gaza and the West Bank.

Artificial cityscapes - complete with “smoke and sound systems” - were built to simulate combat conditions in densely populated neighborhoods of cities like Baghdad or Port-au-Prince. The Marine Corps Urban Warfighting Laboratory also staged realistic war games (“Urban Warrior”) in Oakland and Chicago, while the Army’s Special Operations Command “invaded” Pittsburgh.

Today, many of the Marines inside Fallujah are graduates of these Urban Warrior exercises as well as mock combat at “Yodaville.” the Urban Training Facility in Yuma, Arizona, while some of the Army units encircling Najaf and the Baghdad slum neighborhood of Sadr City are alumni of the new $34 million MOUT simulator at Fort Polk, Louisiana.

( For complete article, click HERE )

There's at least one good article out there on the exercises in Pittsburgh that were conducted.

Something to think about,...

 

[Guest]

Israeli advisors were quietly brought in to teach Marines, Rangers and Navy Seals the state-of-the-art tactics - especially the sophisticated coordination of sniper and demolition teams with heavy armor and overwhelming airpower - so ruthlessly used by Israeli Defense Forces in Gaza and the West Bank.

Let's have another two thousand years of that!

What do I care.

 

[Somme]

This is really frightening. What are the chances that this could become a reality?

~lucky

High.

 

[Pure]

Here's an article from a mainstream Mass. paper, dated May 2

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/05-04/05-02-04/b01pe017.htm



Rumors of a new draft are swirling
By STEVE URBON, Standard-Times senior correspondent

Local draft board members say they don't think they're going to get the go-ahead, but if word does come, they stand ready to begin sending those dreaded "greetings" to eligible young men in the region.


Stephen Guinen of Fall River isn't among those who think there will be a return to the military draft soon in this country -- and he's attuned to the situation: Mr. Guinen is one of five members of the draft board for Greater Fall River.
"I don't believe its going to happen," he told The Standard-Times. "I don't believe there'll be a draft unless there's an all-out war."


Referring to a bill introduced last year by two Democratic congressmen, Mr. Guinen said, "Someone is trying put a smoke screen up. Some people are for this Iraq thing and some are against it. Some people against it want to cause a little public outcry as far as the draft board is concerned."


As of January 2003, that was almost certainly the case. Identical bills, H163 and S89, known as the Universal National Service Act of 2003, were aimed at "requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes."
Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-S.C., who co-sponsored the bill along with Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said bluntly at the time that they were making a political point. "One way to avoid a lot more wars to come is institute the draft," Sen. Hollings said in a New York Times interview. "You will find that this country will sober up, and its leadership, too."


But that was before the war in Iraq, in which the Pentagon predicted that U.S. forces, once Saddam Hussein was removed from power, would be reduced to 30,000 by September of last year. Instead, there are five times that many there today, and many military experts say that many more are needed just to provide basic security.


While Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld continues to praise the performance of the all-volunteer military, it is becoming more difficult to maintain troop strength in Iraq and in the other places where the military is deployed. More than 60 percent of the Army's fighting force is reportedly deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea and the Balkans. Troops are also deployed in Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.


In Iraq, National Guard forces recently accounted for 20 percent of the troops, and that number is expected to increase to 40 percent. There is talk of calling up retired reservists, and some families have complained that the manpower-hungry Pentagon is ignoring reservists' medical conditions when screening them for what is essentially combat duty.


In December, when a "stop-loss" order blocked the departure of 40,000 service members from Iraq, then-presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, complained, "The Army's refusal to release tens of thousands of soldiers who have completed their terms of service amounts to drafting them on the very day they fulfill their obligations. These men and women have already risked their lives. They should not have to risk them a second time through involuntary service, through being forced to serve in Iraq. This is a draft. A draft forces people to serve involuntarily."


Stop-loss was invoked again last month when 20,000 U.S. soldiers due to return home had their tours extended at least three months beyond the full year that most have already served in Iraq. The majority are regular Army, but thousands are from the National Guard and Reserve.


The Washington Post recently reported that Pentagon officials have raised the possibility that "the next rotation of forces into Iraq planned to start in September and run through January could be moved up to sustain the higher troop level after the current extensions end. That means some troops who were promised a full year at home before being sent back into Iraq will see that promise broken.



