NationStates Jolt Archive


If you vote for Bush in 2004, there will be a draft in 2005.

Misterio
19-09-2004, 08:27
SPECIAL MILITARY DRAFT ALERT!

A military draft planning document, recovered through the Freedom of Information Act, is now online at the Blatant Truth Web site:
http://blatanttruth.org/selective_service091304.pdf

Here is Blatant Truth's Draft page:
http://blatanttruth.org/draft.php

http://blatanttruth.org/draftalert.gif

This is a SPECIAL MILITARY DRAFT ALERT. In May, the Seattle Post Intelligencer published an article about a document they received through the Freedom of Information Act. It was revealed that the SSS is currently “designing procedures” for the implementation of a “Skills Draft” and had held a top-level meeting on it with Deputy Undersecretaries at the Defense Department. This draft would change the essential mission of the Selective Service and require “virtually every young American”, male and female ages 18-34, to register for the Skills Draft and list all the occupations they are proficient in to fill labor shortages throughout nearly the entire government. If enacted, the Skills Draft proposed in this FOI-recovered document would change America as we know it.

The Pentagon is suffering from immediate labor shortages. Recently, the inactive Ready Reserve had to be called up for the first time since the Gulf War to fill 5,600 job shortages in the Armed Forces. DoD said in the recent IRR callup “20% of the call-ups are truck drivers, 12% are supply specialists who can use a computer to track supplies, 10% are Humvee mechanics, 7% are administrative specialists and 6% are combat engineers” (USA Today, August 8, 2004).

Although Congress would have to approve new legislation to create a Skills Draft or reinstate the combat draft, Family Circle reported in its July 13 issue that Karl Rove has polled GOP members of Congress in September 2002 to see if they would support the President if he requests reinstatement. The Republicans said they would vote for the draft. They would likely support the new legislation needed to create the Skills Draft. While Bush and the Republicans are of course keeping the return of the draft and the new skills draft as quiet as possible, many anti-draft organizations have recently begun warning of a “Coming New Draft”.

The Issue Paper document was revealed through the Freedom of Information Act by Seattle Post Intelligencer reporter Eric Rosenberg, who wrote a partial explanation of it that was printed May 1, 2004:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/171522_draft01.html

Rosenberg’s article was edited, however, and some key points about this document were omitted in the published article. What follows is a full explanation of the document. (Link to the document itself is at the top of the post)

This .PDF document is real, having been acknowledged by the DoD and the SSS when they said no action is being taken on it at the present time. However, given the current manpower shortages for certain skills and nurses, if Bush gets back in, expect all the options outlined in the Issue Paper to be implemented by the end of December of this year, and at the least a non-combat skills and medical draft to start next year, if not the male combat draft, ages 18-25.

Despite Rumsfeld saying the draft is not needed, this is the same neo-con administration that has repeatedly lied to and misled the American people. Draft-age youth and their families are left looking at a “long, hard slog” in Iraq (Rumsfeld secret memo), the neo-con plans to invade still more nations, and then having to take Rumsfeld and Cheney’s word not to worry about the draft, that they “are not considering it at this time.”

Although official word is that this secret list of options is not being implemented—the Issue Paper options have NOT been rejected and the 6-page proposal is rather sitting in the Pentagon, waiting. In addition, the SSS itself has said that it is “designing procedures” (Seattle PI, May 1, 2004) to implement the skills draft, meaning designing the compliance cards and the data fields needed to keep track of “virtually every young American” and their skills. Acting Director of the SSS Brodsky has also said the Skills Draft is the “top priority” of the Selective Service for 2004.

From the FOI document, we now know that on February 11, 2003, Charles Abell, the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, and William Carr, Deputy Undersecretary for Military Personnel Policy, met with Lewis Brodsky, the Acting Director of the Selective Service and some other officials. This is the highest-level meeting you could have about the Selective Service, outside of Rumsfeld and his inner circle. They were there to discuss the urgent “issue paper” now revealed, which starts: “With known shortages of military personnel with certain critical skills, and with the need for the nation to be capable of responding to domestic emergencies as a part of Homeland Security Planning, changes should be made in the Selective Service System’s registration program and primary mission”.

