Senate Bill 89 / House Resolution 163 is a bill designed to reinstate a "Universal Draft" for any and all U.S. citizens from ages 18 to 25. This bill also includes women, whether or not they have children.

The description of the bill states: "To provide for the common defense by 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."

So, whether you like it or not, YOU (or your kids) would be forced to serve in the millitary regardless of the fact they are attending college or can not serve due to family issues (such as raising kids!)

Ironically enough as the bill came to a vote, THE GUY THAT INTRODUCED THE BILL (Charles Rangel (D-NY 15th)) VOTED NO.

Maybe this is a wake-up call to those who do not pay attention to the activities of the government. If it wasn't for the people watching over these guys' shoulders, how on earth would our country survive?

-RocketGib

good
becasue i wouldnt fight for a country thats no longer free
so what would be the point

One of the biggest problems with the bill is thtat it's forced military service.
The reason that countries win wars,besides technology, is because of the drive to win.
When you have something dear to you to fight for,you'll fight much more valiantly,and be much better at combat in general.
But if you're forced into the military,you're just disgruntled and will only do enough to survive,which may just be digging a hole and hiding there until a battle is over.

This was a protest bill.

The best way to undermine family values is to break up a family. And I truly believe the best defense (along with pacmandude32) is a voluntary force. Some people are just not cut out for military service, and can help the country in other ways. And if they ever make it mandatory, I want to see the everyone's children enlisted--not just the middle and lower classes. All those Kennedys and Bushes and Cheneys and Frists and Daschles and Hatches and Leahys.....NO EXCEPTIONS.

Perhaps everyone should serve a year or 2 when they get out of high school. And I do mean EVERYONE.

Works in theory, Shmoo, but you will have an awful lot of unwanted pregnancies if you do that. Are you sure the country can handle that? And like I said, Women's Lib and all, some people are just not suited for military service. Think of the most gentle person you know, and think of them in the military, and I guarantee you, there will be some spirits broken that should not be. I'm a peacenik of the highest degree, don't have a gun, don't have an alarm, nothing. Don't even allow them in my house. And I believe that if everyone felt the same way, the world would be a far safer place. I know a lot of you here believe in your right to bear arms, and I respect that. But in MY house, there are no arms. Think I'm stupid??? I live in Miami, not in a wealthy neighborhood, just middle class. My son was robbed at gunpoint outside my house one night. They took his wallet, and his beeper. The only other thing that ever happened was some silly things stolen from outside my house once in a while. Still no alarm, still no gun. I have a baseball bat, because I am home alone at night with my daughter. Scared? No. The only THING in my life I would kill for is my kids. Not my car, my stereo, my tv, nothing. Do I feel safe? I've lived here for 25 years. Know what? I'm still here, and after all these years I still believe--the world would be a safer place without guns. My daughter will never be forced to serve in a military institution of any kind--I will leave this country first. She is kind, and gentle, and extremely smart, and artistic. And the mold you would place on her would most assuredly break her back. So back off.

Love ya Shmoo, but I'm a mom. Can't help myself sometimes....

It is usually the countries that strip away freedoms that require military service. You know, places like China. Thank goodness this was struck down. I've got better things to do than have some seargent scream in my face all day, not to mention I'd probably knock 'em for a loop if they got up in my face.

You can't force someone to do something for you. All you'll get is resentment. So if you force all the 18-25 year olds to give up their lives, and their hair, to serve a president (because he IS the Commander-in Chief) who conjures up stuff about other countries so he can invade them, then eventually you're gonna have a lot of ticked off young adults around holding guns and you know what happens then, they turn on their commanders and everything goes down the crapper.

BTW, just thought I'd add this. My father served in Korea, of his own free will (he enlisted). He wasn't forced to go defend the South Koreans from the communist North. My first stepdad was drafted into the army and was supposed to go over sometime in '51 or '52 but went AWOL before he was deployed (I know, that makes him look very bad, but if not for him my life would have been very different). So you can see how different a draftee feels from an enlistee.

Been on both sides of the fence. I was drafted on Oct. 1969. Since you have a 6 year commitiment to fullfill one way or another, I enlisted to finish it. (Yes even if you are drafted)

Didn't really give a rats butt about the service then, don't now. Will tell you this, it messes with peoples heads for life. They know things they would be better off not knowning.

Seen a lot of crazy things, don't want to see them again. Let the politicans that want to go have a war get in the circle with the enemy. Which ever one is still standing at the end, wins. Save a lot of lives that way.

I wouldn't serve the military when I was between 18 and 25 . . . and I won't serve the military now at any age . . . by force or otherwise.

"perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service "

What seems to be overlooked in this bill is "CIVILIAN SERVICE". This would be a NON-MILITARY service to our country, perhaps at some government facililty here at home.

