"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
...


They'll be a US flag flying over Mecca by the time they are draft
age.

and only if the liebrals take control of congress and the white house

Insurgent attacks are becoming more numerous, more organized and more
deadly.

Don't you mean "terrorist attacks"? The term "insurgency" implies the
bad
guys are Iraqis.

Are you unhappy with the current administration?

I couldn't be happier with them.

Same here, though I do wish he would limit domestic spending more.



Separate question:

What if the situation is far worse 6 months from now? What will be your
reaction to that? Assume for the moment that the definition of "worse"
is
one created by YOU.

We'll have troops in bases over there...but they won't be regularly
patrolling the cities. Instead, they'll be using the bases as staging
areas
for attacks against terrorist cells in Syria and Iran.

We are still free of incidents in the states, let the suicide bombers
flock to bagdad, far better then them coming here.


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

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
...


They'll be a US flag flying over Mecca by the time they are draft
age.

and only if the liebrals take control of congress and the white
house

Insurgent attacks are becoming more numerous, more organized and more
deadly.

Don't you mean "terrorist attacks"? The term "insurgency" implies the
bad
guys are Iraqis.

Are you unhappy with the current administration?

I couldn't be happier with them.

Same here, though I do wish he would limit domestic spending more.



Separate question:

What if the situation is far worse 6 months from now? What will be
your
reaction to that? Assume for the moment that the definition of "worse"
is
one created by YOU.

We'll have troops in bases over there...but they won't be regularly
patrolling the cities. Instead, they'll be using the bases as staging
areas
for attacks against terrorist cells in Syria and Iran.

We are still free of incidents in the states, let the suicide bombers
flock to bagdad, far better then them coming here.


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

Did I miss a question that was directed at me? Send it over, and make sure
it's reheated.

Meanwhile: You ignored one I directed at you, and NOYB tried to answer it
for you. Here it is again, prefaced by your comment which made me ask the
question:

==============================
They'll be a US flag flying over Mecca by the time they are draft age.

and only if the liebrals take control of congress and the white house

Insurgent attacks are becoming more numerous, more organized and more
deadly. Are you unhappy with the current administration?

Separate question:

What if the situation is far worse 6 months from now? What will be your
reaction to that? Assume for the moment that the definition of "worse" is
one created by YOU.
==============================

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:

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 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

"NOYB" wrote in message
news

"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.

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
news

"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.

Which is why he never responded to Doug when Doug asked him to summarize it.

NOYB wrote:
"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
news

"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.

Which is why he never responded to Doug when Doug asked him to summarize it.

See below, idiot.

P. Fritz wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
news

"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.

Uh, sorry, idiot. Perhaps you didn't comprehend this part:
SEC. 3. BASIC MILITARY TRAINING AND EDUCATION.

(a) OBLIGATION FOR YOUNG MEN- It is the obligation of every male
citizen of the United States, and every other male person residing in
the United States, who is between the ages of 18 and 22 to receive
basic military training and education as a member of the armed forces
unless the citizen or person is exempted under the provisions of this
Act

Notice "as a member of the armed forces".. Do you see that part,
dumbass? Do members of the armed forces get to say that they don't want
to go to war????

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".

I take it that you didn't comprehend THIS part:
SEC. 3. BASIC MILITARY TRAINING AND EDUCATION.

(a) OBLIGATION FOR YOUNG MEN- It is the obligation of every male
citizen of the United States, and every other male person residing in
the United States, who is between the ages of 18 and 22 to receive
basic military training and education as a member of the armed forces
unless the citizen or person is exempted under the provisions of this
Act

Notice the "as a member of the armed forces" part? As a "member of the
armed forces", you do what you are told. You'd have no more right to
refuse to go war than the "members of the armed forces" do right now.