Although it would require changes in current draft law, the far-reaching proposal shows how far the Republicans are going to plan and prepare for a huge expansion of the draft. The Issue Paper options include:

- Change the very mission of the SSS to become a massive conscription service in the War on Terror for the entire government.

- Conscript men and women in a critical skills non-combat draft up to age 34 with no deferments of any kind, except “essential community service” (like the Medical Draft).

- Allow a non-combat draft for shortages in critical skills, without calling a combat draft.

- Fill labor shortages of all kinds throughout not only DoD but the whole government, especially high-paying professionals like computer networking specialist or linguist.

- Create a massive database of “virtually every young American” ages 18 to 34. This database would be used to draft in war and to recruit in peacetime. State and even local governments would be given access to the names for recruitment and help in emergencies.

- Create a single-point, all-inclusive database, in which every young person would be forced to send in a “self-declaration” of all of their critical skills, chosen from a long list of occupations like the Armed Forces Specialty Code. The self-declaration is similar to IRS compliance and the filling out and signing of your tax forms. All young people would be required to keep the government updated if they acquired a new skill. SSS Compliance forms will be available at every Post Office. The usual penalties of imprisonment and/or a $250,000 fine would apply to all non-registrants.

- A draft or recruitment could be for any one of the skills you self-declare on the compliance form, not your current or primary skill. This greatly increases your chance of being drafted if you are 18-34

- Bring the Medical Draft (HCPDS) up to speed and fully test it through readiness exercises.

- Reduce induction time from being able to deliver all inductees in 193 days down to just 90 days for skills inductees.

This secret paper urges the mission be changed “promptly”, meaning they really need it, it would draft for the Pentagon as well as the enormous Homeland Security branches as well as other government agencies, even state and local!

For obvious political reasons, the decision was made by Bush, Cheney and Rove to sit on this 6-page proposal until after the election in November. Yet the SSS was told to go ahead and begin “designing procedures” for the Skills Draft in 2004 and make it their “top priority”. It can be expected that if Bush gets back in, and the DoD and SSS are still asking for the Skills Draft, the “Next Steps” part of the document will be put into action and the most expansive option to change the SSS mission will be rapidly legislated.

In the secret planning meeting document, the next steps strongly recommended by SSS Acting Director Brodsky were:

1. “Promptly” redefine the SSS Mission to draft men and women up to age 34 for skills, and deliver them within 90 days or sooner to the Department of Defense. Program a massive database to be ready to enter millions of names of those registering their critical skills.

2. Expand mission to deliver personnel in skills draft to the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies, including FEMA, NSC, Border Patrol, INS, Customs, Corporation for National Service, Public Health Service and other federal, state and local government agencies.

3. Form interagency task force to provide Administration with recommendation on this skills draft for the entire DHS and the rest of the government.

4. Obtain White House Statement of Administration Policy on the future of the SSS.

5. Be prepared to market the skills draft, raising the non-combat age to 34 and the drafting of women to the Armed Services and Appropriations Committee.

This proposed expansion of the draft, forcing all people under 35 to register with the SSS, man or woman, is primarily proposed, according to the document, because the cost of providing contract professionals, like computer network specialists, would be “prohibitive”. In this way, the proposed Skills Draft would help preserve Bush’s massive tax cuts for the wealthy by lowering the massive budget deficits.

That’s the new Skills Draft and the secret document behind it. But what about the Combat Draft?

Selective Service has been registering young men for over twenty years and at any moment the President can go to Congress and ask them to reauthorize conscription for the male combat draft for ages 18-25. It doesn’t take much to imagine a re-elected Bush going to Congress and saying “We cannot cut and run from Iraq or the War on Terror. I need you to reauthorize conscription.”

And they would not have to pass a whole new draft law to do it. All that is needed is a “trigger resolution”, which could be passed in the dead of night—and bingo! No debate, no regular bill, just a short resolution passed quickly and the draft for men 18 to 25 is back.

That is why the Democratic draft legislation being offered by Rangel and Hollings is totally irrelevant. These are known protest bills and actually propose drafting women for the combat draft, just to make sure they will never see the light of day. Rangel and Hollings offered them to raise the issue and confront Bush. Hollings even said he wouldn’t vote for his own bill!