I do not know if anyone remembers this from history class, but President George Washington warned in his farewell speech against "close relations with foreign nations." -- In other words, we're completely violating the wishes of our founding fathers by forming overseas alliances. If we would stop wasting billions of dollars sending our troops over to countries that do not appreciate us being there, then our country would be MUCH safer.

Who here still believes that stuff about the government (Bush's group) drawing up ways to force us into war with IRAQ?

"What seems to be overlooked in this bill is "CIVILIAN SERVICE". This would be a NON-MILITARY service to our country, perhaps at some government facililty here at home."

At this point in time, I'm sure they would be using the "MILLITARY SERVICE" part first. Civilian service is for peace times; even though it still may involve taking time from your high-paying job to be paid minimum wage by the government to hold a gun all week.

I joined the Navy before I even got out of high school, got to finish, then I was in bootcamp 3 days out. I did it merely because it was something to do. I didn't know if I wanted to go to college, or be a waiter or what, so I figured what the hell. I did know what I was getting into, and I did know that in four years I'd have to make a decision to continue or do someting else.
In 8 years, I went around the world three times. I was in for all stages of Desert Shield/Desert Storm, and saw/heard/did some unusual stuff, none of which scarred my psyche or turned me into a bastard.
I was let out on a medical discharge, through no fault of my own after 8 years (halfway into my second hitch)So I'm out, collect a pension and have some great memories, college money and an ex wife. Do I blame any of it on the military? NOPE! I knew a few people that quite honestly were only in the military because w/o it they would have been homeless crack addicts merely because out in the 'real world' no job would have kept them on for as long as the Navy did. They however had a knack, for giving 'management' (superior officers) what they wanted to see/hear and moving in.
I would go back tomorrow if called. *I* personally enjoyed my time in the military, and the good far outweighed the bad.
I'm of the opinion that there are many people who are arguing personal opinion here. That's okay with me, honest. I believe this topic is about more than personal action than feelings though. I have many friends right now overseas, and it really confuses me when their relatives get all teary eyed (one even had a clinical breakdown when she heard her daughter was shipping out) and sad. I don't mean because a loved one is going in harms way.. that I understand. I don't see how someone ELSE doing something they won't ( or can't bring themselves to) do makes them get all weird. When an individual signs up (I'll use the word.. volunteer) for a few years in the service, they do it with FULL KNOWLEDGE that they could be engaged in an armed conflict. Hell, that's pretty miuch the definition of the words military force. A protective force.
We DO need guns. We DO need a stronger presence in certain theaters and areas of the world, if for no other reason than to let other countries know that we are a strong country who will defend what's ours and fight for what we believe in.
Individuals may not DESIRE to have guns around, and that's certainly your right. Safety is not just a position, it's a state of mind. I know that sounds simplistic, but it's true. How many people out there are w/o guns, alarms and such, and have never had something bad happen to them, merely because they presented a picture of stability and power after a fashion?
On the opposite side though, how many people are out HERE as civilians that are not now nor ever will be in the military that are much more scary than the ones IN? Nuts with guns and ammo and camo and MREs and hordes of cash (i know it's an extreme, but it's becoming more commonplace), yet can't get into the military for one reason or another? THOSE are the people that worry me, not the majority of vets. Once you kill, it DOES change you, I don't care what the psychologists say.
I have to agree that this bill was a bad one, in that it would have forced people to give up years of their lives without fulling knowing why and making a conscious decision to sacrifice those years. I'm not against the draft in general though. My father's number came up for Vietnam about four months before I was born, but he didn't end up going. He has told me time and again that he would have, for no other reason than HE sees it as his duty to defend. But at least those people knew that somewhere over there -----> was a place called Vietnam and we were involved in an armed conflict. If people were forced (even in peace time) to serve, and a conflict broke out, they would have no choice but to be involved, whether they liked it or not.
I guess basically I believe it should come down to a choice. YOU either choose to go into the military with full knowledge that you could become involved in something, and accept it.. or you don't.
The bottom line I guess is..
this is my opinion. I've got others if you don't like this one.

Makes you wonder why something stupid like this bill was introduced. Perhaps the Government is planning to invade more countries in the future.

War is waged soley for the pupose of protecting or expanding the interests of the wealthy.

By use of manipulation, war is fought by the working classes.

War is wrong. Demand Peace.

Dogpile,
I read somewhere they have plans for several countrys like sudan, iran, maybe north korea who knows where else. Does that give you an idea why they want to get a bill like this passed.

remye...you obviously weren't a nuke if you liked your job in the navy. hehe after watching Fahrenheit 911, i don't think i can ever serve in the military again. unless i agree with what we're doing anyway. and i definately don't agree with bushladen.