portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article questions united states

government | imperialism & war | youth

when the draft passes...

What do we do when the draft passes and they start stopping draftees at the boarders?
What do we do when the draft passes and they start stopping draftees at the boarders?
Re: when the draft passes... 09.Apr.2004 16:08

Matt

We fight it like hell.

Stand and Fight 09.Apr.2004 16:15

Luke from DC

Refuse to register, refuse to go-and if they come for YOU, let the motherfuckers know you are prepared and willing to make "another Waco" out of it.

During Vietnam, one potential draftee told his draft board to get him his training and his rifle so he could come back and use them on the draft board-he never heard from them again, and was never bothered.

They can't make a person fight 09.Apr.2004 16:46

just say no

If they draft run if you feel like it or bust out your guns and shoot them down.

If you don't feel like running show up and then sit the fuck down. Don't do one single thing they say. Go on a hunger strike. Refuse to respond to them or talk just crazy talk.

Believe me - they will not beat you up and shanghai you to send you to war. If your will is strong they will not be able to break it. Just say no.

learn Spanish 09.Apr.2004 17:10

mom

After the fact if you have registered: Remember to go south not north. The US and Canada signed a treaty after Vietnam that allows the US to go after "draft dodgers" who go north. Learn some Spanish or plan to spend some jail time.

Looks like Bush is starting his own Vietnam 09.Apr.2004 17:14

I won't go

For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction. All empires fall.

They can send you to jail 09.Apr.2004 18:08

...

They can't make you fight, but they can send you to jail, and that sucks.

Conscientious Objectors 09.Apr.2004 20:15

Ted

You folks are not reading the law. The legislative branch's website had the National Service Act down for awhile, but I think it's back now. Funny that. Anyway, it includes a conscientious objector provision that says you don't have to go to war, you just have to do public service...at the will of the President. The funny thing is that, it basically states that the draft, the numbers drafted, the term of the draft, and the nature of services you can be drafted for are all at the discretion of the President. Now if that doesn't smack of fascism, what does?

Is is about fresh meat for the war machine? Yes, but I honestly believe that is secondary. This is more about conditioning the nations youth to gradually ween the population off of these silly notions about civil rights and due process. Psychological conditioning is by far the most powerful form of social control. The blind faith that people put in major media has been very successful in shaping public opinion, since it has been taken control of (not completely, but its close to being nothing more than a propaganda mechanism). However, if you could get people in a position where you can spoon feed them the government version of reality 24/7 for two years, then in a couple generations, you might actually have destroyed American democracy and hijacked its military power. That is NOT a widespread corporate conspiracy, BUT it IS the goal of Cheney, Bush Sr, Kissinger, Ashcroft, etc.

Public Service, Ayh? 09.Apr.2004 23:09

Tacky Irish

And what would that be? Running supply lines in the desert?

when the draft comes 10.Apr.2004 09:18

...

The day they announce the draft is the day the anti-war forces becomes the anti-government forces, and is the day that those forces' numbers will grow to include 80% of the young population. The day after that day is the day we take over.

I doubt that the draft will occurr... 10.Apr.2004 10:16

Kirk McCall kirkbmccall@yahoo.com

I really doubt that the draft will be implemented. As of this date (4/10/04) the united states military is being defeated on all sides. Implementing a draft, and continuing to proscecute the war in Iraq is not a realistic option.

The anger of americans at the stupidity and incompetence of the Bush gang is boiling over. Implement a draft at this time? Who are they kidding? There are many young people who already see through the lies used to start this ill fated war.

For the administration to implement the draft would trigger an American intefada.

Perhaps im wrong, but my honest opinion is that the administration wouldnt dare to do it.

There are many options available to young people in resisting the draft. Resistance, non cooperation or dropping out of society are all valid tactics. One is just right for you!

On a personal note, i have long said that the government will only be able to draft my children over my dead body. Many of my peers; friends with children, say the same, so there will be revolt of draft age kids and their fathers....(and mothers and sisters and brothers).....

Would the Bush administration risk open revolt of the american people?

No draft = yet 10.Apr.2004 10:33

close a window

There will be no draft unless the Jr. Shrub is reelected.

I doubt that the draft will occurr... 10.Apr.2004 10:50

Since When

do the politicians in Washington care what the American people think? All it would take would be another "terrorist" action in the United States - suitcase nukes maybe - to instutite martial law. Then they could execute for treason anyone who refuses to cooperate. It is amazing what someone will do when a gun is held to their head.

Corpo 10.Apr.2004 13:35

VIP

I recall in Greg palast's book that he compared the American Media to "shooting the wounded".
Essentially it's already been done and now the govt is using the media to try and "prepare" us with subtle psychological inuendos.
Get ready.
I can only imagine what will happen when a million men and women who are part of the anti war movement get drafted.


p.s. tampons help to make great molotov cocktails.

everyone know where the army recruitment center is right??