They are not needed—and the press and the Republicans will bring them up as red herrings to distract everyone from what is really going on: the Republicans, and the SSS are quietly, behind the scenes, oiling up the draft machinery—getting ready to reinstate for the Spring of 2005. Taken singly, each of the clues indicating the return and expansion of the draft might seem insignificant but when you add them all up with what the selective Service is doing to gear up the combat draft, a clear pattern emerges, leading to the inescapable conclusion that a Bush re-election will see not only a Skills Draft, but a return of the Combat Draft as well.

What is the proof? The government’s own document, the SSS Performance Plan for Fiscal Year 2004:

http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

The Selective Service System, or the SSS, has for decades operated at a low level of readiness. Readiness Exercises are conducted on a multi-year cycle but historically these have been little more than getting draft board volunteers together and going over the procedures of what would happen under reinstatement and training new members every summer. And the draft boards themselves have become 80% vacant over the decades.

In the current 5-year cycle of exercises, however, the SSS is clearly ramping up the draft machinery to an unprecedented level.

-snip-

“Strategic Objective 1.2: Ensure a mobilization infrastructure of 56 State Headquarters,
442 Area Offices and 1,980 Local Boards are operational within 75 days of an authorized
return to conscription.”

Tie that to this objective:

“An annual report providing the results of the implementation of these performance
measures will be submitted by March 31, 2005.”

-snip-

75 days from March 31, 2005 is about June 15, 2005. According to the 2004 plan, the draft boards will be “operational” then, meaning that they will be set up in 1,980 local offices around the country. If Bush asks for reinstatement on April 1, Congress could pass it that night and the first batch of over one million 20 year-olds would face the national lottery as soon as that date, June 15, 2005.

Here is how the $28 million is being spent according to the official document. Although the Senate rejected the funding request to bump up the SSS budget to $28 million, the SSS says in one paragraph of the Performance Plan that budgets will be “adjusted” to cover the additional cost for 2004:

-snip-

“Strategic Goal 1: Increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the Manpower
Delivery Systems (Projected allocation for FY 2004 – $7,942,000)

Strategic Goal 2: Improve overall Registration Compliance and Service to the Public (Projected allocation FY 2004 – $8,769,000)

Strategic Goal 3: Enhance external and internal customer service
(Projected allocation for FY 2004 – $10,624,000)

Strategic Goal 4: Enhance the system which guarantees that each conscientious objector is properly classified, placed, and monitored. (Projected allocation for FY 2004 – $955,000)”

-snip-

In analyzing each of the 2004 goals in detail it is obvious that there are hidden “activation bombshells” in this so-called “Performance Plan”. Goal number 1 in particular brings the combat induction process up to 95% operational readiness, going so far as to actually hold a mock lottery drawing this year and to issue sample orders to report for the famous medical exam. The document does not reveal the day in 2004 the mock lottery is to be held.

In addition, the Medical Draft, or Health Care Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS in the document), is for the first time brought up to full readiness by next year. This draft would take men and women up to age 44 if they are doctors, nurses or one of 60-some medical specialties. No medical deferments allowed. Previous readiness exercises merely went over what would happen with HCPDS and updated the guide. The 2004 plan actually develops a readiness exercise for the Medical Draft that would be conducted next year. Plus HCPDS must be ready to conscript by June, being part of the system.

Goal number four is particularly ominous.

-snip-

“Strategic Objective 4.1: Ensure a mobilization infrastructure of 48 Alternative Service Offices and 48 Civilian Review Boards are operational within 96 days after notification of a return to induction.”

“Strategic Objective 4.2: Develop a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the Alternative Service Employer Network to specifically identify organizations and associations who can, by law, participate in the Alternative Service Program. This network will provide jobs for ASWs at the local level. Prior to activation, SSS will develop a draft MOU for use when obtaining agreements with qualified employers at the local and national level.”

-snip-

For 31 years, the Conscientious Objector system, called the Alternative Service, has lain dormant. The 2004 plan also calls for this to be brought up to speed and to be ready to decide cases and place COs in the Alternative Service by July 6, 2005 (96 days after March 31, 2005). The SSS is even going so far as to draw up the SOPs, the Standard Operating Procedures which identify local employers eligible to receive cheap AS workers and to also draw up the actual MOU, the Memorandum of Understanding the employer must sign to get their CO workers and allow their mandatory attendance to be monitored. This is the last obstacle to be hurdled before the draft could actually be ready for quick activation under the law.

