I think George bush should commemorate the anniversary of 9/11 by visiting the Trade Center site and announce that the draft is being re-instated. I can see all the Young Republicans wildly cheering and "hoo-rah"ing now.

Back in the Age of Aquarius, I was two years too young to be drafted for the Vietnam War. But if Vietnam had continued, I would have gone.

Now, I have ten nephews and nieces who are the right age to be drafted for Iraq and Iran and wherever else! I hope they all move to Canada. Take me instead!

Sooner or later, the military draft is coming back. National service is not an option when things start to get serious.

Thanks to Rumsfeld's doctrine of "war on the cheap" our military is now not capable of defending us if the shit hits the fan in the Western Pacific and in the Middle East at the same time. Instead of a measured response using troops and conventional arms, in a real emergency, not a phony one cocked up by Neocon fanatics, our only option is strategic first-strike nuclear weapons.

This is not about Iraq anymore. That little skirmish is almost over. Everyone had better understand what the Pentagon war-fighters and long-term military strategists have cooked up for you "over the next horizon."

That's how they talk at the military think tanks: "Horizons." As the sun sets on one military adventure like Iraq, eyes have already turned to the task of anticipating the next "horizon."

I don't think American "psyches" are sufficiently prepared to face what's coming next.

The basic reason why armed forces exist at all is to defend a nation. When an armed force of a nation becomes weak, as Rumsfeld has weakened our military, then other countries will exploit this opportunity.

So there's going to be a draft folks. Oh yes. And when the government gets ready to do it, you can expect that all broadcast and cable media will be behind it 100 percent, just like last time.

So, is Jack Reed saying that he is in favor of a draft to keep the military from being stretched too thin? I don't understand how else you are supposed to "increase the size of the military" when they already have a problem getting new recruits to keep it at it's current size.

Maybe he is admitting that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is removing some of the most qualified and talented candidates from the pool.

Maybe he is advocating lowering the admissions standards to that the autistic don't keep slipping away from us.

Maybe, everyone who enlists will be promised a pony.

Bush and his minions will be doing everything they can to avoid a draft. The minute they announce a draft to fight the never-ending "war on terror", he will lose the last dregs of popular support he has. Do you think any of the neo-con pundits will let their kids get drafted? I don't think so!

I heard a radio commercial yesterday that shows where the military's collective head is at, so to speak.

It was for the U.S. Navy and featured an announcer pretending to be a surfer-dude who was pumped up about working in military intelligence and still having plenty of time off to be a surfer in California. "Work hard, play hard" was the theme. Unfortunately, some guys and gals will fall for that spiel...and wind up in Iraq or Afghanistan. Didn't know there were totally awesome beaches there...

I say George Bush should offer up the twins for volunteer service to Iraq. Think of all the fan fare and jubilant neo-con crowing of the deployment of his kids, say, outside of Faluja, or better yet guarding a check point on the road to Bagdad's airport.

I'll "donate" my son ten minutes after he donates his daughters. Make that twenty minutes. After all he started this quagmire, not me.

"George Bush should offer up the twins for volunteer service to Iraq"

Sounds like an episode of the now defunct "Taradise" on E! Tara Reid stumbled her way from hotspot to hotspot (like South Beach, Capri, etc) with a blood alcohol level that never dropped below .08! I would definitely tune in to see the Bush twins in action in "hotspots" like Baghdad, Fallujah, etc.

Thye only draft that is worth it comes from the barkeeper, not nut Rumsfeld.

Once again, lost in the debate are the soldiers themselves. The hawks don't care, and the doves fret about the draft, tomorrow's military commitments, etc ... everything but the people directly affected by this unbelievably callous decison: the Marines who have to return yet again to Bush's folly. They must be wondering just how many bullets are in the chamber in this little game of Russian roulette they're being ordered to play. Yeah, some may argue they knew it could happen. But could they have known their president would would ask them to risk their lives over and over again simply because he's too stupid or unwilling to admit he's wrong? I'm really sorry.

The most (perhaps, only) positive aspect of a Draft is that it hits virtually every American directly, which means that as a whole we (and therefore Congress) won't be willing to go off to war when our leaders haven't given enough real justification. I think our Iraq invasion would have failed that test, since the Draft would have given reporters more incentive to ask real questions (since their viewers/readers would actually care!).

But we also shouldn't have a permanent Draft -- we don't want to live in a permanent state of war. So what's the best way to activate/deactivate it?

How about this: Congress should pass a law that reinstates the Draft whenever there is a deployment of more than, say, 30,000 troops into hostile environments (aggregate, worldwide), and then ends it when the deployment drops below that number.

I think this makes fundamental sense -- not just as some kind of political ploy. If the nation is engaged in enough hostilities worldwide to require those kinds of troop numbers, then the American People had better be fully behind it -- which means they must all be committed to contribute personally to the effort.

For example (ignoring Iraq), if things in N. Korea got so bad that a shooting war started -- that is, it became a hostile situation -- then the troops we have stationed there, plus any others we send in, would suddenly count towards the 30k limit. That scenario would therefore make it very politically dangerous for our leaders to ignore or even de-prioritize diplomatic solutions beforehand.

Of course, politically, it will be impossible to pass this law until we get our troops out of Iraq -- or we're otherwise forced to activate the Draft anyways.