When Iraq war commenced, the Selective Service System quietly mobilized to fill vacancies in the 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board seats that are spread from coast to coast.
Lee Holton, the Selective Service's 16-state Region 1 programs manager, told The Standard-Times, "There are no actual draft boards because there's no draft. They're local boards, in standby status, basically."


That may change soon -- but no one believes it will be before the November election. Few politicians believe it would be anything but political suicide to push it before then.


Nonetheless, Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska, a Vietnam veteran and a member of the Foreign Relations committee, said that the nation should consider reviving the draft to help ensure that all Americans "bear some responsibility ... pay some price" in defending the nation, according to The Washington Post.


At a committee hearing and in interviews, he said, he was not advocating a new draft, although he said he is "not so sure that it isn't a bad idea."


There has been no draft since 1973, at the end of the Vietnam era, and the all-volunteer military that top brass once opposed is now staunchly defended by those same officers.

Since the local boards, and mandatory registration for males at age 18, were reinstituted in 1980 under President Jimmy Carter, Selective Service has quietly maintained the bureaucracy, staffed mainly by thousands of volunteers. A 20-year limit on their terms meant that the year 2000 saw an exodus that required a recruitment drive by Selective Service.


Some of it was achieved by word-of-mouth, or the Selective Service's Web site invitation. One New Bedford local board member, who asked not to be named in this story, signed up two years ago at the urging of a friend who was on the board, he said. He filled a vacancy left by a 20-year member who was forced to retire.

He, Mr. Guinen and others in Bristol County attended an annual training session in March to familiarize local board members with proper procedures in the event a draft is reinstated. The training, led by regular military personnel on assignment to Selective Service, included role-playing and a focus on drafting medical personnel -- EMTs, doctors, nurses.

Targeted draft

Hearst Newspapers recently reported that the government was in the first stages "toward a targeted military draft of Americans with special skills in computers and foreign languages. That arose, the news service said, after Pentagon officials suggested a need for more people in those areas. This was in addition to a plan already in place to register and draft health care personnel between the ages of 20 and 44, which was the topic of the recent training exercises.


Meanwhile, while active-duty re-enlistment rates stay strong, with help from $10,000 bonuses now offered by the Army, The Denver Post reported that recruiting of reservists is dropping. While the desired retention rate is 85 percent, it dropped to as low as 71 percent in Colorado last year. An Army officer was quoted by the Post as saying, "They are getting out because of personal reasons, promotions at work ... and stress on the family."

Mr. Guinen said he recently received a letter from Selective Service announcing a suspension of the annual training because of budget cuts, and the Hollings-Rangel "bring back the draft" bill has gone nowhere so far, with no Senate co-sponsors and just 13 sponsors in the House.
And Selective Service's Web site -- www.sss.gov -- firmly rejects the speculation that a move is imminent:

"Notwithstanding recent stories in the news media and on the Internet, Selective Service is not getting ready to conduct a draft for the U.S. Armed Forces -- either with a special skills or regular draft. Rather, the agency remains prepared to manage a draft if and when the president and the Congress so direct. This responsibility has been ongoing since 1980 and is nothing new.

"Further, both the president and the Secretary of Defense have stated on more than one occasion that there is no need for a draft for the War on Terrorism or any likely contingency, such as Iraq. Additionally, the Congress has not acted on any proposed legislation to reinstate a draft. Therefore, Selective Service continues to refine its plans to be prepared as is required by law, and to register young men who are ages 18 through 25."

This story appeared on Page B1 of The Standard-Times on May 2, 2004.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

This bill is frightening. That we all know. Even if they're drafted for "technical" positions, I know a few men in "technical" positions in Iraq that are dodging shrapnal daily. Considering the youth I know, they may be generally apathetic, but as soon as this passes, look for a concentrated youth rebellion.

You'll see Weathermen returning, hacker attacks against key military offices, and open rioting once again in the colleges. The youth today may be quieter, but threaten to remove them from their glorious world of technology and they will kill.

Personally, I think it's sad that the baby boomers who stopped the draft are now the buggers bringing it back. What the fuck?