What will happen when Kerry implements the draft? 10.Apr.2004 13:54

Tony Blair's dog

Kerry is the one they have selected to be president then.

Foolish people... 10.Apr.2004 18:09

Wilhelmina

"No Draft = yet" and some others imply or say outright that there will be no draft unless Bush is re-elected. Nonsense. Do they know that it's been liberal Democrats like John Conyers and Charles Rangel who have introduced legislation for its restoration? And Kerry is out-hawking Bush regarding Iraq, i.e.., he wants to send more troops, while also criticizing Bush from the right re: the "war on terror". Where are these troops going to come from?

There are no solutions to the problems of militarization and war to be found in either of the twin parties of capital in this country. (We remember Kennedy and Johnson's imperialist aggression in Vietnam, their invasion of the Dominican Republic at the same time, etc.) Solutions will only be found by building the mass movements on a political basis independent of and against the bourgeoisie and its political parties.

DRAFT WILL COME AFTER THE 2004 "ELECTIONS" 10.Apr.2004 22:35

Draft Dodger

For those of you who believe that they won't implement the draft, think againg. The draft will be implemented after the 2004 selections, and it will be implemented regardless of who is put in power--Democrat or Republican. Remember, it is DEMOCRATS in Congress like Charles Rangel of New York and Ernest Fritz Hollins of SC who are have pushed legislation that would reinstitute the draft.

This is not about Kerry or the Democrats.


VIP and DRAFT DODGER have it right 11.Apr.2004 08:47

Ted

The subtle framing of public perceptions for a coming draft are already in the works. I was sitting in an airport yesterday watching CNN pump information into the eyes of business travelers and one of their "political analysts" was discussing how the stretched American forces. He stated that in time, families of those serving in Iraq will demand that other civilians share some of the burden for protecting us against terror. I expect this message will strengthen in coming months. It would wait until after the election, but events in Iraq may prevent that. So rather than suggesting that the soldiers maybe shouldn't be there in the first place, they will try to shape the debate to divide Americans on the subject of who goes to war. It will be peace activists fault that families of soldiers in Iraq don't get their loved-ones back after one year, due to extended tours of duty. Not Rumsfield's fault. Not Bush's. No, it will be the freeloading peace protestors who relish the freedom to say what they want, but don't want to go fight for it themselves.

This same strategy was implemented by the Reagan Admin to justify trickle down economics and gut social programs. It wasn't the rich getting richer off the middle class (a perception that dated back to early industrial era of America and developed over time), it was the poor sucking off the middle class that were responsible for the growing disparity of wealth and income. To illustrate just how powerful this kind of conditioning is, just look at how the experience of the the fight for organized labor and Great Depression that led to the popularity of FDR's New Deal were reversed in just a few years by Reagan.

Under former CIA-Directors Dulles and Helms, Bush Sr, was a protege' of the psychological operations era--MKULTRA and CHAOS. As a seldom-mentioned Senate investigation into the CIA in 1975 revealed, the CIA had many journalists on their payrolls. The Senate forced the CIA to end the program, but many of the names of these journalistic spooks are now senior executives of companies like Time-Warner and CBS. With a sufficiently melodramatic actor (Reagan) as President and former CIA director (Bush) who had cleaned out the CIA's upper ranks and filled it with loyalists, the machinery was put in place for the propaganda machine we see today.

As for the comment that Kerry will support the draft, too, it's not Democrat vs Republican. The powers-that-be play both sides for the middle. Some Republicans are owned and so are some Democrats. Some Republicans are honest conservative Americans who believe in the Constitution and their duty to the American people. True, the Republican party has mostly been taken over, but there are free thinkers on both sides. I personally don't believe Kerry has been completely seduced by the dark side. He's done too many things as a Senator that crossed the grain. That's not to say he's completely outside of the establishment, but he's not a pawn in its game. The propaganda machine tried too hard to kill his campaign in the early primaries for me to believe that.

I do not believe Kerry would institute a draft 11.Apr.2004 08:52

Heinz catsup

Bush's unilateral policies are the reason we went into Iraq before UN approval and the reason we are slowly drowning in the sand there now.
Kerry is not a unilateralist. NATO would be more of a force in Iraq than they are now. There would be a different atmosphere with a Kerry administration.
More world help = no draft.

There is a big difference in who wins the election, contrary to the spammers.

fragging immobilized the army in Vietnam, ending that war 11.Apr.2004 09:46

GRINGO STARS

One flyer during Vietnam read "Don't burn your draft card! Join up and kill your CO!"

More than anything else, the soldiers revolted against their commanders so that they could live to see another day. Violently revolted. That was how the Vietnam War was ended. US officials genuinely believed that anti-war protests here in the US were agitated by foreign agents. That was not true, of course.

