On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 09:13:38PM -0500, Damon Agretto wrote:
Right now, this becomes a very pertinent question for me. One
of my relatives is of draftable age, and is a junior in
college. Currently, I think he's becoming a bit of a screw-up
(problems with
I'm wondering what your take is on the draft
According to the CIA World Factbook
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/us.html
the US has 2,124,164 (2004 est.) males reaching military age annually.
The usual estimates are that the US military needs 100,000 more
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
No, actually, I know far better than you do that it
isn't. That's nonsense. It's not coming back.
I read somewhere that the volunteer soldiers that are dying
in Viet... Oops... Iraq are actually foreigners who want to get
USA citizenship, and the only way to get it is
If this group has some magnitude in numbers, then I imagine
draft will not come back - except when the USA ceases to
be an economically viable place to emigrate to.
Some may be. Enlisting in the US Military has NEVER been subject to the
condition of citizenship. Any person can qualify to join
Damon wrote:
Some may be. Enlisting in the US Military has NEVER been subject to the
condition of citizenship. Any person can qualify to join the Army, no
matter what country they come from, or what citizenship they hold
(barring any extenuation circumstances, like espionage etc). But I have
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not saying Gautam is wrong, I trust that he
knows what he's talking
about in this instance, but I don't want to be
caught off guard either.
--
Doug
Thanks, Doug. Just a note - the Washington Post ran
an article on the possibility just
I'm wondering what your take is on the draft, Damon. I don't see how Iraq
can be subdued without greater numbers and I think that it's likely that
we'll begin to loose coalition members as the violence continues; what if
the UK pulls out?
Well, its as I had said before: we reap what we sow.
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Thanks, Doug. Just a note - the Washington Post ran
an article on the possibility just before the
election. Quite a few Republicans (myself included,
actually) thought it was a clear attempt to help the
Kerry campaign (and thus somewhat out of
--- Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Occasionally the Post will skew things and create
stuff that just isn't
there. And if they do it on the wrong story,
someone a lot closer to the
facts will harbor a deep mistrust of the paper for
10 years or so, and
will only reluctantly be
Damon wrote:
I'm wondering what your take is on the draft, Damon. I don't see how
Iraq can be subdued without greater numbers and I think that it's
likely that we'll begin to loose coalition members as the violence
continues; what if the UK pulls out?
Well, its as I had said before: we reap
OK, but if what you're saying is that an 18 division all volunteer army is
possible; we could recruit enough people to fill the ranks, then why
didn't we start doing it after 9/11?
I'm not saying that an all volunteer 18 division army is possible, it has
been done! Prior to GW1 and after
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Occasionally the Post will skew things and create
stuff that just isn't
there. And if they do it on the wrong story,
someone a lot closer to the
facts will harbor a deep mistrust of the paper for
12 matches
Mail list logo
