What is Kerry's position on bringing back the draft?

[barbaraann]

Here's a paragraph from his website that makes me worry:

"Supply Our Military Commanders with the Additional Troops Requested. We have to succeed in Iraq. We simply can’t allow it to become a failed state. That would mean a victory for extremism, new dangers in the Middle East and a breeding ground for anti-American terrorism. To succeed, we are going to need more forces on a temporary basis. Our commanders on the ground have requested it. We should provide it."

(Apologies if I have missed a Kerry statement about the draft.)

[onehandle]

1. Against it....

“They are not the same in terms of goals and purpose. The war on terror is very different,” he said. “Iraq is a place where we need to have a success in the end.”

Kerry also said he doesn’t believe there is a need to reinstate the draft, a source of conflict during the Vietnam War.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/clips/news_2003_1203a.html

[Jacobin]

2. So, where's he gonna get the troops for this "must win" war?

Keeping in mind that the U.N. has NO troops, it must get them from other countries.

I smell a large rat.

[onehandle]

3. Are you calling the Democratic Nominee a "large rat"? nt

[Jacobin]

7. Please adjust your reading glasses

Sometimes I do actually believe that Kerry is a large rat. Like when he voted for IWR.

At this moment, I "smell a large rat", meaning (if you require translation) that his requirement that we "win the Iraqi invasion" and the fact that foreign troops are leaving in droves and american forces are NOT re-enlisting in droves simply does not compute.

In other words, I believe he may be getting himself into a position with the two conflicting goals of not telling the truth. Or, if you prefer, of lying.

BTW, I reserve the right as an american to call any politico a "rat" and don't feel that I need your permission to do so.

OKAY?

[onehandle]

10. Out of curiosity...

Where are you getting the must "win the Iraqi invasion" quote?

[Jacobin]

12. Gee, haven't you heard him speak lately?

Okay. I'll play.
Give me a minute to google for you.

On edit. How odd. I just clicked on the link in your sig line and found the answer to your question.

We have to succeed in Iraq. We simply can’t allow it to become a failed state. That would mean a victory for extremism, new dangers in the Middle East and a breeding ground for anti-American terrorism. To succeed, we are going to need more forces on a temporary basis. Our commanders on the ground have requested it. We should provide it.

And a thousand apologies for slightly misquoting him. If you disagree that the two sentences mean the same thing, then I suppose we just have a different opinion of IraqNam, perhaps because of my two soon to be draft age sons.

Have a nice day

[Brotherjohn]

16. I understand your concern, if your sons are that age.

My wife wants to move to Canada because our daughter is merely 14 (and I'm not even sure if they'll draft women even if a draft comes about).

But she wants to do it if BUSH is re-(s)elected.

As for Kerry, you may fear he'd do the same thing, but I'd have to say it's much less likely. As I posted below, I believe Kerry is infinitely more flexible (and thinking) than Bush and can and will adjust based on what is happenening in Iraq. And all he has said so far is that "we are going to need more forces on a temporary basis". Oh, and also that "he doesn’t believe there is a need to reinstate the draft".

Doesn't scare me much (sounds pretty reasonable, actually). But even if it did, Bush's actions scare me orders of magnitude more. Think of the potential for a draft if, on top of the mess in Iraq, we go into Syria, or North Korea...

[Feanorcurufinwe]

25. In other words, you fabricated it. There is no such quote.

[barbaraann]

18. "We have to succeed in Iraq."

From the passage I quoted.

www.johnkerry.com

[Jacobin]

19. Same quotes from Vietraq, or is it IraqNam

Same hubris, same stubborness, same unwillingness to understand cultures different from our own, same idiocy, same brazen stupidity and it doesn't end until people are shot in droves in mass protests, draft boards are burned down, thousands upon thousands are brought home in transfer tubes, and millions of innocents are dead.

I hope like Hell I'm wrong about Kerry and IraqNam, but right now he is saying the same shit that got so many young people from this country killed and millions of Vietnamese killed...........all for nothing.

Yeah, I'll vote for him because there is no choice. But, I don't have to like it.

[Brotherjohn]

9. It isn't hard to conceive that by a sincere appeal to the U.N....

... accompanied by real action and commitment by the U.S., would encourage other countries to pitch in more. Or at least would stem the violence somewhat, allowing for a less harmful withdrawal. Bush has shown no signs of such action.

Also, as Welsey Clark suggests, a real change in focus in what those troops are doing there could help quell the violence and get them out earlier, and get help in earlier... i.e., actual policing, and not bull-dozing homes of suspected "terrorists" relatives and laying siege to entire cities where atrocities happen.

Let's not forget as well that Kerry is somewhat more flexible than Bush (to say the least). Unlike Bush, he is willing and able to adjust his reaction as the situation on the ground changes. He may say more troops now, and "we can't afford to lose". But that is a cost-benefits analysis that may change if the costs rise significantly.

Bush isn't big on "cost-benefits" analyses.

[Jacobin]

11. Those are good points

He may be able to pull that off, and there is no doubt that Bush* can't.

However, I'm afraid that by January 20, 2005, Iraq will be in absolute and total chaos and the number of troops to "fix it" will be in the hundreds of thousands.

