Kerry Warns Draft Possible if Bush Wins

[Bronco_Beerslug]

They will have to come from somewhere to keep up the administrations policing of Iraq for any lenth of time.

----------------------------------------------------------
By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - John Kerry (news - web sites) said Friday there is a "great potential" for a new military draft to replace overextended U.S. troops in Iraq (news - web sites) if President Bush (news - web sites) wins a second term, despite Bush's repeated pledges to maintain the all-volunteer service. Republicans rejected the suggestion as "fear mongering."

Bush and his Democratic challenger also sparred over jobs and other domestic issues as they campaigned through battleground states in the Midwest.
At a rally in Milwaukee, Kerry said Bush was "out of ideas, out of touch and unwilling to change" and accused him of mishandling the economy. Bush, campaigning in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, called his rival an unrepentant liberal seeking to hide his record.
Kerry raised the draft issue in an interview in The Des Moines Register published Friday.

"With George Bush (news - web sites), the plan for Iraq is more of the same and the great potential of a draft. Because if we go it alone, I don't know how you do it with the current overextension" of the military, Kerry said.
Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt dismissed Kerry's comments as "fear mongering" and suggested the Massachusetts senator was spreading "false Internet rumors."

Kerry has suggested that Bush's heavy use of National Guard and Reserve troops has created a "backdoor draft." But his latest comments went further.
Bush did not directly respond, but he said in Cedar Rapids that he was "modernizing and transforming our United States military to keep the all-volunteer army an all-volunteer army."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=3&u=/ap/20041015/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_rdp

[W*GS]

Strange how the only party to attempt to reinstate the draft are the Democrats - the far left wing, no less, and that the attempt completely crashed and burned in the House within the last week.

Yep, Kerry is just fear-mongering.

[TexanBob]

Why should Kerry stop lying now?

Fact: A bill to reinstate the draft was introduced in Congress last week. It was introduced by Democrats. Only two congresspeople voted for it out of 400+ representatives and those two were both Democrats,

The Democrat who WROTE the bill, Charles Rangel (D-Harlem) didn't even vote in favor of his own bill.

The draft is another Skerry scare tactic.

[watermock]

Kerry is famous for 1 vote proposals.

He's an idiot.

[watermock]

Kerry is demanding that we produce two new divisions. He offers nothing how this is supposed to happen.

He literally is telling us that he will make two divisions out of thin air.

I don't mind getting two new divisions, but he needs to have a little better "plan".

[Hogan11]

Neither guy is going to admit to draft reinstatement this close to the election if they're thinking of it....they simply wouldn't risk it....to think otherwise is to think Hillary is gonna run in 2008....or in other words: it's just being foolish.

There are better ways to waste you time than on this claptrap.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Why would anyone believe a pathological liar like bush when he says there will be no draft?

This idiot has done the opposite of just about everything he's said he'd do for four years.

[Rohirrim]

All I know is that when Bush was asked about Iran, he said that if they would not allow inspections, then we would join the UN in imposing sanctions. Sound familiar? Don't forget, Iran is a member of the Axis of Evil. This administration intended to go after Iraq the day they were elected in 2000. How do you know they don't feel the same way about Iran? If that is how it plays out, a draft is inevitable, regardless of campaign speeches.

[Kaylore]

Kerry is really making all sorts of crazy claims. I'm expecting him to promise nuclear winter if Bush is wins, and cold fusion if he loses.

[bronco militia]

this is the 2nd time that the A.P. took a Kerry quote out of context to claim 'there's going to be a draft".......

ap headline:

Kerry Says Draft May Return Under Bush


now how did they come up with this gem?:

Answering a question about the draft that had been posed at a forum with voters, Kerry said: "If George Bush (news - web sites) were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea (news - web sites) and Iran and other places, is it possible? I can't tell you."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...kerry&printer=1

[Rohirrim]

Kerry is really making all sorts of crazy claims. I'm expecting him to promise nuclear winter if Bush is wins, and cold fusion if he loses.

But of course Cheney saying that if Kerry is elected you can expect a nuclear attack on one of our cities was a perfectly reasonable assertion.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Strange how the only party to attempt to reinstate the draft are the Democrats - the far left wing, no less, and that the attempt completely crashed and burned in the House within the last week.

Yep, Kerry is just fear-mongering.
Strange how Bush supporters always conveniently leave out republican calls for the draft.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Strange how Bush supporters always conveniently leave out republican calls for the draft.

Do you have anyone but that article you posted from April at the height of the insurgency from one Senator, to baack up that claim?

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Kerry wants 40k new troops. I've asked this before and no Dem will answer, where will Kerry get those troops?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Kerry wants 40k new troops. I've asked this before and no Dem will answer, where will Kerry get those troops?
The U.S.?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Kerry wants 40k new troops. I've asked this before and no Dem will answer, where will Kerry get those troops?
Let me ask you this. If you had to pay more taxes (although you won't have to) so we could have 40,000 more special forces to address terrorism would you be opposed to paying them?

