Get ready for the draft in 2005 guys.

[AirBorne]

A-FUCKIN-MEN Crunch! HUA!

the anti-war crowd cant grasp this though.....they know deep down that its a plausible argument, but they want ACTUAL PROOF on paper, on video, wutever.

They just sit around and bask in the mistakes of the govt, waiting for the next screw-up so they can say "told ya so..." its fuckin annoying! whiny little bitches

 

[thick]

damn right, they need it on paper or "proof". f'n idiots man. like i said in an earlier post "who gives a fuck about wmd's". That is the big point that they keep bringing up that really means jack shit. and anyone who honestly doesnt think iraq had them or was in the process of getting them needs some serious help

the anti-war crowd cant grasp this though.....they know deep down that its a plausible argument, but they want ACTUAL PROOF on paper, on video, wutever.

They just sit around and bask in the mistakes of the govt, waiting for the next screw-up so they can say "told ya so..." its fuckin annoying! whiny little bitches

 

[Manuel_Hung]

do u remember the inspector Ritter (US) that was on the UN inspection team. He kept saying the sanctions broke Iraq's back.....even with sadoms illegal oil deals...the did not have the money.....The US put 1,200 people in Iraq to find these weapons and they found none. They interigated hundreds of goverment officials and still got the same message....The UN inspection and the sanctions worked. David Kay said the same....Iraq wanted weapons especially nuclear but the sanctions and inspection would have mad that very hard to impossible.
By the way I don't really like the UN

I remeber before the war how Hannity and O'Riley mocked Ritter and blix...u don't see those cats around anymore do u????????

We need to hold are government accountable for thier actions.
This was the wrong war at the wrong time....we should be focusing on afghanastan.....Iran...do u rember israel bombing a nuclear plant in Iran??? The truely are a threat

This war will cost americans....especially working class folks a ton of money
A Yale economist used a framework to prepare a low-end war-cost estimate of $121 billion and a high-end estimate of $1.595 trillion. Each extreme was the result of a specific scenario: the low estimate assumed a short war with no complications, whereas $1.6 trillion would be the result of a protracted war with many complications. this was cited right after the war and most thought the low end would be correct....but things changed

This war was planned by wolfowitz in Bush 1!!!

Check this out guys it will only take a few minutes to read
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/etc/cron.html

Policy analysts note that there are many elements in the 2002 NSS document which bear a strong resemblance to recommendations presented in Paul Wolfowitz's controversial Defense Planning Guidance draft written in 1992 under the first Bush administration.

Revisiting Ritter on WMD
by Sean Gonsalves

According to the gospel of Matthew, the world's most famous woodworker said "a prophet is not without honor, except in his own country, and in his own house."

It may be a stretch to consider former UNSCOM weapons inspector Scott Ritter a prophet, but his pre-war warnings about the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq certainly appear prophetic today in light of David Kay's recent report.

What follows is the meat and potatoes of my interview with Ritter three years before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and one year after Ritter published a more detailed analysis in his book "Endgame."

SG: Can you tell me about the threat that Saddam Hussein poses to the Middle East region, in particular, and the world, in general?

Ritter: "Let's talk about the weapons. In 1991, did Iraq have a viable (WMD) capability? You're darn right they did. They had a massive chemical weapons program. They had a giant biological weapons program. They had long-range ballistic missiles and they had a nuclear weapons program that was about six months away from having a viable weapon.

"Now after seven years of work by UNSCOM inspectors, there was no more (WMD) program. It had been eliminated....When I say eliminated I'm talking about facilities destroyed...

"The weapons stock had been, by and large, accounted for - removed, destroyed or rendered harmless. Means of production had been eliminated, in terms of the factories that can produce this....There were some areas that we didn't have full accounting for...(U.N. Resolution) 687 required that Iraq be disarmed 100 percent. It's what they call 'quantitative disarmament.' Iraq will not be found in compliance until it has been disarmed to a 100 percent level. That's the standard set forth by the Security Council and as implementors of the Security Council resolution, the weapons inspectors had no latitude to seek to do anything less than that - 80 percent was not acceptable; 90 percent was not acceptable; only 100 percent was acceptable.

