So, how long do you think it'll be until there's a draft?

[conuly]

A year? More? Less?

Comments

[morganne13.livejournal.com]

Yeah.......down with the Shrub.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

For the record, I make it more than a year but less than two - though, admittedly, I may not be cynical enough in my prediction.

The public must first be sufficiently distracted from the inconvenient fact that the Bushrealites insisted it would never happen. As you will recall, they called it "fear-mongering" (Oh, the irony!) to raise any concerns over a possible reinstatement of the draft. In order to deflect those who can't be made to forget, they must be able to plausibly insist that the situation has changed radically.

A lovely way to offset these difficulties, of course, would be another "Reichstag" incident - another "Pearl Harbor" scenario, as the PNAC's pre-9/11 manifesto so tellingly put it.

:-\

[lots42.livejournal.com]

Never. There'd be a civil war if there was.

[lots42.livejournal.com]

You think the Bush administration would let another 9-11 happen just to push through a draft?

[conuly]

There's people who believe they let it happen (or even engineered it, though I think that's ludicrous) just to push through a war in Iraq.

[conuly]

I don't think so. It'd be the 60s all over again, but hey, it's already vietnam out there.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

No, of course not.

Reinstating the draft would a cinch if the BushCorp Boys had the opportunity to exploit another 9/11-type disaster as successfully as they did the last one.

But in this context, to frame the draft as an end in itself is spurious. Mayhem permitting, the draft will be just another minor stepping-stone in the Neocons' ongoing consolidation of power.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

There was/is a helluva lot more at stake in the exploitation of 9/11 than just Iraq (I know you know that - I'm just sayin'). Even so, I agree, at present it still appears highly unlikely that the Neocons were active participants in bringing about 9/11. But I'm not sure I'd dismiss it as ludicrous. The more I learn about these people, the less surprised I will be at anything they might pull, no matter how horrific.

At this point, the only thing that will really surprise me is if they do something so utterly inept as to significantly turn their own power-base against them. But right now, they're pissing off the AARP pretty badly. That's not a bad start.

We can only hope.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

You and your brevity. Sheesh.

You just saved me the labor of a whole paragraph.

(t/y)

;-)

[conuly]

I think it's ludicrous to believe there was a conspiracy to cause this, simply because conspiracies require people. In this case, many people. I can't imagine them *all* being silent about it.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

I tend to disagree, there. With the right conditions in place, I doubt it would have taken more that two or three BushCorp insiders (in the right places) to bring it about. But were that the case, I seriously doubt that Bush himself would have known about it. Rove is another story.

Highly unlikely, but not quite ludicrous.

As for any medium- or large-scale conspiracy - nah! All the reports from credible insiders who have blown whistle to whatever degree are limited to evidence of incompetence beforehand, and exploitation and corruption after the fact.

Unless Ray McGovern and his brethren are disinformants...but I seriously doubt it.

For now.

[morganne13.livejournal.com]

Yeah.......down with the Shrub.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

For the record, I make it more than a year but less than two - though, admittedly, I may not be cynical enough in my prediction.

The public must first be sufficiently distracted from the inconvenient fact that the Bushrealites insisted it would never happen. As you will recall, they called it "fear-mongering" (Oh, the irony!) to raise any concerns over a possible reinstatement of the draft. In order to deflect those who can't be made to forget, they must be able to plausibly insist that the situation has changed radically.

A lovely way to offset these difficulties, of course, would be another "Reichstag" incident - another "Pearl Harbor" scenario, as the PNAC's pre-9/11 manifesto so tellingly put it.

:-\

[lots42.livejournal.com]

Never. There'd be a civil war if there was.

[lots42.livejournal.com]

You think the Bush administration would let another 9-11 happen just to push through a draft?

[conuly]

There's people who believe they let it happen (or even engineered it, though I think that's ludicrous) just to push through a war in Iraq.

[conuly]

I don't think so. It'd be the 60s all over again, but hey, it's already vietnam out there.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

No, of course not.

Reinstating the draft would a cinch if the BushCorp Boys had the opportunity to exploit another 9/11-type disaster as successfully as they did the last one.

But in this context, to frame the draft as an end in itself is spurious. Mayhem permitting, the draft will be just another minor stepping-stone in the Neocons' ongoing consolidation of power.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

There was/is a helluva lot more at stake in the exploitation of 9/11 than just Iraq (I know you know that - I'm just sayin'). Even so, I agree, at present it still appears highly unlikely that the Neocons were active participants in bringing about 9/11. But I'm not sure I'd dismiss it as ludicrous. The more I learn about these people, the less surprised I will be at anything they might pull, no matter how horrific.

At this point, the only thing that will really surprise me is if they do something so utterly inept as to significantly turn their own power-base against them. But right now, they're pissing off the AARP pretty badly. That's not a bad start.

We can only hope.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

You and your brevity. Sheesh.

You just saved me the labor of a whole paragraph.

(t/y)

;-)

[conuly]

I think it's ludicrous to believe there was a conspiracy to cause this, simply because conspiracies require people. In this case, many people. I can't imagine them *all* being silent about it.

[dkmnow.livejournal.com]

I tend to disagree, there. With the right conditions in place, I doubt it would have taken more that two or three BushCorp insiders (in the right places) to bring it about. But were that the case, I seriously doubt that Bush himself would have known about it. Rove is another story.

Highly unlikely, but not quite ludicrous.

As for any medium- or large-scale conspiracy - nah! All the reports from credible insiders who have blown whistle to whatever degree are limited to evidence of incompetence beforehand, and exploitation and corruption after the fact.

Unless Ray McGovern and his brethren are disinformants...but I seriously doubt it.

For now.