Conservative columnist hints at the need for a draft

[bluestateguy]

In fairness to the writer, Ross Mackenzie, he does have two sons currently serving in the Navy, and I do sort of see his point: that being that it is all too easy for most Americans to simply "tune out" the Iraq War, and go about their daily lives as if the war is just a million miles away. Although, I vigorously oppose the draft, even Charlie Rangel's politically motivated bill. You don't play political games with young people's lives.

Anyway:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/rossmackenzie/rm20050609.shtml

The nuclear option, Social Security, John Bolton; Paris Hilton selling hamburgers or something; "Deep Throat" starring - masquerading? - as Mark W. Felt. Those topics are consuming the news columns. But what about . . . Iraq?

cut

Have you noticed? On Iraq, the public is oddly disengaged, distracted, remote from the fight.

We are at war against a jihadist terror that seeks our eradication from the planet. Yet, for instance, regarding Pat Tillman, the pro-football player who gave it all up to join the Army Rangers, the story now is less about his abiding patriotic commitment than about the Pentagon papering over of the nature of his death.

And . . . join up?

cut

A retired lieutenant general finds the Army unable to "compensate for a problem of national scope" - the problem being, of course, a public uninspired to connect with the war at hand. He wonders: Has the United States lost its will to survive? What's happened to the Great Satan when so few are willing to fight to defend the country?

The dismaying wonder extends: Does a citizenry so distracted that it cannot even weigh in usefully on the debate - let alone enlist in the confrontation in whatever way on whatever front - deserve to prevail in the wider war?

[AX10]

1. Why should I, an opponent of the criminal war in Iraq...

have to go fight???

:wtf:

[ComerPerro]

7. Exactly. This sounds like the normal conservative BS of

"Those liberals who protest this war ought to get out there and enlist"

I mean, honestly: :wtf:

[DBoon]

12. and people who oppose arson

should go out and burn down someone's house??

[NorCalDem]

2. It's simple

The peoples attention span for this war is short, because we never should have been there. Trust me, if we went to war with a country that had been actively attacking us or our allies, the people would respond to defend their nation.

[GetTheRightVote]

3. No one should be forced to die for any lying adminstration. sorry

:kick;

[damntexdem]

4. I hope the GOP proposes a draft.

Then the Dems shut down the Senate to block it.

[pocket]

10. unfortunately

it is Chuck Rangel that keep introducing draft legislation :mad:

[Wright Patman]

5. Attention span

is just not there for a Hundred Years War or Crusades or whatever it was the powers that be were trying to pull off when they staged 9-11.

The fact there has not been a repeat even though the borders are open lends credence to the fact it was staged.

They'd have to stage one every few months with an increasing number of dead each time to get the people's attention focused once again.

One was all they were willing to do. Our debt-based economy is so fragile that that was all it could take. And they had to go to an emergency one percent interest rate so people could "extract equity' from their homes to keep it from imploding even after one.

[denverbill]

6. He's asking the wrong question.

The general asked "Has the United States lost its will to survive?"

The answer is no it hasn't.

What it is losing is it appetite for using American soldiers lives as tools for multinational corporations.

If an enemy army attacks the US proper, you'd have 50 million volunteers overnight.

It doesn't take an Army to fight terrorism. It takes an Army to CREATE terrorism.

[indepat]

8. If only more conservatists would offer their offspring to the military, a

draft would never be needed.

[Frederik]

9. Here's a couple of clues for the lieutenant general...

1. Iraq isn't about "a jihadist terror that seeks our eradication from the planet". That's either a lie or a profound misunderstanding of the situation in Iraq and the nature of the insurgency.

2. The United States hasn't "lost its will to survive" - but the Iraq debacle is not about the survival of the United States. It was a desired war, pure and simple, a war of conquest and looting in a faraway land, like the European empires of old used to engage in.

3. It follows from the above that the "will to defend ones country" is irrelevant to the will to lose a leg or an arm in Iraq.

[acmejack]

11. Distracted citizenry

so that it cannot even weigh in usefully on the debate- creates a vacuum in the debate that the loudest voices (on both sides of the question) rush in to fill. It certainly makes for much more adversarial encounter.

[roguevalley]

13. a retired colonel on msnbc talked about the draft soon. just don't

go. You will be in good and numerous company. nothing like breaking a broken social compact.