"And this was the Achilles tendon, so to speak, of UNSCOM. Because by the time 1997 came around, Iraq had been qualitatively disarmed. On any meaningful benchmark - in terms of defining Iraq's WMD capability; in terms of assessing whether or not Iraq posed a threat, not only to its immediate neighbors, but the region and the world as a whole - Iraq had been eliminated as such a threat....

"What was Iraq hiding? Documentation primarily - documents that would enable them to reconstitute, at a future date, WMD capability....But all of this is useless...unless Iraq has access to the tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars required to rebuild the industrial infrastructure (necessary) to build these weapons. They didn't have it in 1998. They don't have it today. This paranoia about what Iraq is doing now that there aren't weapons inspectors reflects a lack of understanding of the reality in Iraq.

"The economic sanctions have devastated this nation. The economic sanctions, combined with the effects of the (first) Gulf War, have assured that Iraq operate as a Third World nation in terms of industrial output and capacity...

"Now, having said that, I firmly believe we have to get weapons inspections back in for the purpose of monitoring...especially if we lift economic sanctions. There should be immediate lifting of economic sanctions in return for the resumption of meaningful arms inspections. Iraq would go for that.

"What Iraq is not going for is this so-called suspension of sanctions where the Iraqi economy is still controlled by the Security Council and held hostage to the whim of the United States...

"I, for one, believe that a.) Iraq represents a threat to no one, and b.) Iraq will not represent a threat to anyone if we can get weapons inspectors back in. Iraq will accept these inspectors if we agree to the immediate lifting of economic sanctions. The Security Council should re-evaluate Iraq's disarmament obligation from a qualitative standpoint and not quantitative standpoint."

Maybe now those who chose to keep their head in the sand will recover the lost art of questioning authority and demanding accountability.

 

[grisb81]

I know one thing I know my scepticism of the war and the whole fact of the matter is that Mr. Bush needed someone to attack or point the finger at in order gain publicity. Whether it was going into Iraq and getting WMD or going into Iran to get Charmin toilet paper it is all polititcal.

The good leaders of the country are long gone we are now faced with these worthless politician who don't know the first thing about leading a country rather the only thing that will achieve them more status.

I truly believe that we cannot just sit around and let these countries take advantage of us but at the same token one be open-minded and look at the big picture every time that we try to attack ,all that we are doing is feeding them more hatred and hatred towards our country and way of life. Where do you think that this hatred came from in the first place? It came from the first time Bush Sr. went over there and fought the worthless Desert Storm war. The future for our nation does not look very assuring.

They try to get me to join the draft I am going to get on my hands and knees and squack like a chicken, act fucking insane or something. If we had leaders that were truthful and could get there stories straight then I wouldn't mind being in the military, or fighting for my country. Bottom line is there isn't any way I am going to fight for our crooked ass government.

 

[garyzilla]

I know one thing I know my scepticism of the war and the whole fact of the matter is that Mr. Bush needed someone to attack or point the finger at in order gain publicity. Whether it was going into Iraq and getting WMD or going into Iran to get Charmin toilet paper it is all polititcal.

The good leaders of the country are long gone we are now faced with these worthless politician who don't know the first thing about leading a country rather the only thing that will achieve them more status.

I truly believe that we cannot just sit around and let these countries take advantage of us but at the same token one be open-minded and look at the big picture every time that we try to attack ,all that we are doing is feeding them more hatred and hatred towards our country and way of life. Where do you think that this hatred came from in the first place? It came from the first time Bush Sr. went over there and fought the worthless Desert Storm war. The future for our nation does not look very assuring.

They try to get me to join the draft I am going to get on my hands and knees and squack like a chicken, act fucking insane or something. If we had leaders that were truthful and could get there stories straight then I wouldn't mind being in the military, or fighting for my country. Bottom line is there isn't any way I am going to fight for our crooked ass government.

So what are you going to do to make our country better? I hear you and many people complaining, but no one really wanting to do anything about it, or try to make our country better. But lets be honest for better or worse there is no other country that you would rather live in! The United States is still the best country in the world!

-Pastor

 

[MANWHORE]

So what are you going to do, make out country better? I hear you and many people complaining, but no one really wanting to do anything about it, or try to make our country better. But lets be honest for better or worse there is no other country that you would rather live in! The United States is still the best country in the world!