P.S. Thanks for the link, I sent it to all my friends who are of college age to show their parents. None of them is dismissively laughing the threat. It's literally dead serious.

 

[ruminator]

High.

Speaking of odds,....

Do you remember the short-lived and really bad idea from the war rooms where they were going to bet on speculation of terrorist activity. A tip board of sorts to lay money down on when and where the terrorists would strike, what the casualties might be and other details?

 

[Xelebes]

FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE!!!!

If I didn't see this earlier, aw well.

But this is fake. This is what? From like 2003? Put together by Democrats as a dare. The Republicans wouldn't dare - every politician knows, even George Dubya, that a draft is a good way to have unnecessarily large numbers killed.

 

[minsue]

FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE!!!!

If I didn't see this earlier, aw well.

But this is fake. This is what? From like 2003? Put together by Democrats as a dare. The Republicans wouldn't dare - every politician knows, even George Dubya, that a draft is a good way to have unnecessarily large numbers killed.

The bills are real. That's enough for me. I don't give a fuck why they did it.

 

[Xelebes]

The bills are real. That's enough for me. I don't give a fuck why they did it.

This time you can actually trust the Republicans.

 

[minsue]

This time you can actually trust the Republicans.

Wouldn't it be pretty to think so?

 

[ruminator]

This time you can actually trust the Republicans.

Why in the world would you say that?

 

[Xelebes]

Why in the world would you say that?

It would be political suicide for the Republicans to actually let the bill pass. They actually learned something from the Vietnam War. Also, the Republicans, namely Rumsfeld, only wants a minimal foprce in there. Sure there may be a few Republicans who want the Holy War to begin but I am assured they are a small minority within the ranks.

 

[SlickTony]

If the lot currently running things can keep the economy such that jobs are scarce and one ends up applying to work in Dynecorp and other companies like it, maybe a draft won't be necessary.

I have noticed how many contractors there are fighting the war in Iraq. They are fighting alongside regular army troops from the US and other countries. Here you have the concept of people who will be exposed to shot and shell but won't be counted as veterans and won't be eligible for veterans' benefits.

They don't call them mercenaries, but nevertheless, that's what they are. But it's an extension of the trend I'd been noticing in America in the regular workforce for some time, for companies to hire as few people as possible and to contract out as much as possible. You start out with the Kelly Girls, and end up with Sun Wolf*.




*Sun Wolf was a character in an excellent series of sword and sorcery novels written by Barbara Hambly. He was the leader of a mercenary troop.

 

[shereads]

This bill is frightening. That we all know. Even if they're drafted for "technical" positions, I know a few men in "technical" positions in Iraq that are dodging shrapnal daily. Considering the youth I know, they may be generally apathetic, but as soon as this passes, look for a concentrated youth rebellion.

You'll see Weathermen returning, hacker attacks against key military offices, and open rioting once again in the colleges. The youth today may be quieter, but threaten to remove them from their glorious world of technology and they will kill.

Personally, I think it's sad that the baby boomers who stopped the draft are now the buggers bringing it back. What the fuck?

P.S. Thanks for the link, I sent it to all my friends who are of college age to show their parents. None of them is dismissively laughing the threat. It's literally dead serious.

It won't happen.

The people who got us into this mess have no intention of sending their own sons and daughters to fight alongside Joe Public's sons and daughters. ("Joe Public" is the president's nickname for us ordinary working-class schmucks, as quoted by Bob Woodward.)

Frankly, an unbiased draft is the only fair way to fight a war.*Otherwise, the burden falls to an enormous extent on young people who needed jobs and had no more promising options.

*I take it back. The only fair way to fight a war of choice is for the people who wanted it to sign up and go first.

 

[shereads]

There is one very chilling consideration. If the Dems propose it and the Gop votes for it we could have a draft back. I shudder to think what might happen if this administration returns and is provided with carte blanche to use force where ever they wish, without the size of the military acting as a moderating factor to their ambition.