In sharp contrast to all this preparation for a Spring 2005 draft by Bush, John Kerry has proposed a military plan that rejects any draft. By adding 20,000 active duty combat soldiers and 20,000 active “reconstruction specialists”. At a Wisconsin high school, Kerry pledged in June, 2004, that the draft would be “absolutely unnecessary”. When asked in April by 130 college editors in a conference call as to whether he would support a draft, John Kerry said unequivocally: “No. No draft” and he has criticized the use of the Guard and Reserve and now the Individual Ready Reserve as a “back-door draft”.

Kerry plans to spend an additional $7 billion to strengthen the Volunteer Army in what is essentially a “No-Draft Plan”. Moreover, Kerry is strongly opposed to the neo-con plan revealed in Wes Clark’s book, in which Clark was told by a senior Pentagon official that invasions of Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Sudan and Somalia were still to come over the next three years. Kerry promises a "reasonable foreign policy".

BUSH '04 = DRAFT '05
Lunatic Goofballs
19-09-2004, 08:31
*shivers* Is there a draft in here? *puts on a sweater*
Roachsylvania
19-09-2004, 08:38
Somehow, I simply don't trust a website called "Blatant Truth." That's just me. The Republicans are always counting on the military vote, and most people in the military don't want to deal with draftees, so I doubt it will happen. Personally, I think Bush's actions in office so far are quite enough reason to vote for someone else.
Daistallia 2104
19-09-2004, 09:04
Are people still taking this seriously? I thought it was adequately shown to be scare mongering and political posturing back in the spring. I can tell you the military doesn't want it.
Samarika
19-09-2004, 09:14
Are people still taking this seriously? I thought it was adequately shown to be scare mongering and political posturing back in the spring. I can tell you the military doesn't want it.



Where's your proof?
Chess Squares
19-09-2004, 09:15
Are people still taking this seriously? I thought it was adequately shown to be scare mongering and political posturing back in the spring. I can tell you the military doesn't want it.
not that i have an opinion but just saying: the military doesnt run this country
Roachsylvania
19-09-2004, 09:15
Are people still taking this seriously? I thought it was adequately shown to be scare mongering and political posturing back in the spring. I can tell you the military doesn't want it.
Thank [insert diety of choice] some people still have some reason. I do find it quite ironic, though, that someone called Fascist Ideals would be one of the voices of said reason. Oh well, what can ya do?
Samarika
19-09-2004, 09:17
It's not like they had a problem with it in Vietnam, heck, they probably would enjoy having some cannon-fodder to march infront of them...
Dragons Bay
19-09-2004, 09:34
Fun, fascist, and world's greatest solution to unemployment. congratulations, americans.
Chodolo
19-09-2004, 09:34
I've heard about this in alternating levels of coverage since May.

Apparently the Bush administration doesnt want it, the Pentagon doesn't want it, the public doesn't want it....yet it moves through Congress, why?

But if I do get a draft card...*grabs lighter* :p
Pan-Arab Israel
19-09-2004, 09:36
What a load of crap. Charles Rangel, a NY Democrat congressman, introduced a bill to reinstate the draft as a political stunt to scare the American public. Apparently he is also disturbed by the number of minority volunteers in the military and claims that a draft will "equalize the races". Democrats love to play racial politics.

It will never pass Congress. No Republican supports it.
MKULTRA
19-09-2004, 09:38
What a load of crap. Charles Rangel, a NY Democrat congressman, introduced a bill to reinstate the draft as a political stunt to scare the American public. Apparently he is also disturbed by the number of minority volunteers in the military and claims that a draft will "equalize the races". Democrats love to play racial politics.

It will never pass Congress. No Republican supports it.
but the republicans as the four more wars party will be forced to concede theyll need a draft.
Daistallia 2104
19-09-2004, 11:15
Where's your proof?

