-Caveat Lector-

Hard Hitting Publications Mainstream Won't Dare To Touch!

http://www.gooff.com/news/read.asp?ID=1753

Rangel's Military Draft Bill Ruffles Hawks'

Feathers

A New Year's Eve commentary in the New York Times, "Bring Back the Draft,"
by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the Ways and
Means Committee and a senior member of the Black Caucus, has the pro-Iraq
war "chicken-hawks," and their allies among the uniformed utopians "up in
arms." Rangel said he would introduce legislation to restore the military draft—a
promise on which he delivered on Jan. 7, the first day of the 108th Congress.
Even before the bill was introduced, angry responses against Rangel, and
against Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), also a senior member of the Black
Caucus, who supports the bill, appeared in the financier oligarchy's Wall Street
Journal, accusing them of political opportunism and playing race politics; and
came from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who implied that Rangel is
ignorant of the matters of the "professional military."

Apparently, Rangel, who is a decorated Korean War veteran and, during the
Vietnam War, was general counsel to the National Advisory Commission on
Selective Service (the "draft board"), hit a nerve.

Rangel's move was a welcome dose of reality, as a flood of daily headlines were
chronicling the Rumsfeld-ordered deployments of U.S. troops to the Middle East,
to take up positions that would be used in a war against Iraq. Well-informed
Washington sources told EIR that the total of forces, already on location,
combined with those deployments which have been announced and are planned
for the immediate future, adds up to 100,000 American troops—combat and
support. Behind the scenes in Washington, the sources said, complaints are
growing that this deployment stretches the violation of "separation of powers"
between the Executive and Congress on fighting a war, to the limit. Public
criticism may break out, these sources said.

Rangel's commentary has caused a furor among pro- war utopians, precisely
because most of the war- mongers are "chicken-hawks," who have no military
experience, and who are in no danger of having their own children involved in a
war. Rangel's article noted: "President Bush and his Administration have
declared a war against terrorism that may soon involve sending thousands of
American troops into combat in Iraq. I voted against the Congressional
resolution giving the President authority to carry out this war— an engagement
that would dwarf our military efforts to find Osama bin Laden and bring him to
justice.

"But as a combat veteran of the Korean conflict, I believe that if we are going to
send our children to war, the governing principle must be that of shared
sacrifice.... Yet the Congress that voted overwhelmingly to allow the use of force
in Iraq includes only one member who has a child in the enlisted ranks of the
military.... I believe that if those calling for war knew that their children were 
likely
to be required to serve—and to be placed in harm's way —there would be more
caution and a greater willingess to work with the international community in
dealing with Iraq. A renewed draft will help bring a greater appreciation of the
consequences of decisions to go to war....

"A disproportionate number of the poor and members of minority groups make
up the enlisted ranks of the military, while the most privileged Americans are
under-represented or absent....

"We need to return to the tradition of the citizen soldier—with alternative national
service required for those who cannot serve because of physical limitations or
reasons of conscience" (emphasis added).

Blasting the Chicken-Hawks
Rangel, who was awarded a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star for his service,
went even further in several television and radio interviews on Jan. 3. Speaking
on National Public Radio, he said, "If indeed the President believes war is
necessary in terms of our national welfare, then he has to believe that sacrifices
have to be made, and those sacrifices have to be shared. We have to kick up a
notch the sense of patriotism and the sense of obligation."

When the host of NBC's Today Show asked, "Are you talking of all those people
in the higher echelon, all the way up to the top, not being aware of the cost of
minorities? Are you saying that?" Rangel replied: "After you get past Colin
Powell, they haven't the slightest clue as to the pain of war, the sacrifice of war."

"Wait a minute!" the interviewer interrupted. "You're talking about Donald
Rumsfeld, the Defense Secretary. You're saying he doesn't have an idea of the
cost, the pain of war? The President of the United States?"

Rangel responded: "Well, when Rumsfeld gets on television and says, 'We can
fight more than one war at a time; we can fight in North Korea; we can fight in
Afghanistan; we can fight'—when the President of the United States says, 'I've
made a New Year's resolution to eat less cheeseburgers, and not to go to war in
Iraq if I can avoid it'—that's no way to be talking about war."

