"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ups.com...

P. Fritz wrote:

Noted is how doug ran from the draft question..........only
liebrals in
congress have been calling for a draft.

Another idiotic, fact free statement from Fritz!!! Here's the truth,
Fritz, taking for account that you can comprehend anything:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:

That comes up blank for me, at least in Netscape. Wanna summarize it?

It's a bill that calls for mandatory military *training* and *education*
for all males aged 18-22. There is no provision in the bill to transfer
a trainee to active duty and ship him over seas...although there is a
provision to complete the training in a "national service program".

It's hardly a "draft".

http://tinyurl.com/c4x3f


It should be defeated on its face. Mandatory "military" training indeed,
and only for males? B.S.

The IDF has mandatory duty requirements...as does Belarus, Brazil,
Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cypress, Egypt, Finland, Germany, Greece,
Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Singapore,
South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, and Venezuela.

This bill isn't calling for draftees to enter active duty. Instead, it's
calling for mandatory military training and education, so that we're ready
on a moments notice if a draft becomes necessary. I don't necessarily
support it, because I don't think it's needed at the moment. However, as
we continue to head further down this collision course we're on with
China, it might become prudent and necessary.


Would you support the idea of no exclusions for *any* reason, including
physical handicaps, college, etc? Handcuffs for parents who try to arrange
exceptions, same thing that sometimes happens if you hand a traffic cop a
$20.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that good enough for you, Doug?


No, it's not.

By the way, why do you suppose this sort of violence was not going on
before we arrived? Keep in mind that your first response will probably
be flung out the window, and go for the second response, to save us all
some time.

First response: because you're in idiot (I figured I had a freebie there
since you already told me you were throwing it out).

Second response: because bin Laden's goal (as described by his 1996
Fatwa) was to toss the U.S. out of the Middle East, sieze control of
Saudi Arabia, and use its oil to finance an Islamic state. The problems
with his plan arose when we voluntarily surrendered Saudi Arabia and
planted 170,000 troops in the 2nd most oil-rich country in the
region...which just so happens to be on the border of the #1 oil-rich
country that bin Laden and his fellow Salifis hoped to sieze.

Great! But, I thought we were supposed to give the Iraqi people a safer,
more civilized country.

We got them started, but it's up to them to build that themselves.

Your president said "Mission Accomplished". When do you think this goal
might be achieved?

When US oil imports from Iraq equal or exceed imports from Saudi Arabia.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ups.com...

P. Fritz wrote:

Noted is how doug ran from the draft question..........only
liebrals in
congress have been calling for a draft.

Another idiotic, fact free statement from Fritz!!! Here's the truth,
Fritz, taking for account that you can comprehend anything:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:

That comes up blank for me, at least in Netscape. Wanna summarize it?

It's a bill that calls for mandatory military *training* and
*education* for all males aged 18-22. There is no provision in the
bill to transfer a trainee to active duty and ship him over
seas...although there is a provision to complete the training in a
"national service program".

It's hardly a "draft".

http://tinyurl.com/c4x3f


It should be defeated on its face. Mandatory "military" training indeed,
and only for males? B.S.

The IDF has mandatory duty requirements...as does Belarus, Brazil,
Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cypress, Egypt, Finland, Germany, Greece,
Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Singapore,
South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, and Venezuela.

This bill isn't calling for draftees to enter active duty. Instead, it's
calling for mandatory military training and education, so that we're
ready on a moments notice if a draft becomes necessary. I don't
necessarily support it, because I don't think it's needed at the moment.
However, as we continue to head further down this collision course we're
on with China, it might become prudent and necessary.


Would you support the idea of no exclusions for *any* reason, including
physical handicaps, college, etc?

No. All of the aforementioned countries have exceptions...as should we.

Handcuffs for parents who try to arrange exceptions, same thing that
sometimes happens if you hand a traffic cop a $20.

The cops down here require a couple hundred.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...


P. Fritz wrote:

Noted is how doug ran from the draft question..........only liebrals
in
congress have been calling for a draft.


Another idiotic, fact free statement from Fritz!!! Here's the truth,
Fritz, taking for account that you can comprehend anything:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:


That comes up blank for me, at least in Netscape. Wanna summarize it?

