My comment: If you do not think we are close to another world war, read this article. This congressman wants to reinstate the draft and include woman. This makes a lot of sense. Start a war that most Americans do not want to have involvement with and then draft them to fight in it. Insane!!
On Sunday, Congressman and criminal ethics violator Charlie Rangel (D-NY) renewed his call to reinstate the national draft, just ahead of votes on war with Syria. The New York representative argued that a vote should be held on mandatory military service before a decision is made to attack Syria.
“I truly believe we should have a National Draft Act before the Congress acts,” Rangel told MSNBC.
Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War, has been introducing legislation for years to do this, and this year he even included women.
The Hill reports:
The New York lawmaker said the burden of war unfairly falls on lower-income Americans.
“They are not in the Hamptons. They are not in the wealthy neighborhoods,” he said.
Rangel, a former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and the third-longest-serving member of Congress, has made it clear he will vote “no” on a forthcoming resolution seeking congressional approval for limited strikes on Syria.
Although Rangel said he is satisfied that Syrian President Bashar Assad is responsible for poison gas attacks on his own people last month, he argued it is not the U.S.’s responsibility to respond on behalf of the world.
“There is no mandate that the United States of America has to get rid of every evil person,” Rangel said.
“If it’s an international problem it should be an international solution.”
Rangel said he would not attend a Sunday afternoon “members-only” briefing for lawmakers on Capitol Hill about the proposed Syrian military strike because he could not justify the use of force to his constituents.
“If I have the slightest idea how this gross violation of international law affects citizens of the United States of America, my ears are open to see the connection,” he said.
Wait, is Mr. Ethics Violator is to be believed when he talks about violations of the law? Sorry, the man cannot be seriously considered on this matter.