If he wins, he won't give a damn about mothers complaining
about their dead children. And he won't have much choice,
unless he wants to admit defeat, like Reagan did in Lebanon,
and withdrawing, sending a message to terrorists that they
could push us out if they hurt us badly enough. And a surrogate
draft is already in place, manipulating National Guard units.

On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:45:47 -0400, "James T. Kirby"
wrote:

I'm not sure I buy that, Greg - I think it would work against him. Having a
professional army gives
Bush a lot more political flexibility - you can attack anywhere you want and
there won't be hundreds
of thousands of people in the streets screaming "you took my baby to fight in
that stinking place for
your own personal reasons that you won't even admit to!". No, I think that
reinstating a draft would open up
a real can of worms. I think all he really needs to do (or intents to do) is
to keep some sort of hopefully
constrainable military adventurism going somewhere, so that the people who are
susceptible to the
thought that voting against a leader during time of war is somehow disloyal, or
(my favorite from Al Reid )
we should somehow buy into the notion that we should vote for Bush because the
troops like him (moron)
will vote the right way.

Jim Kirby