-Pastor

Accually,i'd like to live in Australia or at least see how i like living there for awhile. My M.C. friends and i did plan to go back there to live,but when we got back home,to our families,one thing lead to another,and we just ended up staying here. Of course,your own country is always the best place for you to live,because you know it best and your family is probably there... It's just home..... Maybe i'll go to France Yeah OK I'll go there just so i can slap a few of those French fags around. I don't know about all this draft talk,but i sure as hell won't be going. Shit,i did my 4 years,and,besides,i joined the Corp to party not go to war. What the hell kind of Marine do you think i am?

 

[Hogg]

Personally, I focus on ethics, honesty, and integrity. I also try to steer the path of those a decade younger toward the proven model of respectable living. Mind you, I make no impact on government, yet I make an impact on people. Perhaps some day, what I believe in may rub off on others who join the ranks of politicians and they will be less likely to become deceivers and charlatains.

Indirectly, I believe I am making this country better by promoting the simple tenets of being a honest and respectable man.

So what are you going to do to make our country better? I hear you and many people complaining, but no one really wanting to do anything about it, or try to make our country better. But lets be honest for better or worse there is no other country that you would rather live in! The United States is still the best country in the world!

-Pastor

 

[Bob Smith]

Hogg, the world needs many, many more men like yourself. Keep up the good work trying to being a positive influence on those 10 years your junior.

Wait a minute....thats me!

 

[Ian Smith]

Maybe they will do it like the NFL draft, with seven rounds, and who ever gets picked first will get paid more. The Coast Gaurd would get the first pick.

 

[crunch76]

well to your guys who are skeptics of the war, i read most of your posts and you all make valid arguments, i just wana say that they defintly are looking at the big picture, thats whta iraq was, its an attempt to control that region, and yep wolfy and the other hawks have wanted this for a long ass time, they saw the invasion of kuait and the war with iraq as a perfect oppurtunity, like kids at christmas

they want a puppet regieme in that region, sure they would like it to be democratic and spread the almighty dollar and our policies, but trust me they will settle for a lesser form of control, dosent bother me at all, the region is fuckin backward, dont let frnace and germany get in your thinking, they are trying to make themselves stronger forces within the euopen union, fact of the matter is we are the ones to control the world,

britain has not only accepted this they encourage us to lead in this domination, even since the suez debacle britain has been careful to lay in the wake of the united states, from all the regular citizens crying about blair being bushs bitch, hes not, he and britian's leaders want this kind of foreign policy, and are happy to get it from the US

dont think this is vietnam, these chips are big, this is an all in situation, and if it fails, we are sooo fuckin screwed, our crediablity is shot, dont go assuming its shot now, creditablity does not = honesty, its is power , determination, not taking any shit from piss ant countries

this is control, our counrty has been in this dirty business for years and years, we supported fuck heads all over this world, dictators, murders, u name it, all for control, its about us and our place in the world, our world, you may not like it, and i see you point how this is planned and how it dosent all add up to the propaganda, but look at it this way, so fuckin what? fuck those creatins, they hate us anway, this wont make them hate us anymore, these people will kill us all fraekin day long, they hate all of the west, they are jealus, they live in shit, while we split the atom, the US is the leader of the west so we will be the lightning rod regardless,

anyway its control, and its an oppurtunity, kuait was first one, sept 11 gave them a second shot, they will spend a ton more money to, this is big

oh yea wolfawitz is an idiot, i read apaper where he said iraq was best suited for conversion to democracy cuase they only have one ethinic group, theres at least 3 that i know of, and not only that,l they all hate each other with a passion, ive done better reaserch for school then he does for the foregin policy of the strongest nation on earth, disturbing

too much type, nobody will read, lol

cliff notes- this war is control, control over an enitre region that is weak but vast and wont be weak for long, conrtol not bad, they suck, already hate us, dont kid yourself, hate the west, we lead the west, we are lighting rod for there propaganda of hate, which in reality is just so the people will acept thier shitty life and accept their enslavment, bombs away, iraq has a new daddy now

 

[Manuel_Hung]

Crunch u are right on target!.......the average american Doens't know who wolffowitz is or even care to know....and this is his war he built the doctrine and he thought we could over throw the government and have peace quickly!(The National Security Strategy NSS) is a document prepared for Congress to give them an idea what direction the administration is heading, what kind of resources they will need and how they see the long-term goals of America's security policy. Wolfowitz wrote about preemption well before 9/11...1992 was when he wrote te NSS and when Bush Junior won...hepulled outthe document with a few changes.


