I think America will reinstitute the army draft.

Posts: 707

Congree is already ready for it.

'CONGRESS READY TO RESURRECT DRAFT"
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/resurrect_draft.html

And America does not have enough soldiers to invade Iran and Syria. The reason for nuclear terrorism is because they want to bring the draft back alive. Bush'll think the american people would be useless during the coming hiked up oil prices because there would be huge unemployment and closed schools. So, he sends them or its children to war.

Posts: 100

They may not have to ... all they have to do is offer a few more bucks and more

Americans will be willing to kill others for money.

Rolling Eyes

Posts: 103

	blu wrote:
	They may not have to ... all they have to do is offer a few more bucks and more Americans will be willing to kill others for money.

And don't forget, it is all for your great nation, Israel.

Posts: 100

the_names_james wrote:

	blu wrote:
	They may not have to ... all they have to do is offer a few more bucks and more Americans will be willing to kill others for money.

And don't forget, it is all for your great nation, Israel.

Afghanistan and Vietnam was for Israel ???

If the Americans would simply follow the " thou shall NOT kill " commandment

most wars will be impossible to start. The Jews have the answers ... the goyim refuse

to learn. Rolling Eyes

Posts: 101

	blu wrote:
	If the Americans would simply follow the " thou shall NOT kill " commandment most wars will be impossible to start. The Jews have the answers ...

LOL. HAAAA! ROFL!!!! OH my god, OMG. You are f***ing hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh. And if they try to draft me, I'm going to go join the only army in the world that's fighting Zionism. Anyone? Anyone?

Posts: 103

blu wrote:

the_names_james wrote:

	blu wrote:
	They may not have to ... all they have to do is offer a few more bucks and more Americans will be willing to kill others for money.

And don't forget, it is all for your great nation, Israel.

Afghanistan and Vietnam was for Israel ???

If the Americans would simply follow the " thou shall NOT kill " commandment

most wars will be impossible to start. The Jews have the answers ... the goyim refuse

to learn. Rolling Eyes

The whole conflict in the Middle East right now is only going to help Israels goal.

And what are the answers?

Posts: 100

the_names_james wrote:

blu wrote:

the_names_james wrote:

	blu wrote:
	They may not have to ... all they have to do is offer a few more bucks and more Americans will be willing to kill others for money.

And don't forget, it is all for your great nation, Israel.

Afghanistan and Vietnam was for Israel ???

If the Americans would simply follow the " thou shall NOT kill " commandment

most wars will be impossible to start. The Jews have the answers ... the goyim refuse

to learn. Rolling Eyes

The whole conflict in the Middle East right now is only going to help Israels goal.

And what are the answers?

Even with the answer in front of him the goy can't figure it out.

Rolling Eyes

Posts: 101

	blu wrote:
	Even with the answer in front of him the goy can't figure it out.

I know, isn't that insane? Very Happy

Posts: 100

sharshur wrote:

	blu wrote:
	Even with the answer in front of him the goy can't figure it out.

I know, isn't that insane? Very Happy

It's Crazzzy and then they blame the Jew !

Very Happy

Posts: 101

	blu wrote:
	It's Crazzzy and then they blame the Jew !

Dude, do you even know who I am? We've been replying to each other over and over. Are you retarded or something? I was being sarcastic! Man, you are delusional AND you have a low IQ.

You are hilarious!

Posts: 100

I'm glad that I amuse you.

Very Happy

Posts: 5

hey if the reinstate it well we haev to go. we dont have muchof a choice. I suport my troops 110% but on my personal leveal I would nto want to join but I will if I have to.

Posts: 8248

You don't have to go, and if you do go, you don't have to fight. What many of them are doing over there is treason.

Last edited by madthumbs on Tue May 08, 2007 5:29 pm; edited 1 time in total

Posts: 4

Draft? I was fearing this word would begin to raise its ugly head in the coming Months, and i'm not even American. With all the sabre rattling going on over Iran - a Country who cannot be invaded WITHOUT a draft, points to one thing....

A very, very, very bloody war.

If they put the USA to war against Iran, then its the end of the US experiment as we know it. It looks like the bloodsuckers are about to drop from the pale US cadaver at any moment.

Edit: Did someone say an army fighting zionists? Sign me up!

Posts: 2699

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?storyID=7062

Quote:

Iraq is so far from a conclusion that the US may have to bring in a draft, robert fox reveals
The US is considering introducing a limited military draft if it is to keep its present force levels in Iraq and Afghanistan, Pentagon advisers have warned British colleagues. Next month, US forces in Iraq will peak at around 170,000, and GIs in the new units are being told they could be on operations for at least 15 months.

Over Memorial Day weekend, Americans have been faced by the grim statistic that in the year since the last Memorial Day, very nearly 1,000 US military have been killed in Iraq, and many more wounded. These are the worst casualty rates since the coalition invaded Iraq in March 2003.

British Army chiefs are mulling over a new report that reservists, mainly from the Territorial Army, are suffering combat stress worse than regulars because of lack of attention when they return home. Commanders are concerned by the high rate of young officers applying for voluntary redundancy when they return from Iraq and Afghanistan; in some frontline infantry battalions the rate of officers applying for early retirement is as high as 17 per cent.

"Morale is very high in these regiments when they are actually on operations," said a senior officer, speaking anonymously, "but the officers just say they've had enough, and they want to do something else now, thank you."

US-led operations in Iraq appear to have reached yet another turning point with the American commander, General David Petraeus, due to hand to Congress a report on his latest strategic thinking. He appears to have given up on the so-called 'surge' which has brought an extra 21,000 US troops to central Iraq. According to advance reports from Baghdad, the surge has failed because the Iraqi government and forces were not prepared to fulfill their promise to back it in word and deed. Last week, a US patrol shot dead an Iraqi in the act of concealing a roadside booby trap bomb – and discovered his identity card showed he was a sergeant in the new Iraqi army.

Gen Petraeus's plan B seems to focus on 'soft' power, getting the combatants inside Iraq - with the exception of al-Qaeda groups - to talk to each other and their sponsors in the neighbourhood, principally Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and its allies.

Yesterday saw the first face-to-face diplomatic negotiations between the US and Iran since Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic Revolution in Tehran in 1979. The US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, met his Iranian opposite number, Hassan Kazemi-Qomi, for four hours. The meeting was reported to be businesslike – though Crocker took the opportunity to warn Iran against arming the Shia militias and other extremists in Iraq.

Though the two sides agreed to a re-match of the meeting, it is clear they are pretty far apart. The US has been formally warned by Tehran for running spies and saboteurs in Iran's border provinces. There seems little chance than Iranian Revolutionary Guards are going to stop arming and training Shia militants against the British in the Basra sector.

To mix a metaphor, both the Americans and the British seem caught in a drifting impasse now in Iraq. They cannot go forward, nor suddenly pull out, for fear of triggering a major regional war – for which all the combustible ingredients are in place. Both London and Washington face the issue of forces and equipment reaching exhaustion point by this time next year.

Now even the Democrats in Congress have stepped back from setting a deadline for American forces to withdraw from Iraq. The only voices arguing for a sensible timetable are the two Democrat presidential front-runners Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The question for Britain now is whether Gordon Brown will follow the messianic policy laid down by Tony Blair, or cut loose and follow the counsels of Hillary and Barack.

The question is more than intriguing. It could be vital, and a lifesaver for our forces.