Fragging is the killing of your superior officer. It is what brought the US army in Vietnam to a standstill. Pools of cash were collected, to be paid as a bounty to the soldier who killed that particular officer. Bounties were higher the more uncaring and bloodthirsty an officer was. Soon, officers were conferring with their troops over every order, and even then the grunts would refuse any dangerous order. Occasionally bounties were called off when an officer demonstrated common sense. Eventually they stopped counting fraggings in Vietnam because they became so commonplace. Officers started killing their own soldiers at times, as well.

No one knows how many officers were fragged, but after Tet it became epidemic. At least 800 to 1,000 fragging attempts using explosive devices were made. The army reported 126 fraggings in 1969, 271 in 1970 and 333 in 1971, when they stopped keeping count. But in that year, just in the American Division (of My Lai fame), one fragging per week took place. Some military estimates are that fraggings occurred at five times the official rate, while officers of the Judge Advocate General Corps believed that only 10 percent of fraggings were reported. These figures do not include officers who were shot in the back by their men and listed as wounded or killed in action.

Most fraggings resulted in injuries, although "word of the deaths of officers will bring cheers at troop movies or in bivouacs of certain units." The army admitted that it could not account for how 1,400 officers and noncommissioned officers died. This number, plus the official list of fragging deaths, has been accepted as the unacknowledged army estimate for officers killed by their men. It suggests that 20 to 25 percent -- if not more -- of all officers killed during the war were killed by enlisted men, not the "enemy." This figure has no precedent in the history of war.


sources cited;

Richard Moser, The New Winter Soldiers: GI and Veteran Dissent During the Vietnam Era (Perspectives in the Sixties) (New Brunswick: Rutgers, 1996), p. 48

Christian G. Appy, Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers and Vietnam (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1993), p. 246.

Colonel Robert D. Heinl, Jr., "The Collapse of the Armed Forces," Armed Forces Journal, June 7, 1971, reprinted in Marvin Gettleman, et al., Vietnam and America: A Documented History (New York: Grove Press, 1995), p. 328.

Terry Anderson, "The GI Movement and the Response from the Brass," in Melvin Small and William Hoover, eds., Give Peace A Chance (Syracuse: Syracuse University, 1992), p. 105

a fascinating article about the Soldiers' Revolt in Vietnam;
 http://www.isreview.org/issues/09/soldiers_revolt.shtml

Kerry wants 40,000 more serving soldiers than Bush does 11.Apr.2004 16:13

GRINGO STARS

One flyer during Vietnam read "Don't burn your draft card! Join up and kill your CO!"

More than anything else, the soldiers revolted against their commanders so that they could live to see another day. Violently revolted. That was how the Vietnam War was ended. US officials genuinely believed that anti-war protests here in the US were agitated by foreign agents. That was not true, of course.

Fragging is the killing of your superior officer. It is what brought the US army in Vietnam to a standstill. Pools of cash were collected, to be paid as a bounty to the soldier who killed that particular officer. Bounties were higher the more uncaring and bloodthirsty an officer was. Soon, officers were conferring with their troops over every order, and even then the grunts would refuse any dangerous order. Occasionally bounties were called off when an officer demonstrated common sense. Eventually they stopped counting fraggings in Vietnam because they became so commonplace. Officers started killing their own soldiers at times, as well.

No one knows how many officers were fragged, but after Tet it became epidemic. At least 800 to 1,000 fragging attempts using explosive devices were made. The army reported 126 fraggings in 1969, 271 in 1970 and 333 in 1971, when they stopped keeping count. But in that year, just in the American Division (of My Lai fame), one fragging per week took place. Some military estimates are that fraggings occurred at five times the official rate, while officers of the Judge Advocate General Corps believed that only 10 percent of fraggings were reported. These figures do not include officers who were shot in the back by their men and listed as wounded or killed in action.

Most fraggings resulted in injuries, although "word of the deaths of officers will bring cheers at troop movies or in bivouacs of certain units." The army admitted that it could not account for how 1,400 officers and noncommissioned officers died. This number, plus the official list of fragging deaths, has been accepted as the unacknowledged army estimate for officers killed by their men. It suggests that 20 to 25 percent -- if not more -- of all officers killed during the war were killed by enlisted men, not the "enemy." This figure has no precedent in the history of war.


sources;

Richard Moser, The New Winter Soldiers: GI and Veteran Dissent During the Vietnam Era (Perspectives in the Sixties) (New Brunswick: Rutgers, 1996), p. 48

Christian G. Appy, Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers and Vietnam (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1993), p. 246.

Colonel Robert D. Heinl, Jr., "The Collapse of the Armed Forces," Armed Forces Journal, June 7, 1971, reprinted in Marvin Gettleman, et al., Vietnam and America: A Documented History (New York: Grove Press, 1995), p. 328.

Terry Anderson, "The GI Movement and the Response from the Brass," in Melvin Small and William Hoover, eds., Give Peace A Chance (Syracuse: Syracuse University, 1992), p. 105

A fascinating article about the Soldiers' Revolt in Vietnam;
 http://www.isreview.org/issues/09/soldiers_revolt.shtml