It's a bill that calls for mandatory military *training* and *education*
for
all males aged 18-22. There is no provision in the bill to transfer a
trainee to active duty and ship him over seas...although there is a
provision to complete the training in a "national service program".

It's hardly a "draft".

http://tinyurl.com/c4x3f


Poor Kevin.....shoot and misses once again.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ups.com...

P. Fritz wrote:

Noted is how doug ran from the draft question..........only
liebrals in
congress have been calling for a draft.

Another idiotic, fact free statement from Fritz!!! Here's the
truth,
Fritz, taking for account that you can comprehend anything:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:

That comes up blank for me, at least in Netscape. Wanna summarize
it?

It's a bill that calls for mandatory military *training* and
*education* for all males aged 18-22. There is no provision in the
bill to transfer a trainee to active duty and ship him over
seas...although there is a provision to complete the training in a
"national service program".

It's hardly a "draft".

http://tinyurl.com/c4x3f


It should be defeated on its face. Mandatory "military" training
indeed,
and only for males? B.S.

The IDF has mandatory duty requirements...as does Belarus, Brazil,
Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cypress, Egypt, Finland, Germany, Greece,
Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Singapore,
South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Venezuela.

This bill isn't calling for draftees to enter active duty. Instead,
it's
calling for mandatory military training and education, so that we're
ready on a moments notice if a draft becomes necessary. I don't
necessarily support it, because I don't think it's needed at the
moment.
However, as we continue to head further down this collision course
we're
on with China, it might become prudent and necessary.


Would you support the idea of no exclusions for *any* reason, including
physical handicaps, college, etc?

No. All of the aforementioned countries have exceptions...as should we.

Handcuffs for parents who try to arrange exceptions, same thing that
sometimes happens if you hand a traffic cop a $20.

The cops down here require a couple hundred.

And of course, you are talking about a 4 year old bill with one co-sponsor,
introduced during the 9-11 hysteria, that has gone absolutely nowhere.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that good enough for you, Doug?


No, it's not.

By the way, why do you suppose this sort of violence was not going on
before we arrived? Keep in mind that your first response will probably
be flung out the window, and go for the second response, to save us all
some time.

First response: because you're in idiot (I figured I had a freebie
there since you already told me you were throwing it out).

Second response: because bin Laden's goal (as described by his 1996
Fatwa) was to toss the U.S. out of the Middle East, sieze control of
Saudi Arabia, and use its oil to finance an Islamic state. The problems
with his plan arose when we voluntarily surrendered Saudi Arabia and
planted 170,000 troops in the 2nd most oil-rich country in the
region...which just so happens to be on the border of the #1 oil-rich
country that bin Laden and his fellow Salifis hoped to sieze.

Great! But, I thought we were supposed to give the Iraqi people a safer,
more civilized country.

We got them started, but it's up to them to build that themselves.

Your president said "Mission Accomplished". When do you think this goal
might be achieved?

When US oil imports from Iraq equal or exceed imports from Saudi Arabia.



This is wonderful. You've finally admitted that everything on your
president's list of reasons was nonsense.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ups.com...

P. Fritz wrote:

Noted is how doug ran from the draft question..........only
liebrals in
congress have been calling for a draft.

Another idiotic, fact free statement from Fritz!!! Here's the truth,
Fritz, taking for account that you can comprehend anything:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:

That comes up blank for me, at least in Netscape. Wanna summarize it?

It's a bill that calls for mandatory military *training* and
*education* for all males aged 18-22. There is no provision in the
bill to transfer a trainee to active duty and ship him over
seas...although there is a provision to complete the training in a
"national service program".

It's hardly a "draft".

http://tinyurl.com/c4x3f


It should be defeated on its face. Mandatory "military" training
indeed, and only for males? B.S.

The IDF has mandatory duty requirements...as does Belarus, Brazil,
Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cypress, Egypt, Finland, Germany, Greece,
Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Singapore,
South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Venezuela.

This bill isn't calling for draftees to enter active duty. Instead,
it's calling for mandatory military training and education, so that
we're ready on a moments notice if a draft becomes necessary. I don't
necessarily support it, because I don't think it's needed at the moment.
However, as we continue to head further down this collision course we're
on with China, it might become prudent and necessary.