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Let me ask you this. If you had to pay more taxes (although you won't have to) so we could have 40,000 more special forces to address terrorism would you be opposed to paying them?

Special Forces guys are born, they aren't created. Kerry simply saying that he wants more SFs isn't going to make them magically appear.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

The U.S.?

and where are they coming from in the US? You keep telling us that the military can't hit their enlistment goals.

Is he going to have a call for enlistments? Maybe it's me, but the draft age guys who vote for Kerry aren't going to come flocking to his banner, and the Reps who are draft age probably don't want to go for a C-in-C they don't support.

Kinda sound like the draft is Kerry's only option.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Special Forces guys are born, they aren't created. Kerry simply saying that he wants more SFs isn't going to make them magically appear.
So you won't answer my question? And I know a little something about where special forces come from.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

So you won't answer my question? And I know a little something about where special forces come from.

If he finds them, good for Kerry. What do you think the odds are that Kerry can actually find 40k new SFs? About 0?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

If he finds them, good for Kerry. What do you think the odds are that Kerry can actually find 40k new SFs? About 0?
Back to my question that you won't take a chance on and answer. It won't label you or anything if you answer. I'm just interested in if you think it would be worth raising taxes for.

[broncogary]

Let me ask you this. If you had to pay more taxes (although you won't have to) so we could have 40,000 more special forces to address terrorism would you be opposed to paying them?

We already are paying for the SF we have, and would pay for the additional. The cost of the war is a large part of the current deficit that Kerry keeps saying that Bush's economic policies are causing.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Back to my question that you won't take a chance on and answer. It won't label you or anything if you answer. I'm just interested in if you think it would be worth raising taxes for.

More SFs, yeah. I don't have a problem raising taxes to a point if it goes to national security/defense, but not to pay for more social programs. Simply eliminating the fraud and waste in government would more then pay for it though.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

We already are paying for the SF we have, and would pay for the additional. The cost of the war is a large part of the current deficit that Kerry keeps saying that Bush's economic policies are causing.
I'm sure you meant to say the cost of the Iraq occupation not the war on terrorism is a large part of the current deficit.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

I'm still curious where you think those 40k new troops are going to come from.

[broncogary]

I'm sure you meant to say the cost of the Iraq occupation not the war on terrorism is a large part of the current deficit.

One and the same.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I'm still curious where you think those 40k new troops are going to come from.
It's a few more than 40,000 total.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

It's a few more than 40,000 total.

Ok, where is he going to get them? You tell us the Army and Nat Guard can't hit their recruiting marks, so it won't come from a natural swell in regular enlistments.

Is he going to have a call for enlistments?

Is he going to reinstate the draft?

Where are they going to come from?

[baja]

Kerry wants 40k new troops. I've asked this before and no Dem will answer, where will Kerry get those troops?

From all those ilegal alians Bush is letting flood in.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

From all those ilegal alians Bush is letting flood in.


Ohhhhh, strike 2. So far we have the "U.S." and Baja's answer above as the witty remarks the Left has made to a legit question. Guess they don't know where Kerry's going to get the troops either.

Someone out there want to try to save it for the Left, or are they going down swinging on three straight pitches?

[TomServo]

dunno? is this the same left swinging crowd that freaked out w/bush said he wanted to reduce troops in germany and s korea? like the old soviet union is going to send massive waves of troops and T-72's into the old w. germany? O and our troops in s korea will do any good when kim jong whacko sends a simple nuke laden truck into the dmz?
check me if im wrong but the only pple proposing a draft in congress are democrats?

[baja]

Ohhhhh, strike 2. So far we have the "U.S." and Baja's answer above as the witty remarks the Left has made to a legit question. Guess they don't know where Kerry's going to get the troops either.

Someone out there want to try to save it for the Left, or are they going down swinging on three straight pitches?

No matter what I say I get labeled, "from the left" or "that Liberal" as if that is something dirty. Truth is I'm neither, my problem is with George W. Bush and the band of merry neocons.

As too the answer to where the troops are coming from Kerry plans to create another division of solders and to also create a more comprehensive coalition of our traditional allies, something Bush has as much chance as a snowball in hell of doing..

[Hercules Rockefeller]

As too the answer to where the troops are coming from Kerry plans to create another division of solders and to also create a more comprehensive coalition of our traditional allies, something Bush has as much chance as a snowball in hell of doing..

and as I said in Beerslug's poll, they can allocate all the money they want for new divisions that doesn't mean they physically have the soldiers/enlistees to fill them. And the US' traditional allies have already said they're not going to Iraq, even if Kerry gets elected.

