#2 2010-07-26 19:33:20
Affirmative Action Token Congresscreature Rangel introduced a draft authorization bill because he believes not enough Whites are being killed in America's policing actions around the world. The truth is that Whites are being killed in a greater proportion to their representation in the military, and kneegrows are being killed in a smaller proportion to their percentage in the forces.
Offline
#3 2010-07-26 22:36:22
Wikipedia wrote:
On January 7, 2003, Senator Ernest F. Hollings (South Carolina) and Representative Charles Rangel (New York) introduced the Universal National Service Act of 2003 (S. 89 / H.R. 163). H.R. 163 failed in the United States House of Representatives by a vote of 2–402 on October 5, 2004.
On February 14, 2006, Congressman Charles Rangel (New York) introduced the Universal National Service Act of 2006 (H.R. 4752). The bill never made it out of committee.
On January 10, 2007, Congressman Charles Rangel (New York) introduced the Universal National Service Act of 2007 (H.R. 393). The bill never made it out of committee.
4 time’s the charm?
Offline
#4 2010-07-26 22:47:43
I recall we have a volunteer service?
Offline
#5 2010-07-26 23:05:25
Draft the rich folks kids first. The war would end in a month.
Offline
#6 2010-07-27 00:52:39
Senators & Congressman's Kids. Yes. Front Line, with slingshots.
Offline
#7 2010-07-27 01:00:13
Dmtdust wrote:
Senators & Congressman's Kids. Yes. Front Line, with slingshots.
That's the whole point. Rangel believes that if the Congressmen actually believed their kids and constituents' kids would be drafted then they wouldn't be so cavalier about fueling wars.
Offline
#8 2010-07-27 01:04:26
This was the set up in Pre-Roman and Post Roman times in Europe and elsewhere. The brunt of war theoretically fell on the classes that it would serve the most. In practice, not so much.
Offline
#9 2010-07-27 01:38:39
[soapbox]
As much as I *hate* Rangel (and the lot of them, frankly, but him especially), I have always thought that mandatory service to country for all citizens is a good idea. It would develop skills for those who have none, instill discipline for those who lack same, develop a commitment to the country's cause and citizenship, encourage participation in the government and community, and get one hell of a lot of things done in this country that *really* need getting done. Citizens should, as this bill notes, be able to choose among military and non-military options.
And there should be *no* exemptions. Everyone, except the truly insane or the grossly infirm (think: vegetative state) should be impressed to serve. Even paraplegics can still find some way to contribute... making phone calls, directing work, etc. The wealthy should serve along side the poor. No favors, no buy-outs... promotion based solely on merit.
Yeah, I know it sounds socialist. Too bad. People need to get re-engaged with thieir country, and this country needs their help.
And you're right.. once the rich boys start coming home in body bags, and the sons of senators come home as cripples, this warmongering shit will end forthwith.
[/soapbox]
Last edited by whosasailorthen (2010-07-27 01:44:28)
Offline
#10 2010-07-27 08:08:19
whosasailorthen wrote:
[soapbox]
It would develop skills for those who have none, instill discipline for those who lack same, develop a commitment to the country's cause and citizenship, encourage participation in the government and community, and get one hell of a lot of things done in this country that *really* need getting done.
[/soapbox]
[fatchance]
Sure, no problem. All for it. As soon as the leaders who will deploy this mobilized force of citizens to do their will have some discipline,skills and commitment to the country's cause and citizenship other then their own craven interests, and can behave responsibly in the neighborhood with these new added powers
[/fatchance]
Offline