But the Bush administration insiders who helped define the "Bush Doctrine," and who have argued most forcefully for war, are determined to set a course that will remake America's role in the world. Having served three Republican presidents over the course of two decades, this group of close advisers -- among them Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and perhaps most importantly, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz -- believe that the removal of Saddam Hussein is the necessary first act of a new era.

Advisers -- calling themselves "neo-Reaganites," "neo-conservatives," or simply "hawks" -- set out to achieve the most dramatic change in American foreign policy in half a century: a grand strategy, formally articulated in the National Security Strategy released last September, that is based on preemption rather than containment and calls for the bold assertion of American power and influence around the world.....This shit was going on well before 9/11! 9/11 was an excuse to invade Iraq.....Shit I was convinced that Al Qaeda and WMD were there...I not much for the UN but Blix and Ritter kept saying Iraq was not a threat! The Informer that al queda was in Iraq turned out to be a fraud...there is no connection.....Lets blast Iran....the UN is saying they are a great threat and the younger folks there protest for a new government....they are very well educted people....but they are moving slowly because what they got after the Shaw was totaly unexpectd!

Wolfowitz basically authored a doctrine of American hegemony, a doctrine in which the United States would seek to maintain the position that it came out of the Cold War with, at which there were no obvious or plausible challengers to the United States. That was considered quite shocking in 1992. So shocking, in fact, that the Bush administration, at that time, disavowed it."

As the first President Bush left office, Wolfowitz's draft plan went into the bottom drawer, but it would not be forgotten.

"The War Behind Closed Doors" goes on to recount how the Clinton administration struggled to deal with Saddam Hussein's defiance of U.S. and U.N. containment policies, while hawks in the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party grew increasingly impatient.

With the election of George W. Bush in 2000, however, the hawks saw a new opportunity to implement a stronger, forward-leaning American stance in the world. Yet during the new president's first year in office, skirmishing between Colin Powell's State Department and Rumsfeld's Pentagon -- where Wolfowitz is now the second-ranking civilian -- left the adminstration's foreign policy stalled in a kind of internal gridlock.

All that would change on Sept. 11, 2001.

Four days after the attacks on New York and the Pentagon, President Bush and his Cabinet held a war council at Camp David. "From the first moments after Sept. 11, there was a group of people, both inside the administration and out, who believed that the war on terrorism should target Iraq -- in fact, should target Iraq first," says Kenneth Pollack, author of The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq (2002) and a former member of the National Security Council staff in the Clinton administration.

But Colin Powell and Gen. Henry Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, were determined to rein in the hawks. Powell's argument -- that an international coalition could only be assembled for a war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, not an invasion of Iraq -- won the day, and Iraq was put on the back burner.

Yet President Bush had made it clear that the U.S. would not stop at pursuing terrorists and bringing them to justice. "We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them," the president told the nation on the evening of Sept. 11.

Four months later, with the Taliban defeated and Al Qaeda largely dispersed, Bush was ready to move on to the next phase of the war on terrorism. In his State of the Union address, he laid the groundwork for an invasion of Iraq, tying Saddam Hussein's regime to terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. I believed our governmen not the UN....The UN and Powell said something very different that Iraq was disabledby the sanctions.

"States like these," Bush declared, "and their terrorist allies constitute an axis of evil arming to threaten the peace of the world. ... The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."

The stage was set. Phase two was underway, and preemption would get its test case. The president had set a course for the U.S. to use its military power not only to topple Saddam Hussein but to promote democracy in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. Wolfowitz and the hawks, by all appearances, had succeeded.

"I wrote a piece in the Post two days after the State of the Union," recalls William Kristol, editor of the influential neoconservative magazine The Weekly Standard, "saying we've just been present at a very unusual moment: the creation of a new American foreign policy."

"Dont think this is vietnam, these chips are big, this is an all in situation, and if it fails, we are sooo fuckin screwed, our crediablity is shot, dont go assuming its shot now, creditablity does not = honesty, its is power , determination, not taking any shit from piss ant countries" I believe this also Crunch...this is going to be a long struggle.