[Brotherjohn]

15. If that is the case, by that time, the American people will say "enough".

They may be slow, but they have been much quicker to pick up on this than they were with Viet Nam. The s*** hit the fan for Bush 2 weeks ago with a bad start to April. Imagine if it gets several times worse. People will see it as his mistake, his "Viet Nam". If that happens, he WILL lose. That is why he is so firm on the June 30th deadline: he's trying to wash his hands. He can't afford to have the situation you propose to come to fruition. If it does, but we're "out" of Iraq (if only symbolically), there's a chance most Americans will see it as no longer our problem.

Kerry may have said we should provide "more forces on a temporary basis" if the generals are requesting it, but that sounds pretty qualified to me. He'd be crazy to get on a "draft bandwagon" (a bandwagon which I don't think will ever exist).

Hagel is only broaching the subject in another desperate attempt by Republicans to pre-emptively control the dialogue on an issue which they know is going to hurt them. Facts on the ground in Iraq have made them repeatedly resort to this tactic, but all it can do is stem the bleeding. They are up against a wall.

[onehandle]

4. Also, please provide a link next time. nt

[barbaraann]

13. Okay, apologies for that, too!

I just figured DUers were on the ball enough to know the url for John Kerry's website. :-)

[cheezus]

5. on mtp it sounded like we'd settle for an islamic dictatorship

if we couldn't get a democracy.

how do you ask a man to be the last to die for a mistake?

[nickinSTL]

6. Draft

:eyes:

Go ahead, vote for someone other than Kerry.

That'll ensure Bush will be calling up a draft within 6 months of the election.

[Jacobin]

8. Yeah, Kerry's draft will be kinder and gentler

Don't tell that to a father of two soon to be draft age sons.

Just don't

[onehandle]

14. See reply #1 nt

[emulatorloo]

17. see reply 5 EOM

[nickinSTL]

26. draft

My point was, will you vote for a guaranteed draft, Bush, or an unlikely draft, Kerry?

[Walt Starr]

27. I do not think the draft is unlikely with Kerry

The likelihood of a draft under Kerry is identical to the likelihood of a draft under Bush, IMO.

That is to say, there WILL BE A DRAFT, REGARDLESS OF WHO WINS!

[nickinSTL]

29. draft

Then, why are you even debating it? If you're convinced that either way, there will be a draft, why bother asking whether Kerry will oppose a draft?

Personally, I think if Bush institutes a draft before the election (it looks like some people are trying to force his hand on that score) he'll lose. It's one thing for him to send people who volunteered to serve of to die, but to send unwilling Americans...I think it'd destroy him.

However, I don't really think Kerry will institute a draft (and I think he'd have to come out against it if Bush's hand is forced)

Kerry would avoid a draft by doing what he's been pledging to do throughout his campaign, to go to the UN, and to our allies, and to try to bring allied forces in to alleviate some of the stress on our military.

[karabekian]

20. well considering its only Democrats calling for the draft

I think its premature and inacurate to believe that there will be a draft. Not that I will change your mind but I just don't see it happening.

[Walt Starr]

22. There will be a draft regardless

Bush or Kerry, it doesn't matter. Something must give and regardless of who is sitting in the White House come January 20, 2005, there will be a draft started no later than June 2005.

Both men supported an aggressive attack on a beaten nation that was no threat whatsoever to the United States. Both men are committed to "staying the course". Both men will have no choice but to reinstate the draft.

[kiahzero]

30. I wish I could live in a fantasy world too!

"There's no difference! There's no difference!"

You know what happened in Somalia after we pulled out? It's a failed state now. There's no government; the closest thing there is gangs. You know what that's a breeding ground for? That's right, terrorists.

Do you really think it's in the world's best interest to let a nation with a large amount of resources go belly-up, leaving it in anarchy?

I seem to recall the atrocities that guerrilas in Sierra Leone were able to fund with diamonds. I'm not exactly anxious to see what Islamic terrorist groups can do with oil money.

Not to mention the fact that the United States is LEGALLY OBLIGATED to make a good-faith effort to restore order to Iraq:

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/ihlfaqoccupation.htm
International humanitarian law provides that once an occupying power has assumed authority over a territory, it is obliged to restore and maintain, as far as possible, public order and safety.

[Killarney]

21. Put it this way

If Kerry is elected, we'll have to fix Iraq and that will be it (God willing).

If Bush is elected, we'll be in Iraq and then he'll also want to go for Iran and/or Syria (according to PNAC, Iran is next on the list), then Cheney will royally piss off N. Korea and something big will happen in Haiti and/or Venezuela because of the administration's inability to perform diplomacy. etc. etc. etc.

Bush = GUARANTEED DRAFT
Kerry = most-likely won't happen

[Walt Starr]

23. I disagree entirely.

Look at the positions of both men. There will be a draft regardless.

[wasichu]

24. you are right

and everyone will be telling us how great it is.

[rinsd]

28. Draft? I doubt it but......

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0227.html

Here's a press release/speech with Kerry talking about the need for 40,000 additional troops. We are not exactly turning them away at the recruitment office so I am curious as to how that would be done

"And to replenish our overextended military, as President, I will add 40,000 active-duty Army troops, a temporary increase likely to last the remainder of the decade."