Physically where are those soldiers coming from Baja? Do you think the simple creation of 2 more divisions will cause an influx of enlistments? Will Kerry have to make a call for enlistments and say that our country needs more soldiers? Will he reinstitute the draft? Seems to me that there are 3 possible answers.

Well, whiche one Baja?

[broncogary]

I think he means female SF, Herc.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I'm still curious where you think those 40k new troops are going to come from.

You have been listening so I'm sure you heard his plan.
He said he's going to get better retention and sign-up rates offering better pay and benefits. He doesn't say it will happen overnight but during the next 4 years.

[broncogary]

You have been listening so I'm sure you heard his plan.
He said he's going to get better retention and sign-up rates offering better pay and benefits. He doesn't say it will happen overnight but during the next 4 years.

And he will create a coalition of the enemy to wait until we are ready.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

And he will create a coalition of the enemy to wait until we are ready.
Sorta like Bush is doing?

[broncogary]

Are they waiting?

[Hercules Rockefeller]

You have been listening so I'm sure you heard his plan.
He said he's going to get better retention and sign-up rates offering better pay and benefits. He doesn't say it will happen overnight but during the next 4 years.


So this is typical Kerry, all talk but nothing concrete. He's going to have better retention rates? How? He's already said Iraq was the wrong war, why would troops want to continue under a C-in-C who doesn't believe in what they'd be fighting for? Better sign-up rates? So using the Rangel and Conyers logic, Kerry simply wants to put the burden back on the poor who will take advantage of the offers? Doesn't really sound like any way to motivate the general populance to go serve under C-in-C John Kerry. What's he going to do if that backfires?

[Rascal]

Why would anyone believe the pathological liar Kerry? Especially after it was his party that had previously tried to reinstate the draft. Bush allready has said numerous times that there will not be a draft if he is President, Kerry has said no such thing.

Kerry is a liar, and this just continues to confirm that.

If there is to be a draft it will come under Kerry..not Bush. Kerry is the one that has publicaly said he wants two more division but has not said how he plans to get the people to form those new divisions.

This is pure BS.

[Spider]

Why would anyone believe the pathological liar Kerry? Especially after it was his party that had previously tried to reinstate the draft. Bush allready has said numerous times that there will not be a draft if he is President, Kerry has said no such thing.

Kerry is a liar, and this just continues to confirm that.

If there is to be a draft it will come under Kerry..not Bush. Kerry is the one that has publicaly said he wants two more division but has not said how he plans to get the people to form those new divisions.

This is pure BS.
Bush has said alot of things .......... None of them have been true yet .....
you call Kerry a Proven liar ....... Show me ........

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So this is typical Kerry, all talk but nothing concrete. He's going to have better retention rates? How? He's already said Iraq was the wrong war, why would troops want to continue under a C-in-C who doesn't believe in what they'd be fighting for? Better sign-up rates? So using the Rangel and Conyers logic, Kerry simply wants to put the burden back on the poor who will take advantage of the offers? Doesn't really sound like any way to motivate the general populance to go serve under C-in-C John Kerry. What's he going to do if that backfires?
Kerry has a plan to increase and strengthen our military. I explained it to you. Better pay and better benefits will attract more troops. What is Bush's plan with recruitment goals not being met? The draft?

[OrangeDoofus]

I believe Bush is being honest when he says that he has no plans for a draft. The thing is, I also think Bush was being honest back in spring of 2003, when he said that he expected U.S. troop levels in Iraq would be down to about 30,000 by now.

Bush's plans have a way of not working out the way he expects them to.

[alkemical]

I'm still curious where you think those 40k new troops are going to come from.


From schools:

http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2002/11/ma_153_01.html

No Child Unrecruited



And since i know you republicans like to ignore things and not do any research:

From the no child left behind bill:

SEC. 9528. ARMED FORCES RECRUITER ACCESS TO STUDENTS AND STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION.

(a) POLICY-

(1) ACCESS TO STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION- Notwithstanding section 444(a)(5)(B) of the General Education Provisions Act and except as provided in paragraph (2), each local educational agency receiving assistance under this Act shall provide, on a request made by military recruiters or an institution of higher education, access to secondary school students names, addresses, and telephone listings.

(2) CONSENT- A secondary school student or the parent of the student may request that the student's name, address, and telephone listing described in paragraph (1) not be released without prior written parental consent, and the local educational agency or private school shall notify parents of the option to make a request and shall comply with any request.

(3) SAME ACCESS TO STUDENTS- Each local educational agency receiving assistance under this Act shall provide military recruiters the same access to secondary school students as is provided generally to post secondary educational institutions or to prospective employers of those students.

[Play2win]

I believe Bush is being honest when...
You've got to be kidding me, right?!?

[OrangeDoofus]

You've got to be kidding me, right?!?

Ha!

Actually, no, I'm not kidding. I don't think he's evil, just incompetent.