Democrat Charlie Rangel Calls for National Draft Ahead of War Vote on Syria


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.

Let me put my two cents in since I've been thinking about the draft. The draft should never have been instituted in the first place. Free people are free to volunteer for military service. To be forced into military service is not freedom, it's slavery (Deuteronomy 20).

Second, to be considering putting women in combat and also drafting them demonstrates just how far we have fallen in the United States. There was a time when women and children were cherished, and men stood to protect them, not the other way around. That's not a sexist statement; it's just how things were. Some of us still believe that. The Bible teaches us that women are not to serve in battle, not to be drafted and not to enlist (Number 1:1-3, 20). It isn't because they can't do certain things, but because of the role God designed them to fulfill, which He has equipped them for (and for the feminists who may read this, remember that women's roles are just as essential as men's, so I'm not downplaying women here).

Third, to get engaged in a war that has absolutely nothing to do with us, allows us to be the aggressors, and in the end is actually about helping Islamic jihadists and appears to be a move to provide an expansion of money, oil and gas in the region, is immoral and wrong. I don't know about you, but my children's lives and yours are worth far more than that.

Fourth, there is no doubt in my mind that if the United States goes to war with Syria (and that is what it is, war), then we will be the ones starting the next World War. Even now, China and Russia are bringing their ships into the area and arming the Syrians to protect them against US forces. If that happens, everyone knows our government will think nothing of taking those in the prime of their lives and casting them to their deaths to achieve their own agendas, not in the fight for liberty and freedom.

Fifth, sending the US military to attack Syria is not about freedom. It isn't about national security. It isn't about our interests. It's about a power grab and money.

Sixth, getting back to the draft. You can call me what you like, but I think parents of young men and women should be standing up and telling the administration that if they go to war and want to draft our sons and daughters for it, they'll have to fight us to do it. I say that Mr. Obama should pick up a weapon and march his scrawny backside over to Syria, and be the first "boots on the ground" if he thinks it's such a big deal. I will not send my children to fight in such a war.

Seventh, we are already murdering untold millions in the womb every year. We aren't even replacing the people in this country we are losing, and Representative Rangel is all for drafting more of our children and leading them onto foreign fields of battle, which will further demoralize us as a nation.

Finally, Mediaite has this little blurb from Rangel on the draft:

In an appearance on MSNBC alongside New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) told anchor Chris Jansing on Wednesday that he supports President Barack Obama's call for military action in Syria. However, he said that he does not support unilateral military action or action that is not sanctioned by Congress. Rangel added that Congress would not exhibit an "overwhelming sense of patriotism" in support for military action if there was a compulsory draft in place. 

"For all of these excursions and intrusions militarily, if members of Congress thought for one minute that they were talking about drafting their kids and their grandkids, you would not see this overwhelming sense of patriotism that you're seeing," Rangel insisted.

"There must be other kids besides American kids that understand that this is an international travesty," he continued. "We should provide the leadership, but to go it alone – I don't understand it."


Rangel's point is duly noted. However, we know from the past that those in government have been able to manipulate things so that their children weren't drafted or somehow skirted any dangerous involvement in war. Frankly, Rangel's words here are merely a trap for imposing the draft, not stopping a war.

For more on the subject, I suggest Russel S. Walton's short piece.

By the way, if you want to contact your representatives, including Mr. Rangel, click here and tell them you don't want a draft and you don't want US military involvement in Syria. According to National Review, "The phones are ringing off the hook in Congress — and virtually no one is calling in to support military intervention in Syria."

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.






Comments

comments

  • aebe

    Yup , Charlie , reinstitute slavery , prison for those who refuse , death for too many of those who do not .
    I am a Vietnam Vet , joined the Army , and after Kent State , regretted having done so . Seeing the many others of the same economic class ( Poor ) , serving as paid slaves , was no patriotic inspiration , either .
    Validate your 2nd Amendment Rights . Carry

  • grafra102

    You know what, I am getting tired of reading some of the BS, I will lay my head on a soft pillow and go to "SLUMBER LAND"!! GOOD NIGHT!!

  • Wayne

    Make sure that you put all of your LGBT friends at the top of the draft list Charlie. Oh and while you're at it why not put the perpetual welfare recipients on top of the list as well. You know who they are, the ones who have never had a job or tried to get a job but have been on welfare their entire lives.

  • runsinquicksand

    How could that jerk have served in the Military, and be such a commie.

  • ssilv48

    One thing is for sure, you don't have to be very smart to be a congressman.

  • $25290061

    Rangel's draft proposal is not about improving our military. If instituted a universal draft would open the way for unionization of out military to convert it into an arm of the Democrat party.

  • cHUCK

    Rangel makes a point, but the point masks his intent. The point? That Obama's proposed (LIMITED) attack on Syria is insane, and not justified by any immediate threat to the U.S. The real intent is to push his bill to re-impose the draft (which would now include women!) Let's leave the Syrian attack alone - it IS insane, and I think we all know that.

    Re-impose the draft? Under the circumstances, it's equally insane. We have a totally volunteer military that's highly competent and - if left by the politicians to do their job - can effectively secure our country and respond to legitimate situations abroad. Syria is NOT, at this point, a legitimate situation for the U.S. to meddle in, and imposing a draft to support such meddling is truly insane. To draft women involuntarily into military service is equally insane.

    As far as politicians being able to keep their children from being drafted, that's a known fact - and I applaud them. We can do very well, thank you, without the liberal brats of our liberal "leaders" being inserted into our military. By not having a draft at all, however, we don't have to deal with draft evaders - at considerable cost to us taxpayers. As it is, we have an all volunteer military willing and able to do the job.

    I take issue with Mr. Brown on one point. Women in other countries, notably Israel, are formidable soldiers. Remarkably, they've been able to fill this role without abandoning their role as women. We've had, for years, many women in our own military. While I disagree with letting pregnant women remain on active duty, I believe that women can, and should be allowed to, play a significant role in defending their country. They should, however, be excluded from foreign/combat assignments if they become pregnant, or if they already have children.

    Back to Mr. Rangel. Given his personal and political history, I consider him an opportunist. If he can use the Syrian situation to get his draft bill passed, he'll use it - and then promptly change his opposition to Obama's proposed strike to support for same. He's a Democrat, after all, and a most slippery one at that.