 |
Only who can prevent forest fires? |
Feedback? E-mail us.
Real-time updates of recently viewed articles on the site.
"Back to the '80s" rocks the Egyptian Theatre
Percussion recital 'amazing' in front of packed...
| Northern Star
Selective Service proves to not be too selective
Last updated on 00/00/0000 at 12:00 a.m.
Students receiving financial aid may recall a question on the FAFSA form: “Does the student want Selective Service to register him?”
I asked around campus and discovered that about 50 percent of those I spoke to didn’t know about the Selective Service, yet everyone was familiar with military drafts.
In the event of a national crisis, the Selective Service would be responsible for the implementation of a military draft.
Or, as former President Bill Clinton said, Selective Service is “[a] relatively low-cost insurance policy.”
Selective Service applies to a large part of our college population. If you’re a male between 18 to 25, you’re required to register with the Selective Service.
If the idea of a draft seems too distant to concern you, consider other registration requirements.
According to the Selective Service, “young men in hospitals, mental institutions or prisons do not have to register while they are committed. However, they must register within 30 days after being released if they have not yet reached their 26th birthday.”
This means former convicts and those who may have psychological problems can be legally drafted and sent into battle.
The requirements continue: “Disabled men who live at home must register if they can reasonably leave their homes and move about independently.”
The Selective Service comforts us by saying, “A friend or relative may help a disabled man fill out the registration form if he can’t do it himself.”
Other students were skeptical about the draft and Selective Service.
Freshman illustration major Carrie Morse said, “I don’t believe in drafting. People shouldn’t have to go to die if they don’t want to."
On the other hand, “We should serve the country, no matter what. We should think of society as a whole,“ said Daniel Yi, freshman business organizational management major.
Whether or not students supported a draft, most said they would support the U.S. military.
Junior business major Brandi Lyons, however, said she wouldn’t support the U.S. military.
“I don’t like Bush ... or his policies,” Lyons said.
No matter who you are or how you feel about the Selective Service, the fact remains – U.S. foreign policy is currently managed, shaped and controlled by political leaders willing to do nearly anything to “get the job done.”
Americans, including NIU students, seem to forget that we are indeed at war right now and there is little to no promising talk among politicians on how to effectively end this conflict any time soon.
After all, Iran is still the next foreign country on the neo-conservative drafting table and, as Ron Paul, Republican presidential candidate and Texas congressman, has assured us, if we attack Iran, a military draft is sure to follow.
» Next Opinion Article: Don't let fear ruin your life
Yet another person who has drunk the Ron Paul Kook-Aid. We aren't going into Iran. Surgical strikes to take out military targets might happen. Israel may be allowed to nuke Iran if necessary, but the United States will not invade Iran. If Iran did anything substantial to the U.S., we would respond with a nuclear weapon. Also, beware of using the term neo-conservative. That is a codeword for a conservative Jew, and I find it offensive.
Neocons ARE offensive because of their behaviors.
Their diastrous hijacking of US foreign policy led to a failed Mideast Democracy Domino theory and a current botched occupation of Iraq. Cheney & Rumsfeld led Bush to Iraq; no WMD, no operating Al Qaeda until we got there. Mission Accomplished?
Their diastrous hijacking of US foreign policy led to a failed Mideast Democracy Domino theory and a current botched occupation of Iraq. Cheney & Rumsfeld led Bush to Iraq; no WMD, no operating Al Qaeda until we got there. Mission Accomplished?
In 1990 Iraq illegally invaded Kuwait. The United Nations denounced the invasion and ordered Saddam Hussein to pull out of Kuwait. He failed to do so. Therefore a massive international coalition attacked the Iraqi Army and removed them from Kuwait. It was decided to leave Saddam Hussein in power. He signed a cease-fire agreement (not a treaty). Saddam Hussein broke every commitment in the cease-fire agreement. President George H. W. Bush and President William J. Clinton both attempted to bomb Saddam Hussein into compliance, but any compliance was only short-term and after enough time for Saddam Hussein to adjust what needed adjusting. September 11th happened. That changed the world. State sponsors of terrorism or protectors of terrorists, be it those that allowed al Qaeda to remain in their country, the Taliban, or those that gave $25,000 to each family of a Palestinian suicide bomber, Saddam Hussein, were now enemies that were to be destroyed. Since Saddam Hussein did not live up to the stipulations of the cease-fire agreement and his support of terror in Israel gave the United States the moral authority to invade Iraq and take out Saddam Hussein. I agreed with invading Iraq, but not necessarily with the reasons given.
However, after we accomplished the mission of rooting Saddam Hussein from power, the mistakes that were made were extremely costly. They disbanded the Iraqi Army and the Iraqi police force. They put tight restrictions on what form Baath party members could do. The problem with that is in order to get a job under the rule of Saddam Hussein; you had to be a Baath party member. They did not control the borders with Iran and Syria where much of the weapons were coming in (maybe even coming out). They did not provide the troops with enough gear to build the peace.
Much of that has changed. Militarily we are gaining momentum and winning. Tribal leaders are rebelling against the al Qaeda presence that has infiltrated Iraq. However, the Iraqi government is in disarray. The animosity between Shiite and Sunni Muslims has proven to be a task that might be too big to tackle. However, what do we do? Do we pull out and let them destroy each other, angering both sides and the entire Muslim world over making a mess and letting it rot by pulling out? You will have a bloodbath first in Iraq, then in the United States. Ron Paul does not understand this fundamental problem. He thinks we can simply pull out and there will be no consequences. If the United States was to actually elect him or any Democrat, and they hold to their word, the American people would have signed their own death sentence, and the death sentences of millions of Iraqis.
However, after we accomplished the mission of rooting Saddam Hussein from power, the mistakes that were made were extremely costly. They disbanded the Iraqi Army and the Iraqi police force. They put tight restrictions on what form Baath party members could do. The problem with that is in order to get a job under the rule of Saddam Hussein; you had to be a Baath party member. They did not control the borders with Iran and Syria where much of the weapons were coming in (maybe even coming out). They did not provide the troops with enough gear to build the peace.
Much of that has changed. Militarily we are gaining momentum and winning. Tribal leaders are rebelling against the al Qaeda presence that has infiltrated Iraq. However, the Iraqi government is in disarray. The animosity between Shiite and Sunni Muslims has proven to be a task that might be too big to tackle. However, what do we do? Do we pull out and let them destroy each other, angering both sides and the entire Muslim world over making a mess and letting it rot by pulling out? You will have a bloodbath first in Iraq, then in the United States. Ron Paul does not understand this fundamental problem. He thinks we can simply pull out and there will be no consequences. If the United States was to actually elect him or any Democrat, and they hold to their word, the American people would have signed their own death sentence, and the death sentences of millions of Iraqis.
neo-con is anti-semtic? News to me.
