US Re-instating the Draft??
Mar. 1st, 2004 01:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icarusGovernment reinstating the *Draft?* Does somebody know if this is true or not?
I know from![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wildernessguru (military analyst) that we need at least 150,000 troops to hold Iraq really, but what he believes this is about the dream to fulfill the cold war fantasy - the ability to fight on two fronts simultaneously. It's crazy, but the military still wants it. He says the goal is to get more combat forces instead of reservists.
- In North Korea we pulled our troops from dangerous positions so that they couldn't take out 40,000 of our troops with artillery.
- Also, a quiet deployment was sent to Guam. About 12-18 B-52s were sent there to be closer to North Korea.
Both of these actions are preludes to war. The correct term is "It puts you on a war footing." It's the equivalent of moving the 7th fleet a hundred miles off the shore of North Korea.
I know from
wildernessguru (military analyst) that we need at least 150,000 troops to hold Iraq really, but what he believes this is about the dream to fulfill the cold war fantasy - the ability to fight on two fronts simultaneously. It's crazy, but the military still wants it. He says the goal is to get more combat forces instead of reservists.- In North Korea we pulled our troops from dangerous positions so that they couldn't take out 40,000 of our troops with artillery.
- Also, a quiet deployment was sent to Guam. About 12-18 B-52s were sent there to be closer to North Korea.
Both of these actions are preludes to war. The correct term is "It puts you on a war footing." It's the equivalent of moving the 7th fleet a hundred miles off the shore of North Korea.