🚀 go-pugleaf

davehs@ix.netcom.com (David Hutchings) wrote:

>On Fri, 06 Sep 1996 15:46:38 GMT, rex@intr.net (Rex) wrote:

>Didn't screw up my life at all.  Of course I was one of the millions
>that returned from that dirty little war.  Furthermore, I feel great
>that I was able to do something for my freedom.  Remember, you really
>cannot buy freedom with your taxes, you have to give something of
>yourself for your freedom!

I fail to see how Vietnam in any way solidified the freedom of
Americans, but that is another topic altogether.

There are many Vets who would prefer to not have gone, did not join
the military voluntarily, and who suffered a great deal because of the
draft.

I am glad that you are not one of those people.

>>You cannot predict what will happen in the future.  The draft hasn't
>>been outlawed, it is just not currently in effect.  I hope it does not
>>ever go back into effect.

>As it stands right now it would take an act of Congress to reinstitute
>the draft. 

Just like it takes an "act of Congress" to raise taxes or increase the
pay of Congressmen.  Congress "acts" on a daily basis.  Why do people
use this arguement when trying to convince others that a draft is
unlikely?  Acts of Congress are common, easy, and can be done quite
quickly (when they want to).

>There would have to be a declared war for that to happen
>and the next war would not last long enough for them to institute the
>draft again.

It depends on if it is an election year, and what politics are
involved.  The US need to create enemies in times of peace for PR
purposes.  Someday, this might escalate and backfire. 

>>If women register, the pool will be twice as large.

>Sounds good to me.!

Me too. That will cut my chances of being sent to Iraq, (or the enemy
du jour) for a presidential campaign war, more than in half - Since
there are more women in the US then men, 

We certainly agree on this point.




--
Rex
rex@intr.net