 

[crunch76]

great post bro, im always interested in the struggle between rummy wofl and powell, the hawks are defintly getting thier way on foregin policy, pres seems like the guy in the middle, but no question hawks have been winning this debate solidly, was a great frontline on this right before the war in iraq began,

wonder if powell will stay on if bush wins again, i wouldnt if i were him, his views arent takin seriously enough and then he has to go around the world trying to defend/ explain the imporantce of policy he dosent agree with, i gotta pick up woodward's book on all this, have you read it yet? ive heard some disturbing things about the president not needing to consult anyone becuase he talked to god, i know alot of people on here are pro religous and i dont mind it in leaders, but holy fuck lol, you gonna go to war and talk to imaginary people about it instead of experts, imo yikes, i heard good things about the pres in the book also, how bush was skeptical about the iraqies treating us like heros

oh and i gotta say tho, that rumsfeld is awsome, i know who he is and what he stands for, but hes got brass balls, wolfawitz is a shadowy creep, that dosent know the true implications of his own policies imo

 

[crunch76]

on your last sitation on the new American foregin policy

this new prememption strategy for foreign policy is huge, i dont know if most understand how big it is, certainly europe/russia does and are not happy lol, we truley are now an imperial power, there are no checks on our power, incredible, either side of the issue you gotta say wow, not since roman empire has this kind of power and use of it been seen, difficult with a uni polar world, if the hawks screw up iraq , premeption will go with it imo, if they succeed, this may become the norm, and nothing any other country can say about it will change it

 

[atlmo]

The Draft isnt going to happen any time soon. Some of you guys have no clue as to the power of the Amercian millitary once it has been unleashed. Thus far we have been fighting with one arm tied behind our backs, (why I dont know, Politics proabley) The point is if we really wanted to go in and clean house we could do that today, with the forces we have today. ON top of that we can increase force size simply by stepping up recruitment.

Iraq is one isolated place in the world where we are fighting. No one is going to institute the Draft which is a long term policy, just to solve a single isolated problme in one theater of operations.

Thats like buying a new 10,000 sq ft house becuase your inlaws are coming to spend the summer. It just doesnt make strategic sense.

Get a clue guys.

 

[crunch76]

The Draft isnt going to happen any time soon. Some of you guys have no clue as to the power of the Amercian millitary once it has been unleashed. Thus far we have been fighting with one arm tied behind our backs, (why I dont know, Politics proabley) The point is if we really wanted to go in and clean house we could do that today, with the forces we have today. ON top of that we can increase force size simply by stepping up recruitment.

Iraq is one isolated place in the world where we are fighting. No one is going to institute the Draft which is a long term policy, just to solve a single isolated problme in one theater of operations.

Thats like buying a new 10,000 sq ft house becuase your inlaws are coming to spend the summer. It just doesnt make strategic sense.

Get a clue guys.

unfortuantly it is a policy that is possible, your right we could desimate but thats not what we wana do, we want to do things like occupy, today ive heard an intersting spin from two senators one dem one repbulican, they say a draft of some kind of servie is a good idea not neccesarly combat, although combat would be one of many options of mandatory service, but they like the idea , and want to see a range of options most notable to free up military personal invloved in tasks here at home for operations abroad. this is not being kicked around by us, this is being debated by your congress, they want to capaitlize on what they see as the most patriotic sprit seen since world war II, this could happen, it wont be like vietnam draft for sure, but this is more than just us knucle heads debating it, it is brought up just about everyday now on the hill

 

[Manuel_Hung]

You must be a CSPAN listner and watcher like my self crunch.....if things stillgoing wrong in Iraq in 2005....they will reinstate the draft in 2005 a dem or rep if things are still jacked up over there.....They need more troop strength< Rumfeld is keeping more troops over their for extended periods of time! We don't have the man power....Wolfowitz said we are spread thin...He said if another attack is warrented then we may not have enough manpower to handle it!

 

[Massmonster32]

We have a all voluntary army it will 99% chance remain that way unless we had to fight two major battles at once now. We used to be prepared for 2 battle fields at once but no longer. Dont worry their is always gona be enough people who want to join so that the ones who are scared or take their freedom for granted dont have to.

