0 votes

Ron Paul Absolutely, Positively Opposes Draft

The latest news from the Iraq War front is that the "Iraq War Czar" says it is time to reconsider the draft.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the all-volunteer force and made it worth considering a return to a military draft, President Bush's new war adviser said Friday.

If there is any issue that affects young people more than anyone - it is the draft. Think about this tomorrow at Iowa, and going forward. How do Mitt, McCain and Rudy stand on the draft? I don't know, but I can guess - they are for the war, and I can only imagine that they would be for the draft.

Where does Ron Paul stand? There is no question. He absolutely, positively opposes the draft. If you have any questions about it - download and read Chapter 3 of his book "Freedom Under Siege," titled "The Draft or Freedom."

The Founding Fathers never granted constitutional authority to the Congress or the President to conscript an army. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments are very clear in stating that if a power is not granted to the federal government, that power is "retained by the people." The argument that the constitutional authority "to raise and support armies" gives the federal government the authority to force a young man to serve in the military was explicitly rejected by the authors of the Constitution.

I highly recommend that you download and read this chapter here, and now, and inform all of your friends who are, or will soon be of draft age.

If you ever have the opportunity to ask any of the other candidates a question - make sure to ask where they stand on the issue of the reinstitution of the draft.

We know where Dr. Paul stands.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
the stranger's picture

every time I heard it...

…and every time I hear the term, I ask myself, ‘how much authority does The US Constitution give to a Czar?’

The other candidates on the draft

I wouldn't trust the other candidates to answer honestly about where they stand on the draft. I trust Dr. Paul because he opposes the draft on principle - that it is unConstitutional. But I could see the others running on "no draft" and then doing a flip flop. "I tried really hard to raise enough troops without a draft. I worked harder on this than I've ever worked in my life. I just couldn't do it - we have to have a draft."

The question for one of our

The question for one of our good-looking youngsters to ask might be about the Selective Service Administration instead of just the draft, since without that big pile of tax money spent to be ABLE to do this, the general in question wouldn't have ever suggested it. Why should taxpayers subsidize failure when a voluntary miiltary works so-provably-well?
JMR

My Uncle always said

Having a standing army is like having an erection. Sooner or later youre going to find a use for it - it will get you into trouble.

A question about the draft

A question about the draft on the CNN YouTube debate would be killer! :)

draft question that might get aired.

Especially if the questioner was good-looking (Rachel & other young people in the mosaic, I'm looking in all your directions!) and quoted the person who ALMOST (but not-quite, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_service

sigh...$24.3 million tax dollars this year alone) killed the draft, Milton Friedman.
JMR

Army vs Navy

The Constitution was clear (and smart). No standing army but "shall maintain" a navy (and, one would assume later, "ships of the air"). A large standing army with something to do is costly, as we're finding now to our horror, and with nothing to do it's risky, because someone will always manage to find something for it to do.

If we return to a Constitutional, non interventionist policy of trade and peace, and if we reject the un-Christian "principle" of pre-emptive war sans any declaration, the USA will again become the beacon of hope it always was before the spenders took control. And don't let people tell you that doing this will make the USA weaker in any way -- on the contrary, it will make us stronger, both militarily and morally. The fact that so-many foreign friends of the USA and fans of the Constitution know that Dr. Paul is their man for a peaceful, strong, and prosperous USA means a lot to us Republicans who voted for him as Libertarians back in '88. Is there ANY excitement outside the USA for ANY other Presidential candidate? I sure don't see it. Hell, I don't see that much excitement INSIDE the USA for any other candidate, at least around here.

And that's only PART of why I think that Dr. Paul must win. Ron Paul also happens to be the ONLY Republican running who even CAN win. :) Hell, if Iowans just take a look at what the Fed did to their kids' & grandkids' dollars over the past 2 days, the honest ones will all have to vote for Dr. Paul for THAT reason!!
JMR