Seriously political issue affecting US citizens

valis · Post by **valis** » Fri May 28, 2004 3:05 am

Highly suggested that if you're in the US you spread this info & do what you can to let your representatives know you oppose it:

There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately.

$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website: http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004.

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services, subcommitte: Total Force.

In December 2001 Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

Even those voters who currently support US actions abroad may still object to this move, knowing their own children or grandchildren will not have a say about whether to fight. Not that it should make a difference, but this plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft.

[ This Message was edited by: valis on 2004-05-28 04:29 ]

valis · Post by **valis** » Fri May 28, 2004 3:10 am

I was unable to find info easily on the senate version as the search engine seems to turn up only legislation that is already submitted to the floor (ie, not in commitee) but here's what I found on the house version:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... @D&summ2=m&

Universal National Service Act of 2003 - Declares that it is the obligation of every U.S. citizen, and every other person residing in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 26 to perform a two-year period of national service, unless exempted, either as a member of an active or reserve component of the armed forces or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense. Requires induction into national service by the President. Sets forth provisions governing: (1) induction deferments, postponements, and exemptions, including exemption of a conscientious objector from military service that includes combatant training; and (2) discharge following national service.

Amends the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.

To some countries this won't be too much of a shock (switzerland for example) but consider the need of a country with 300,000,000 citizens to have EVERYONE of legal age required to serve. What need are they forseeing?

(edited): found the senate version: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN00089: (/edited)

[ This Message was edited by: valis on 2004-05-28 04:12 ]

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Fri May 28, 2004 3:17 am

valis wrote:

What need are they forseeing?

Perhaps this one:

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

If 'Peak Oil' is a fact, then I'm afraid we're all very, very screwed

Royston

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Fri May 28, 2004 3:37 am

http://www.sss.gov/

<<< well, the notice on the welcome page still maintains that a draft is not going to happen.

- stephen

[ This Message was edited by: wavelength on 2004-05-28 04:39 ]

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Fri May 28, 2004 3:42 am

On 2004-05-28 04:17, Counterparts wrote:
valis wrote:

What need are they forseeing?
Perhaps this one:

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

If 'Peak Oil' is a fact, then I'm afraid we're all very, very screwed

Royston

man, this site really seems to be only about hype and hysteria, all in the name of selling some books for the author...

valis · Post by **valis** » Fri May 28, 2004 5:56 am

On 2004-05-28 04:37, wavelength wrote:
http://www.sss.gov/

<<< well, the notice on the welcome page still maintains that a draft is not going to happen.

- stephen

"Notwithstanding recent stories in the news media and on the Internet, Selective Service is not getting ready to conduct a draft for the U.S. Armed Forces -- either with a special skills or regular draft. Rather, the Agency remains prepared to manage a draft if and when the President and the Congress so direct."

basically I read that as "we're not getting ready to conduct a draft as the bill hasn't passed." (yet)

A close friend of mine when I lived in Sacramento lived with someone that worked for a reporting service (his father ran it actually) that basically tracks most of the legislation in the California & US legislative bodies.

I remember hearing about this in early 2003 and some people making a stink, only to have it disappear. Its apparently been sitting in subcommittee (a subcommittee called "Total Force") since then. However the worry is that there is action on the bill currently and both the Senate & House versions are very closely worded, which means that it should pass relatively unamended in both once passed on one side.

In any case since I raised a stink about the PATRIOT act here stateside only to have people act as if it was paranoia (and later realize that we DID actually lose quite a few constitutional rights) I thought I should put this out there again.

Lifeafterthecrash may be serving someone's book sales (not seen it) but I surprised at how many Americans still believe the WMD or the Iraqi salvation 'reasons'.

paulrmartin · Post by **paulrmartin** » Fri May 28, 2004 7:35 am

I can hear it now:

"I don't wanna get drafted, I don't wanna go..."

I hope they don't convince the canadian government to do the same, as I'm absolutely certain they're trying to...

Post by **hubird** » Fri May 28, 2004 7:47 am

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
On 2004-05-28 04:42, wavelength wrote:
man, this site really seems to be only about hype and hysteria, all in the name of selling some books for the author...

I'm afraid not...
Our national television showed a documentary about this very subject, half a year ago.
The crash will happen in a few years they say.
Does it matter if it will take two times longer?
Anyway, the writers of the book offer double mony back if you're not convinced after reading it...

I must say, I'm very curious about what's going to happen in the next future.
Imagine the scenario of a overall stock crash, the fall of the Empire the US actually is, populations fighting eachother looking for resources, moslem countries trying to jump into the new power vacuums, oh man, Stephen King will need more hands to type

kensuguro · Post by **kensuguro** » Fri May 28, 2004 9:46 am

the draft thing is only for US nationality people right? Not for immigrants?

mr swim · Post by **mr swim** » Fri May 28, 2004 9:50 am

The Peak Oil stuff just seems like it must be true - afterall, what else could happen ?