He continued, "When I talk with people who support the war, I ask, 'Do you have
any idea, do you know anybody who has anybody in the military that would be
exposed to this pain and this sacrifice?' And they don't, because these people
are not able to negotiate for themselves. And others have treated this as though
it was the French Foreign Legion. After all, they volunteered. They're being paid
to fight. And a lot of those kids and their families have been on food stamps."

Representative Conyers was quoted on Jan. 3, "It has unfortunately become the
duty of someone else's child to go to war and die, as the privileged evade the
tragic consequences of war."

Rumsfeld Shoots Back
Rangel's legislation would reinstitute a draft to compulsory military or alternative
national service for men and women aged 18-26, who are U.S. citizens or
permanent residents. He said bluntly, "This legislation is necessary to achieve a
full sharing of the sacrifice which will be required ... if the President chooses to
invade Iraq." The national service can be defined by the President, for national
or homeland security.

Later that day, at the Pentagon briefing, Rumsfeld blew his stack. The same
Secretary of Defense—who had in earlier moments repeatedly called for
emergency measures, including sacrificing civil liberties, because America is "at
war" against terrorism, said that the draft proposal has "notable disadvantages"
which a professional military force does not. Relegating "patriotism" to his other
press conferences, Rumsfeld complained that under a draft, people would be
"forced" to serve, and could earn less than they would in the private sector. And
draftees are "churned" through the system, making it very expensive, because
they "serve the minimum amount of time."

He made an attempt to refute Rangel and Conyers' assertions that the poor and
minorities fill the ranks of the enlisted military. "I do not know that that's
historically correct," complained the Secretary. "And I do not know that, even if it
were historically correct, that it's correct today."

But the real issue is the deeper one raised by Rangel, that it is time to return "to
the tradition of the citizen soldier," which is a tradition that was deliberately
marked for destruction by Zbigniew Brzezinski clone, Samuel P. Huntington, in
the 1956 book, The Soldier and the State, where he insisted that soldiers
become automatons, following the orders of a civilian leadership, and that they
have no political or strategic thoughts or identity. Huntington, who, later, with
input from British intelligence operative Bernard Lewis, invented the "Clash of
Civilizations" war against Islam, argued that the military should be held to the
code: "Ours is not to reason why; ours is just to do and die."

Representative Rangel's proposal is unquestionably a provocation to both the
chicken-hawks and to the citizens who have let the utopians bring the United
States to the brink of starting a global imperial war, which could go nuclear.



CLICK BELOW FOR ADDITIONAL ARTICLES
Written by Michele Steinberg of EIR--Posted 1/15/2003
Click Here For More...


1/15/2003 4:17:39 PM
EST




Seeds of Fire






Unfinished Business











The Right Man

David Frum
New $17.50!
Used $15.95!



Catch Me If You Can
Stan Redding



What Should I Do With My Life?
Po Bronson


The Myth of Laziness
Melvin D. Levine


Leadership
Rudolph W. Giuliani


(Prices May Change)
Privacy Information














NOTE TO THE READER: Headline Articles are contributed to
GoOff.com by independent third-parties. Since individual author's sources
cannot be verified, GoOff.com assumes no responsibility for the reliability of any
information presented as fact. Moreover, any opinions expressed are solely the
author's opinions and should not be construed to represent the views of
GoOff.com, nor its owners, partners, or affiliates.






A<:>E<:>R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forwarded for your information.  The text and intent of the article
has to stand on its own merits.  Therefore, unless I am a first-hand
witness to any event described, I cannot attest to its validity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.
Do not believe simply because it has been handed down for
many generations.  Do not believe in anything simply because
it is spoken and rumoured by many.  Do not believe in anything
simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures.  Do not believe
in anything merely on the authority of teachers, elders or wise
men.  Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when
you find that it agrees with reason and is conducive to the good
and benefit of one and all.  Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutra

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to