"I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft. I think to do so is hypocritical." - Rep. Charles Rangel
Is this the plan the Democrats think will win the war...?
Now, not to offend draftees (my family included), most military people today do not want a draft. We've got a motivated, educated, and dedicated military without a draft.
If I was Charlie Rangel *cough, cough*, I wouldn't be playing the draft straw man in front of the world. It was already voted down by a margin of close to 400 against (including Rangel). This is a pure media play...why?...not really sure.
What Charlie Rangel should say is that anyone who supports the war, but doesn't support troops with increased pay, bonuses, health care, veterans benefits, etc. is hypocritical. And while we're at it, let's stand up the 7th Light and a Marine Division and see what happens before the draft needs to be invoked.
I've said it before...I would activate everybody (Reserves, NG, Retired, IRR) with the message that you're
in for the duration of the war plus six months. Instead of a draft,
this would get most people to understand what is at stake and that we are committed to victory. It's a WWII mentality, rather than a "police action" mentality.
Expensive? You bet.
But it sure beats the hell out of losing and having to do it all over again in a few years.
Here's a draft that I could support: I would rather have seen a Zell Miller, Joe Lieberman or a Barry McCaffrey (or a Chuck "KickAssTakeNames" Ziegenfuss - see below) as SecDef ...let's get that draft going.
More ideas on how win this thing, below:
Chuck Ziegenfuss for Secretary of Defense. Hey, I think Zell Miller is being channeled. And he's pissed.
Eric Egland's piece in the Weekly Standard Six Steps to Victory.
An anonymous general's ideas for winning the war quickly in Time. I think this plan is suited for politics, more than victory...this is to show a quick success and reason for getting out, rather than winning a long term victory. I agree with a lot of it, though.