"The draft would be the Army's worst nightmare," said retired Lt. Col. Leonard Wong, now a research professor at the U.S. Army War College at Carlisle Barracks. "We have a high quality Army because we have people who want to be in it. Our volunteer force is really a professional force. You can't draft people into a profession."[url]

Note the dateline on that was May...

[url=]Why The Draft Is Really, Really Dead and Gone
by James Dunnigan
May 9, 2004

Talk of reviving the military draft, to supply enough troops for the war on terror, is just that, talk. More accurately, it's clueless and opportunistic politicians fishing for headlines. But the draft "controversy" has become a popular media story in the last few months, even though the military says it has more volunteers than it needs and is even laying off people. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040524-unlikely-draft.htm)

It's not like they had a problem with it in Vietnam, heck, they probably would enjoy having some cannon-fodder to march infront of them...

:confused: No problems with the draft in Vietnam? It was the major reason for the war protests. It also filled the ranks with malcontents (forcing people into the military doesn't force them to be good soldiers, marines, sailors, or airmen!)

not that i have an opinion but just saying: the military doesnt run this country

:confused: Yes, and so what's your point?
Leynier
19-09-2004, 11:20
If you vote for Bush in 2004, there will be a draft in 2005.

...And if you vote for Kerry, there will be a borderline traitor in the White House in 2005. Take your pick. :)
Daistallia 2104
19-09-2004, 11:23
but the republicans as the four more wars party will be forced to concede theyll need a draft.

Nope. All indications are that the neo-cons have been totally corrupted by the "Jedi-knights" side of the current debate in the military, and thus believe they can go about various interventions with less than the needed forces. Even if they do realize the need for greater forces (and there is substantial evidence that a minimum of twice the current number of divisions would be needed to carry out current commitments), the military realizes that a professional force can carry out it's missions much more effectively. Higher retention through contract enforcement and recruiting incentives should be sufficient to cover the increases.
Daistallia 2104
19-09-2004, 11:25
...And if you vote for Kerry, there will be a borderline traitor in the White House in 2005. Take your pick. :)

Nope. Kerry bled, Bush fled. Who's the borderline traitor?
Leynier
19-09-2004, 11:30
Bush fled? Odd, I thought he served in the National Guard...I guess I've misunderstood all that stuff I've been reading since he was apparently in Canada, having fled and all.

By the way, just for a bit of perspective...

Benedict Arnold was brave, valiant, brilliant, and just all around one of the best generals we had during the Revolutionary War. Had he not betrayed his nation, he'd probably be best known for his campaign into Canada, or perhaps saving the day at Saratoga. However, he DID betray his nation. My point? Bleeding for ones nation doesn't make up for betraying it. I really hope that sinks in with folks...you can both fight bravely for your nation and STILL be unworthy of respect, given the right set of circumstances (like giving aid and comfort to the enemy).
Daistallia 2104
19-09-2004, 11:41
Yep. Bush fled by using daddies influance to get into a position where he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam, and then deserting even that.

And comparing Kerry to Benedict Arnold is below even the SBVFT liars...
Leynier
19-09-2004, 11:51
Ugh! It was not a direct comparison of B. Arnold to John kerry. I was using ol' Benny as an EXAMPLE of how one can be brave and fight for one's country but deserve the credit for such actions due to later actions which dishonor and pretty much make null and void any valor previously gained.

I have never doubted that Kerry fought bravely in Vietnam and if you want, I'll even say kudos to Kerry for doing so, but it doesn't mean anything due to his later actions. He MET with North Vietnam officials while a Naval Officer without the permission of the US Government...treason, regardless of his justification of the reasons. At least Hanoi Jane was a civilian...(still a traitor though).
Tactical Grace
19-09-2004, 12:13
If a draft's not happening, the US may as well shut up about Syria and Iran, because that's not happening either. :P
Daistallia 2104
19-09-2004, 12:52
If a draft's not happening, the US may as well shut up about Syria and Iran, because that's not happening either. :P

Well, it could be possible to increase the forces to the levels needed, if the government were willing and able to spend the needed funds to retain and recruit sufficient numbers. But, seeing as the current administration doesn't see a need to increase force levels to properly meet the needs of current operations, (as I said above, probably twice the current number of divisions).
Belem
19-09-2004, 16:54
ok that released document doesnt mean theres going to be a draft its a "readiness and evaluation" document. The SSS has documented the current state of Selected Service where they stand financial and politically. They have also outlined what they will need to do in order to provide Mobilization within 183 days.

