Army recruiter caught on tape threatening youth with arrest if he doesn't show up

If there is ever a draft, I will fight for the right I believe I have to make that decision on my own.

They will not take me alive, and I will take down as many unpatriotic fucks as possible if they come and get me.
 
I've thought about this long and hard, and if there was a draft, and my number was pulled, I think I would go and serve now. My father-in-law was a draftee who opposed Vietnam, and people like Charlie Rangel. They held onto their beliefs, fighting a war they knew wasn't right, but they would rather serve their country than to run and hide. It really will take massive public outcry to bring about an end to this insane war. It will happen only when people are drafted from their sububan homes to fight in George Bush's war.
 
[quote name='CTLesq']Enjoy giving people fries with their orders because there will be no more federal aid.

CTL[/QUOTE]

You know, I really do think that the Bush administration could be this spiteful, vindictive, and just plain stupid.

Trading up computer chips for potato chips, but at least we got them thar uppity liberals!
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']If there is ever a draft, I will fight for the right I believe I have to make that decision on my own.

They will not take me alive, and I will take down as many unpatriotic fucks as possible if they come and get me.[/QUOTE]

MEOW MEOW MEOW!
 
[quote name='CTLesq']You know what will be awesome? When those schools lose federal funding.[/QUOTE]
How on Earth would a student-led protest cause the government to yank funding from schools?

If the school was sponsoring the protest or was banning the recruiters from their campus, I could understand that. But this? There wouldn't be any way to justify that.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']I've thought about this long and hard, and if there was a draft, and my number was pulled, I think I would go and serve now. My father-in-law was a draftee who opposed Vietnam, and people like Charlie Rangel. They held onto their beliefs, fighting a war they knew wasn't right, but they would rather serve their country than to run and hide. It really will take massive public outcry to bring about an end to this insane war. It will happen only when people are drafted from their sububan homes to fight in George Bush's war.[/QUOTE]
I could be wrong - again - but haven't the polls been showing disapproval of the war and of a potential draft in particular for months?

If the draft goes through, there's going to be an outcry against it. That much is certain. Even if it was a large one, though, I don't really see the government reversing the decision. Not with Bush in office, still fighting a war that shouldn't have been started, let alone lasted this long, and not with the huge issues military recruitment has been having of late.
 
[quote name='Gothic_Walrus']How on Earth would a student-led protest cause the government to yank funding from schools?

If the school was sponsoring the protest or was banning the recruiters from their campus, I could understand that. But this? There wouldn't be any way to justify that.[/QUOTE]

I think that's what CTL is referring to. Some schools are thinking about blocking recruiters from campus due to the discrimination policies towards gays. As a result, the administration wants to retaliate by withholding funding.
 
No surprise here. Army missed it's goal by 38% of it's original recruitment number. Is it getting drafty in here?

Even after reducing its recruiting target for May, the Army missed it by about 25 percent, Army officials said on Tuesday. The shortfall would have been even bigger had the Army stuck to its original goal for the month.

On Friday, the Army is expected to announce that it met only 75 percent of its recruiting goal for May, the fourth consecutive monthly shortfall in the number of new recruits. Just over 5,000 new recruits enlisted in May.

But the news could have appeared worse. Early last month, the Army, with no public notice, lowered its long-stated May goal to 6,700 recruits from 8,050. Compared with the original target, the Army achieved only 62.6 percent of its goal for the month.

Army officials defended the shift on Tuesday, saying it was not uncommon to change monthly goals at midyear. They said that the latest change reflected the reality that the Army was not going to meet its May goal, and that it made more sense to shift some of that quota to the summer months, traditionally a better season for recruiters to attract new high school graduates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/politics/08recruit.html
 
[quote name='CTLesq']There will not be a draft.

Enjoy the Rangel scare tactics.

CTL[/QUOTE]

There's already one taking place, i.e., the stop-loss. Or in other words, "the unofficial draft".
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']There's already one taking place, i.e., the stop-loss. Or in other words, "the unofficial draft".[/QUOTE]

Not even remotely comprable. Mere political gamesmanship with words.

CTL
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']There's already one taking place, i.e., the stop-loss. Or in other words, "the unofficial draft".[/QUOTE]
First stop loss affects those already in the service and I have never seen anybody extended more than a year because of it. Coincidently the Air Force is trying to trim down folks.
 
[quote name='jlarlee']First stop loss affects those already in the service and I have never seen anybody extended more than a year because of it. Coincidently the Air Force is trying to trim down folks.[/QUOTE]

On the contrary, how about getting it extended 26 more years after your 8 years are up?
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']On the contrary, how about getting it extended 26 more years after your 8 years are up?[/QUOTE]

I think you have misunderstood and its easy to see why because it is not something you would know/understand off the top of your head. The 26 years represents the maximum length of time he could serve under any circumstance. That does not mean that they have imposed a 26 year stop loss.

And Santiago either doesn't understand it or purposefully misrepresented to the writer.

It is very common when I do certain paperwork for myself that I have to include my mandatory retirement date which is decades away, but that doesn't mean I am obligated to serve all that time.

Bottom line: if you properly end your service with the military they can call you back within one year for a reasonable length of time. That isn't because of this war - thats the way its always been.

CTL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top