-Colly

The only bright side to a possible victory for the bill (which I still believe is unlikely) is that reinstating the draft would virtually assure stronger public opposition to any war of choice. If the draft had existed six months ago, the public reaction to the lack of WMD and the lack of a proven link between Iraq and 9/ll would have been one of outrage, in Congress and among voters. Sadly, it would still have been too late; the lies worked to accomplish the objective, as Chalabi has said. But somebody besides Bill Maher would have been fired by now.

 

[shereads]

Speaking of odds,....

Do you remember the short-lived and really bad idea from the war rooms where they were going to bet on speculation of terrorist activity. A tip board of sorts to lay money down on when and where the terrorists would strike, what the casualties might be and other details?

I remember.

And I'm willing to bet it's happening. Quietly.

 

[Somme]

Ditto

 

[cantdog]

The writing's been on the wall for another Selective Service rollaround for months, now. Dems or Reps, what's the difference? The "mission" is global empire. It'll use up millions.

It'll pass, and it'll go into effect.

cantdog

 

[shereads]

The "mission" is global empire. It'll use up millions.

What? You don't want a global empire? That's a buzz kill.

 

[ruminator]

It would be political suicide for the Republicans to actually let the bill pass. They actually learned something from the Vietnam War. Also, the Republicans, namely Rumsfeld, only wants a minimal foprce in there. Sure there may be a few Republicans who want the Holy War to begin but I am assured they are a small minority within the ranks.

Republicans for the holy war far outnumber the Democrats. The religious right and fundamentalists are predominantly Republican. It's the moral deficiency of Democrats that drives them.

This issue can be spun so well that everyone can be involved and not suffer permanent damage. It's true that Rumsfeld in particular has been moving for a lighter ground force and more of the outsourced service support but the need for boots on the ground is even greater globally due to the problems encountered in Iraq. As rummy would say, it's a very fluid situation.

 

[ruminator]

What? You don't want a global empire? That's a buzz kill.

I love that phrase,.......and the word buzzflash, these days.

 

[Ms_Kat]

Of course that's great news about the draft**! Perhaps more middle class and Republican parents' kids need to be involved in bringing freedom to our brown brothers and sisters who worship the same god under a different name, and don't deserve to be subject to Saddam's torturers.

**Story has been lurking in the media and internet for a least a couple months. E.g., the re-activation of local draft boards.

This is actually the whole point of the bill. Both have been referred to committee and no action has been taken since then. The House version was sponsored by Charles Rangel (D) of New York who stated in his comments on the floor that he was introducing it to protest the disproportionate number of minorities in the service who will be at risk during lengthy military actions. Sen. Fritz Hollings (D) of S.C. sponsored the Senate version for much the same reasons.

This is bill is dead and going no where. Don't get your panties in a wad over it. I'd love nothing more than to see Bush voted out, but we need to be honest about what is going on.



Hugs



Kat

 

[ruminator]

This is actually the whole point of the bill. Both have been referred to committee and no action has been taken since then. The House version was sponsored by Charles Rangel (D) of New York who stated in his comments on the floor that he was introducing it to protest the disproportionate number of minorities in the service who will be at risk during lengthy military actions. Sen. Fritz Hollings (D) of S.C. sponsored the Senate version for much the same reasons.

This is bill is dead and going no where. Don't get your panties in a wad over it. I'd love nothing more than to see Bush voted out, but we need to be honest about what is going on.



Hugs



Kat

Let's assume it works the way you describe above. Does that mean we should pull the troops out of Iraq rather than endanger them further by being undermanned? Or does that mean we should increase troop strength by means of conscription, but not through this bill?

It's good to be honest about the bills, I think that's what Rangel and others were doing. They've acknowledged the disparity in service and tried to address the issue. Is it honest to say that we need more troops but should not reinstate the draft?

It doesn't take much research to see the many reasons that Guard & Reservists will not be re-enlisting in large numbers and other active duty might follow out.

The key factor that was missed in Iraq and is now near impossible is the cooperation of an international force in order to lighten the price paid by the US.

 

[Guest]

Here's an article from a mainstream Mass. paper, dated May 2

"Further, both the president and the Secretary of Defense have stated on more than one occasion that there is no need for a draft for the War on Terrorism or any likely contingency, such as Iraq.

Oh, dear me . . .

This means what?