Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brianna
The threat of a draft is a shock tactic. You all should know that.
|
Threat of a draft should never be considered directly part of the "Mission Accomplished" war. Draft should be thought of as consequences of two other reasons (or mistakes). Majority of Americans approved of those reasons without first thinking (of those consequences – as RichLevy did and posted so often previously).
Threat of a draft goes right to our purpose in this world. Under pre-emption (which intelligent presidents would not practice), a draft is necessary because we need more troops to fix the world. We need troops to impose democracy on the world. Iraq is one example of what Americans advocated when they approved of pre-emption after 11 September. Draft made necessary by 'knee jerk' decisions. We decided pre-emption is our doctrine - to impose democracy on the world. Therefore a draft is required.
A completely different topic: what is necessary to solve "Mission Accomplished"? We have three choices - 'go big', 'go long', or 'go home'. It does not matter what domestic consequences may be. Decisions are made by breaking problems down into parts. First decide militarily. Which will work? 'Go big' might have worked. 'Go long' which means 'stay the course' or changing troop levels by 10,000s is widely acknowledged as defeat placed upon another president. 'Go long' was how Richard Nixon made sure the Nam defeat was not on his watch. 'Go home' is also a workable solution once we bury lying political rhetoric such as 'war on terror'.
OK. Two possible military solutions exist. Since problem was broken down into military and domestic, now we are ready to ask about how 'go big' can be implemented domestically. Well that means an immediate draft because those 500,000 troops must be deployed now (‘go big will not work next year) AND we need troops immediately to fill gaps. Problems are broken down into long, painful (and therefore wordy) explanations. 'Go big' means we need a draft and we need '90 day wonders' immediately.
'Go long' is a failed solution in military terms. 'Go long is how the "Mission Accomplished" defeat gets blamed on some other president. We do not even consider it.
'Go home' is the only other military solution. Is that acceptable in our domestic environment? Yes, once Americans acknowledge that the only good options existed four years ago - and were not exercised. Think like an engineer. What we do today creates bottom line results four and more years later. What we did four years ago – well long time Cellar dweller read those warnings in 2003.
'Go big' and the doctrine of 'pre-emption' both mean we need a draft. We have already endorsed a mental midget's international doctrine called 'pre-emption'. Therefore a draft is necessary - or maybe 'pre-emption' was only approved by those so anti-American as to not first think?
What did you think Rangel is talking about? Provided are two reasons America needs a draft. You don't want a draft? Then start by attacking reasons (and president) that create the need.
You don't want a draft? Then 'mental midget' is a standard expression in your posts. Draft is necessary for two separate reasons. Want to eliminate the draft? Eliminate reasons why the draft is necessary. One solution is called impeachment (impeach who?).