Today we have to many people who just want to take take take give nothing back no community service, no voluntaring, no service time, just handout. People dont even want to work now days kids are living at home till they hit their friggin 30s. People are getting mad that the rich are so over taxed when they get a break. They pay more so should get more back hello. No I work enough just to get EIC or whatever a check back at the end of the year. This country is going through changes unfortuanately its like life deal with it. MM

 

[Manuel_Hung]

We have a all voluntary army it will 99% chance remain that way unless we had to fight two major battles at once now. We used to be prepared for 2 battle fields at once but no longer. Dont worry their is always gona be enough people who want to join so that the ones who are scared or take their freedom for granted dont have to.

Today we have to many people who just want to take take take give nothing back no community service, no voluntaring, no service time, just handout. People dont even want to work now days kids are living at home till they hit their friggin 30s. People are getting mad that the rich are so over taxed when they get a break. They pay more so should get more back hello. No I work enough just to get EIC or whatever a check back at the end of the year. This country is going through changes unfortuanately its like life deal with it. MM

But a Key Dems's are warning to Congressman Rangel: you're playing with fire. Come January, if Bush is sworn in again, he'll tell Tom DeLay to run with your bill and then say it was the idea of the Democrats to reinstate the draft. Bush will have no choice, from a manpower standpoint. The overextended Neo-Con empire needs more troops than a volunteer army and dragooned National Guard can provide. Just do the numbers.

You're unlikely to hear much about these efforts during the campaign season, however, though some signals have leaked out intermittently. Last year, for example, we learned that the Selective Service System had begun a concentrated effort to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots. It also received a budget increase of $28 million for fiscal year 2004, and it wasn't for new curtains. Consider Strategic Objective 1.2: "Ensure a mobilization infrastructure of 56 State Headquarters, 442 Area Offices and 1,980 Local Boards are operational within 75 days of an authorized return to conscription."

Hearst Newspapers reported in March that the first steps "toward a targeted military draft of Americans with special skills in computers and foreign languages" were in the preliminary stages. The story, by Eric Rosenberg, continues:

The Selective Service System has begun the process of creating the procedures and policies to conduct such a targeted draft in case military officials ask Congress to authorize it and the lawmakers agree to such a request. Richard Flahavan, a spokesman for the Selective Service System, said planning for a possible draft of linguists and computer experts had begun last fall after Pentagon personnel officials said the military needed more people with skills in those areas. [...] "We want to gear up and make sure we are capable of providing (those types of draftees) since that's the more likely need," the spokesman said, adding that it could take about two years to "to have all the kinks worked out."

The agency already has in place a special system to register and draft health care personnel ages 20 to 44 in more than 60 specialties if necessary in a crisis. According to Flahavan, the agency will expand this system to be able to rapidly register and draft computer specialists and linguists, should the need ever arise. But he stressed that the agency had received no request from the Pentagon to do so.

Once the story broke, the Selective Service System published the latest in a string of denials on its website. At this point, however, those denials have become irrelevant. They are apparently processing applications to fill the seats on the boards.

In the March issue of The Atlantic Monthly, James Fallows neatly summarizes the reality of the situation: "The military's people, its equipment, its supplies and spare parts, its logistics systems, and all its other assets are under pressure they cannot sustain. Everything has been operating on an emergency basis for more than two years, with no end to the emergency in sight. The situation was serious before the invasion of Iraq; now it is acute." His argument for action -- in some form -- is cogent and clear:

Logically speaking, it's easy to see a solution to the military's problems. But politically, it's hard, because the solution necessarily involves one or more of the following: The United States can cut back on its promises and commitments. Or it can spend significantly more money to attract enough soldiers to a volunteer force. Or it can find ways other than voluntary enlistment to bring them in. Some advantages and disadvantages of each approach are obvious; others will emerge only with debate. But the next President will have to take some or all of these steps.

If the next president is Bush, then we know where this is headed. "We must stay the course because the end result is in our nation's interest," the president said during the Q&A of his press conference. And that means the U.S. is not backing out of Iraq -- not for a long while. There may be no optiopn for Keery either.

The military has already wasted millions of dollars trying to boost recruitment through entertainment like NASCAR. Not surprisingly, recruitment goals have fallen far short of expectations. Current soldiers, meanwhile, have made it clear that they want out. Not even signing bonuses are coaxing them to re-enlist. Why go through this mess again?

The draft is the only remaining option. Bush will start implementing a draft through reactivation of the Selective Service Boards, shortly after he is sworn in for a second term.