Would you support the idea of no exclusions for *any* reason, including
physical handicaps, college, etc?

No. All of the aforementioned countries have exceptions...as should we.

No. It's too easy for rich parents to stick their kid in grad school, while
a poor kid might not get that opportunity. As far as physical handicaps, the
military contains just about every type of job that exists for civilians. If
you can work outside the military, you can work within it.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that good enough for you, Doug?


No, it's not.

By the way, why do you suppose this sort of violence was not going on
before we arrived? Keep in mind that your first response will probably
be flung out the window, and go for the second response, to save us
all some time.

First response: because you're in idiot (I figured I had a freebie
there since you already told me you were throwing it out).

Second response: because bin Laden's goal (as described by his 1996
Fatwa) was to toss the U.S. out of the Middle East, sieze control of
Saudi Arabia, and use its oil to finance an Islamic state. The
problems with his plan arose when we voluntarily surrendered Saudi
Arabia and planted 170,000 troops in the 2nd most oil-rich country in
the region...which just so happens to be on the border of the #1
oil-rich country that bin Laden and his fellow Salifis hoped to sieze.

Great! But, I thought we were supposed to give the Iraqi people a safer,
more civilized country.

We got them started, but it's up to them to build that themselves.

Your president said "Mission Accomplished". When do you think this goal
might be achieved?

When US oil imports from Iraq equal or exceed imports from Saudi Arabia.



This is wonderful. You've finally admitted that everything on your
president's list of reasons was nonsense.

I didn't "finally" admit it. I said that it was about oil three years ago.

Doug Kanter wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


P. Fritz wrote:

Noted is how doug ran from the draft question..........only liebrals in
congress have been calling for a draft.


Another idiotic, fact free statement from Fritz!!! Here's the truth,
Fritz, taking for account that you can comprehend anything:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:


That comes up blank for me, at least in Netscape. Wanna summarize it?

Doug, it's House Bill HR3598, here's the first few lines:

Universal Military Training and Service Act of 2001 (Introduced in
House)

HR 3598 IH


107th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 3598
To require the induction into the Armed Forces of young men registered
under the Military Selective Service Act, and to authorize young women
to volunteer, to receive basic military training and education for a
period of up to one year.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

December 20, 2001
Mr. SMITH of Michigan (for himself and Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania)
introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on
Armed Services



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To require the induction into the Armed Forces of young men registered
under the Military Selective Service Act, and to authorize young women
to volunteer, to receive basic military training and education for a
period of up to one year

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ups.com...

P. Fritz wrote:

Noted is how doug ran from the draft question..........only
liebrals in
congress have been calling for a draft.

Another idiotic, fact free statement from Fritz!!! Here's the
truth,
Fritz, taking for account that you can comprehend anything:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:

That comes up blank for me, at least in Netscape. Wanna summarize
it?

It's a bill that calls for mandatory military *training* and
*education* for all males aged 18-22. There is no provision in the
bill to transfer a trainee to active duty and ship him over
seas...although there is a provision to complete the training in a
"national service program".

It's hardly a "draft".

http://tinyurl.com/c4x3f


It should be defeated on its face. Mandatory "military" training
indeed, and only for males? B.S.

The IDF has mandatory duty requirements...as does Belarus, Brazil,
Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cypress, Egypt, Finland, Germany, Greece,
Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Singapore,
South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Venezuela.

This bill isn't calling for draftees to enter active duty. Instead,
it's calling for mandatory military training and education, so that
we're ready on a moments notice if a draft becomes necessary. I don't
necessarily support it, because I don't think it's needed at the
moment. However, as we continue to head further down this collision
course we're on with China, it might become prudent and necessary.


Would you support the idea of no exclusions for *any* reason, including
physical handicaps, college, etc?

No. All of the aforementioned countries have exceptions...as should we.

No. It's too easy for rich parents to stick their kid in grad school,
while a poor kid might not get that opportunity.

Baloney. My parents weren't poor nor rich. But I paid for my own "grad
school" through loans.


As far as physical handicaps, the
military contains just about every type of job that exists for civilians.
If you can work outside the military, you can work within it.

I guess that depends on the severity of the handicap, doesn't it? There are
all sorts of people who don't work in the civilian world due to physical
and/or mental handicaps.