The scenario presented for a 18-34 draft is a worse case scenario probably on the scale of WWII where they would need to draft millions of men like.

The forseeable reason they have expanded there program to the age of 34 is that if a draft was proven to be neccessary they would need more skilled professionals and its easier to find skilled professionals in the late 20s and early 30s category.
Siljhouettes
19-09-2004, 17:13
...And if you vote for Kerry, there will be a borderline traitor in the White House in 2005. Take your pick. :)
I'd pick the traitor.
Stephistan
19-09-2004, 17:19
I don't have any proof nor will I claim I do, but an educated guess would be of course if Bush is elected to 4 more I have little doubt there will be a draft. What will Bush care? It's not like he has to worry about being elected again and if you've been following current events you will know that he has his sights on Iran next. He would have to have a draft to fight Iran.
Incertonia
19-09-2004, 17:33
Is there a new corollary to Godwin's Law that states any internet discussion will morph into a comparison of Bush's and Kerry's Vietnam service within 3 pages? Jeez.

As to the potential for a draft, you're an idiot if you don't think it's a possibility regardless of who's President and no matter how much the professional soldiers don't want it. The US military can't even keep up with current demand--we've already got thousands of soldiers being stop-lossed in order to keep them from leaving once their commitments are up, and we've got people coming out of the combat zone being transferred into units that haven't seen combat yet so thay can be shipped back to Iraq.
Misterio
19-09-2004, 17:33
As much as I'd like to see Bush lose, this sounds like another one of those desparate attempts to discredit him, along the lines of the Dan Rather story.

It makes me laugh when the Dems claim the moral high ground when they display tactics like this. They're just as bad as the Republicans.

Hahaha! So the documents from the SS are wrong then? Oh gee, what a shock that someone would think that. :rolleyes:

It's quite sad that you think this, even AFTER these documents have been proven to be TRUE from the Selective Service, yet you say that Dems are trying to discredit Bush. :rolleyes:

Fine. Keep your eyes closed on what's going on. Maybe it will go away to some magic place.
:rolleyes:
Misterio
19-09-2004, 17:35
...And if you vote for Kerry, there will be a borderline traitor in the White House in 2005. Take your pick. :)

How is John Kerry a borderline traitor? Was it his protesting of the Vietnam war when he came back (which is clearly a right, as it says in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution)? Is it his speaking out against Bush (Again, covered under the First Amendment)?

Don't try telling me John Kerry is a traitor. :rolleyes:
Daistallia 2104
19-09-2004, 17:40
I don't have any proof nor will I claim I do, but an educated guess would be of course if Bush is elected to 4 more I have little doubt there will be a draft. What will Bush care? It's not like he has to worry about being elected again and if you've been following current events you will know that he has his sights on Iran next. He would have to have a draft to fight Iran.

Actually I fear something worse if Bush is re-elected: the possibility that he will continue under the influance of the "Jedi Knights" who argue that technology can defeat weight of arms. Even though (IMHO) that has been shown to be totaly incorrect in Iraq, I fear the current CINC and his idealogical advisors are too much of true believers to see the errors and they will continue to try to wage war with overly light forces, substituting technology for the needed boots on the ground.
This is very bad strategic thinking. Technology can only go so far in warfare, which is ultimately an entierly human endevor.
Incertonia
19-09-2004, 17:46
Actually I fear something worse if Bush is re-elected: the possibility that he will continue under the influance of the "Jedi Knights" who argue that technology can defeat weight of arms. Even though (IMHO) that has been shown to be totaly incorrect in Iraq, I fear the current CINC and his idealogical advisors are too much of true believers to see the errors and they will continue to try to wage war with overly light forces, substituting technology for the needed boots on the ground.
This is very bad strategic thinking. Technology can only go so far in warfare, which is ultimately an entierly human endevor.
The theory is partly sound, which is what makes it dangerous to follow--technology can reign supreme in pitched battles between armies, but when it comes to securing the ground, nothing beats boots on the ground.