But I'm sure there is more on the positive side (though maybe not for the U.S.) - as soon as one has some renewable power, and if everything got really serious, then governments would just have to devote all that power to finding more ways to make power (if you see what I mean). For instance there is a project in Wales (UK) working out how to make hydrogen from wind power (liquid hydrogen can be stored, which is good !) - all the power being used to undertake this project is of course wind power (though it is still true that a lot of the materials (buildings, computers etc) are oil-based ... but the more research that's done, the less this will need to be the case)

Having said this, there must be a minimum amount of power that could feasibly be needed to get these projects going while preventing the anarchy which would prevent the projects. So maybe the US and UK (among others) are screwed, but scandinavian countries that have had sensible energy policies are maybe in a good position to sort themselves out ...

W

valis · Post by **valis** » Fri May 28, 2004 10:28 am

When it comes to things like that I think it has a lot to do with how entrenched your system is in people & technology that rely on the 'old' ways.

For example, its my opinion that Japan's adoption of newer manufacturing techniques and machinery while rebuilding during the 50's & 60's had as much to do with their subsequent economic strength as the management practices which were such a big deal during the late 80's.

Perhaps some hope for Iraq there?

Also another thought: people thought that the 'y2k' changeover would be the biggest calamity ever, but that turned out to be merely a whimper.

[ This Message was edited by: valis on 2004-05-28 11:33 ]

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Fri May 28, 2004 10:37 am

wavelength wrote:

man, this site really seems to be only about hype and hysteria, all in the name of selling some books for the author...

There is some silly stuff on the site for sure, but oil does underpin most (if not all), aspects of modern human society, and it isn't going to last forever.

Combine this with the fact that there's no measurable upper limit of stupidity for a large group of human beings (remember Easter Island?!) it looks like the shit's going to hit the fan.

Royston

Post by **garyb** » Fri May 28, 2004 11:12 am

the u.n has stated that it may be nessessary to "adjust" human population by as much as 80%

. of course(!), there is a limit to oil. naturally, everything from plastics to fertilizer is made from it. get ready, the poor really won't like this.

think of the wealth in the world. there are no natural shortages. there is only mean behavior.

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Fri May 28, 2004 2:35 pm

On 2004-05-28 11:37, Counterparts wrote:
wavelength wrote:

man, this site really seems to be only about hype and hysteria, all in the name of selling some books for the author...
There is some silly stuff on the site for sure, but oil does underpin most (if not all), aspects of modern human society, and it isn't going to last forever.

Combine this with the fact that there's no measurable upper limit of stupidity for a large group of human beings (remember Easter Island?!) it looks like the shit's going to hit the fan.

Royston

yes, hopefully by now any socially aware global citizen should be aware that issues regarding the oil industry have long been wreaking havoc on the earth. there have been excellent alternatives to the gas-combustion engine since the fifties, for instance... things did not need to get this far and only have because the "haves" (money-makers) do not want to give anything up (even if the greater part of the world's population benefitted).

i guess what i resent about this guy's website is that it uses a lot of 'bold-texted, underlined' methods of sensationalistic writing to make his point, while not offering any useful ideas to combat the problem(s). it is very hard to take it completely seriously. it's like some bad infomercial: "you are getting older and there is nothing you can do about it... but if you buy this cream right now you can take twenty years off the clock!!!"

i love how, on the purchase page, the book is promoted as being "Interlaced with irreverent humor to make a tough subject easier to handle." -- thank god! i can't read anything dire without a good dose of irreverent humour (especially when it's the author laughing at his own stupid jokes).

"deal with reality or reality will deal with you"... reality does deal with me, every day -- it's called life... this guy's whole vibe stinks like 'crack-pot'. there is, of course, some is truth to what is being said (just like in the infomercial; we are all, in fact, getting older) but I'm not sure that buying this irreverently funny book is the answer.

here is some FREE information that offers some real ideas about how to deal with this issue (sorry, no irreverent humour):

http://archive.greenpeace.org/climate/renewables/

+ i found this kinda "fun":

http://www.greenpeace.org/international ... _id=482322

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Fri May 28, 2004 2:41 pm

On 2004-05-28 12:12, garyb wrote:

think of the wealth in the world. there are no natural shortages. there is only mean behavior.

exactly! the necessary changes can be made, but the right people have to be convinced of this... maybe, in a few years, when nobody can go outside anymore, the rich will seem no richer than the poor?

no wait, the "haves" will still have their air-conditioning and good drugs.

(attempt at irreverent humour)

[ This Message was edited by: wavelength on 2004-05-28 15:52 ]

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Fri May 28, 2004 2:51 pm

On 2004-05-28 10:50, mr swim wrote:
The Peak Oil stuff just seems like it must be true - afterall, what else could happen ?

But I'm sure there is more on the positive side (though maybe not for the U.S.) - as soon as one has some renewable power, and if everything got really serious, then governments would just have to devote all that power to finding more ways to make power (if you see what I mean). For instance there is a project in Wales (UK) working out how to make hydrogen from wind power (liquid hydrogen can be stored, which is good !) - all the power being used to undertake this project is of course wind power (though it is still true that a lot of the materials (buildings, computers etc) are oil-based ... but the more research that's done, the less this will need to be the case)

Having said this, there must be a minimum amount of power that could feasibly be needed to get these projects going while preventing the anarchy which would prevent the projects...

W

<<< a very sensible argument, IMHO.