I was responding to lonely walker's post which made no sense
whatsoever.

Answer for Alada
I just looked it up a week or so ago that the Army alone has 385,000
soldiers!

There are about 30,000 noncitizens who serve in the U.S. armed forces,
making up about 2 percent of the active-duty force, according to
statistics from the military and the Council on Foreign Relations. About
100 such noncitizens have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Foreign citizens' serving in the U.S. military is a highly charged
issue, which could expose the Pentagon to criticism that it is
essentially using mercenaries to defend the country. Other analysts
voice concern that a large contingent of noncitizens under arms could
jeopardize national security or reflect badly on Americans' willingness
to serve in uniform.


And they only take legal immigrants.(green cards) There are 1 million
that enter the US every year legally!!!!

Thinking,
5 years at war in Iraq and Afghanistan
5 million legal immigrante enter the US
4,600 already gained citizenship. Yay, these men and women are American.
In the truest sense of the word, as much as me or anyone!

30,000 more guaranteed to be citizens upon ETS!

Total-34,600 new citizens out of a possible 5 million!!!

Definitely not taken advantage of!!!

Good point Fanta but you still put the word in there that the moron
crowd still doesn't get.

hey zap is that remark legal

Put your hands together for our new CITIZENS!!!

It's as legal as my boxer briefs pal! lol

See you guys tomorrow! 90 degrees, 500% humidity, and we have four
outside jobs tomorrow. I can hardly wait. Fanta, it's like the Palmetto
state here!

good night Zap!!!

nite zap

Ok, some of my thoughts on this topic.

Why are so few registering for service?
Why are so many dropping out of West Point?
Why are so many opting for early retirement?

Is it a form of protest "hell no, we won't go" ??

Why are immigrants and 'other' nationals being considered before the
draft?

Is it because this government is afraid to open the door to another
chapter of protests as in the Viet Nam era ??

AND - what of those 'other' nationals who are trained and paid to serve
in the armed forces. When they become citizens, will their entire
family be among the first new arrivals here to America as immigrants, or
as citizens, 'by association', so to speak. Which, of course,
leads me to the question of those life long US citizens who have family
abroad, but can not get them here, because of red tape.

Another thought, after those who were trained and paid to serve become
US citizens, decide to leave this country and return to their home soil,
will this government follow them around requesting their share of income
tax.

Which also leads me to wonder, how many might there be who return to
their native land or another country to live their life, but continue to
register send absentee votes for elections??

Just ramblings - or are they?

i don't make sense most of the times
even to myself

here's the problem I have with this whole thing..the administration is
talking about a war that will go on for "generations"...and dont be
fooled into thinking that democrats will stop it...they would have tried
to stop it by now..so if we are committing to a long term war and they
will not do a draft here because of repercussions from the
populace...then the use of mercenaries and / or foreign citizens will
only go up...is this what we want happening in the world in our
name?...mercenaries are not bound by the UCMJ...and foreign citizens
would certainly have that last on their list of required reading...
It will be like the cattle barons of the west hiring gangs of
gunslingers to enforce their law...without accountability..and this is
all being done when the clear majority of the country (maybe as much as
70%..) just want this war to end...
incredible that we remain silent...

Thanks for posting the Philippines time-line, adj. Very interesting.

Fanta, discussion of the draft here in Washington is not active. A few
people bring it up, it causes a flurry of headlines, but the discussions
that precede a legislative initiative are not happening.

I wouldn't put it past Bush to do anything that 'shows leadership' at
this point, and so one can conceive that he might propose that, but it
won't come close to passing.

In an earlier post somehwre I've discussed why...



Oceans

The draft to the extent it is discussed is seen as something that might
be useful if the US military commitment grows.

But this is highly unlikely.

1. We are losing in Iraq, so the issue of keeping troops there
indefinitely is a moot one. We will be driven out. The only way we can
avoid this is by pulling our troops out before we are defeated. Bush
does not have the cognitive ability to make this decision.

2. It is likely that the American people, disillusioned, will turn
inwards, where we have massive problems to address. As with the
aftermath of the Viet Nam war, we will for a decade at least view
foreign adventures with a great deal of suspicion. So we will not soon
be ramping up the military.

3. Instead, those who are involved in the military/strategic/industrial
world will focus on weapons development, and the notions of a cyber war.
There is a lot being done on this already, and it has gained momentum
since it became clear that we are in a no-win situation in Iraq and that
the Powell Doctrine was ignored by Bush and the senior neocons in his
government. A cyber-war strategy is a way of 'cheating' on the
requirements of the Powell Doctrine.

4. The real issue that will emerge is whether the US can learn to stop
being the world's policeman/bully. The US failed to learn that when it
became the world's sole superpower after the implosion of the USSR;
maybe it will learn to do so in the light of the emerging defeat in
Iraq, which will, with our growing economic weaknesses, have severely
diminished our superpower status. I hope so, but I am not holding my
breath.

5. Even when Bush is gone, the neocons will still be here, distorting
our foreign policy and seeking to embroil us in the next of their
objectives, Iran and Syria.

In the light of all this, in my opinion, the issue of taking immigrants
into the military is trivial. The issue of hiring contractors is less
trivial because contractor behavior is often a major problem, and
because of the many security issues involved.



Oceans

Catching up -- nice posts Alada, Fanta, adj.

Thanks.



Oceans

2 words...Ron Paul

To lonely: I can relate! Ever since my divorce, I don't have someone to
tell me if I am right or wrong. It's sooooo confusing!

Davinci, ALL military personnel fall under the UCMJ. I think that was
the next door version of ocean's around the world in eighty one days
explanation. Oceans, would you be so kind as to explain your previous
post?
Well, everyone, don't forget that we have been hiring mercenaries to man
the occupation of Iraq since day one. We call them contractors, but they
are mercenaries with the gloves taken off, and are responsible for some
of the worst atrocities committed against the Iraqi people.

Of course, for the companies that hire and farm out the mercenaries it
is amazingly lucrative.

There is a very large procurement that is going forward for companies to
supply intelligence services to the US military in Iraq. We will hear
horror stories leak out of Iraq about abuse of Iraqis resulting from
this procurement.

I never would have suspected you to be a member of the black helicopter
crowd! Most Liberals are happy as long as everyone is paying higher
taxes than them and the bigger the government is, the better. I thought
I had you pegged as your run of the mill angry Liberal but you seem to
have one foot in the conspiracy camp. No! Tell me it ain't so!

Maybe I'm really stupid, but to me you are either a foreigner or you are
a citizen.

So what are we talking about, foreigners or citizens?