President Bush’s “war czar” did not call for a military draft or say it was likely in the future, as some suggested. Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute (in photo), deputy national security adviser for Iraq and Afghanistan, was asked last week by National Public Radio if a draft made sense militarily. Lute responded: “I think it makes sense to certainly consider it, and I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table. But ultimately, this is a policy matter between meeting the demands for the nation’s security by one means or another. Today, the current means of the all-volunteer force is serving us exceptionally well. It would be a major policy shift — not actually a military but a political policy shift to move to some other course.”
Lawmakers, including Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., don’t support such a policy shift, even though there is real concern about the volunteer military being stretched too thin. When asked Sunday on ABC News’ “This Week” about Lute’s comments, Brownback was emphatic: “We don’t need a draft.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
55 Comments
That’s really pathetic excuse-making. Lute plainly said, “this has always been an option on the table.” That says that he considers enslaving people into the military a permissible action, and that people’s rights aren’t a consideration — only “policy.” That’s “calling for a military draft” in any language that I understand.
The word “draft” should not even be mentioned. The politicians know better than to even consider such non sense because they know damn well that those of us with teenagers ain’t gonna stand for that non sense. We would rise up by the millions and be in the streets raising hell if they ever even considered such non sense. It was really the DRAFT that brought about the huge “anti war” movement during Veitnam. The people raising all the hell back then were not really “anti war” which is why they are not raising hell now. They were “anti draft” and they just disguised it as being “anti war” to avoid looking selfish. Many of the leaders of that movement- which effectively shut down Veitnam- were college students on deferments that were about to end. Well I don’t have any problem being “selfish” when it comes to my kids- 3 of whom would be in the age range of a draft (although if it is male only, 2). I have not struggled to raise, feed, clothe and educate these kids to hand them over to Bush, Halliburton and big oil to get killed. And the country is not going to put up with that. As much as I hate the war in Iraq, the saving grace is that most of those over there are there because they want to be there and not because somebody put a gun to their head and forced them to be there. Slavery was abolished in this country years ago yet some folks still think it is OK to have “war slaves”. And a draft is not needed. Recruitment is up and if the Army has to lower entry standards, raise pay or both then so be it. Maybe the Army should quit looking to reject as many applicants as it rejects- over such minor things as small drug offenses or less than perfect physical specimens.
A draft isn’t such a bad idea. I and my generation grew up with the idea that we owed 2 years of service to our country.
I think a lot of people would re-think their position about war if they had to worry about their own kids having to fight it.
We’re starting to hear a lot of “chatter” about a draft. If it’s even being talked about, they’re considering it.
Keep in mind, we’re fixing to go to war with Iran. We’re going to need a source of manpower (cannon fodder).
I do not think a draft would make much sense in this war, the bottom line is that to defeat an enemy that is using terrorism as a weapon. Military might is of little if any use, in fact it can cause the opposite effect.Kev to a certain point is correct, if the war is unpopular in the first place or seen as a “none of our business”action. The draft only serves to being more focus to that, if the draft was reinstated for Iraq it would make the anti-war movement of the sixties and seventies look small.
The other side of this coin, I DO see the draft coming back before Bush leaves office. In the paragraph above I stated “I do not think a draft would make much sense in this war”. The invasion itself and how the aftermath has been handle does not make much sense either. So there is a proven track record to go by, Bush states he does not go by facts but by his guts and he is the Commander in chief.
Besides, if we are to attack and declare war on Iran, Syria and the entire middle east. We will need more men, women and children! Remember Cheney has a say in the matter and as much as Bush does not go by facts, Cheney does not go by reality.
Sure, start the draft. Both men and women. Draft the Bush daughters. War over.
So long as we have a well paid all volunteer army, it is easy to start and sustain a war.
Those people who feel that we should ‘worship” the people in service need to remember that they are employees of the US. Nothing less and nothing more.
THAT is real.
The draft will never come back. The only people who speak on behalf of the draft are those who were drafted in the past.
But the draft is never coming back, so all this talk is foolish.
On a second note on the Bush Twins, looks like Jenna Bush is getting married. I guess to some dude that looks like Screech from Save by the Bell.
Bring back the draft, I want to see these whiny Liberals standing tall and at attention in a boot camp. :)
If we need more soldiers, we will just contract more. Soldiers of Fortune. Blackwater!
Kansas! The draft is a really bad idea. A very bad idea!
Jenna Bush also looks very prenant.
Jenna Bush also looks very pregnant.
Naw Joe, it’s just what you need. I think you’d look good in a Marine Battle Dress Uniform. :)
You like me in this Marine Battle Dress? I’m flattered! *bats eyes*
It doesn’t make me look too fat? It’s not too revealing? Won’t you come here and give me a kiss, since I look so good!
;)
Joe! in a Marine Battle Dress Uniform?!?!?
Ah, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!
There are plenty of moderates, liberals, and progressives honorably serving in our armed forces. To imply otherwise is an insult to every soldier, Marine, airman and sailor who believes our rights are worth fighting for.
Gen Lute didn’t raise the issue of the draft, he was responding to a question posed by the NPR correspondent. Here’s the actual transcript of the interview:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12688693
The draft has ‘been on the table’ since since Jimmy Carter reinstated the Selective Service Act in 1980.
The only people actively seeking a return to the draft are House Democrats (Charles Rangel among others).
and an amusing cartoon:http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000425.html
Forget the draft. Been there done that. I served under the draft and the volunteer forces.
To put it as nice as possible, I witnessed a vast improvement in morale, quality, and effectiveness when the last of the draftee’s got out and the forces were all volunteer.
I used to believe it would be good for all Americans’ to serve their country. Develop responsiblity, self-discipline, and maybe a skill.
But that is not true of those “forced” to be there. They will do ANYthing to get out, including abandoning their comrades.
They will do ANYthing to get out, including abandoning their comrades.Posted by: Eagle Beak | August 18, 2007 at 10:09 AM
Yep. Including going AWOL from the Texas ANG.
Yep. Including going AWOLPosted by: Tom
I’ll give you that Tom. But Clinton was not much better. It’s all part of the argument that only the poor and less influencial get drafted. Which is another good argument against the traditional draft.
Eagle Beak,
I don’t equate getting deferments, such as those obtained by Vice President Cheney, with illegally going AWOL, such as President Bush.
don’t equatePosted by: Tom
I’m not going to trip over mouse turds with you Tom. The issue presented by Bush is the same as it is for Clinton and many of the elite: They avoid military service and are not pursued for it.
If Bush’s avoidance is a “worse” sin than Clinton’s, I don’t care. It’s all water under the bridge, accomplishes nothing, and just shows your bitterness.
The pnly way to make a draft fair and equitable would be draft everyone no exempemtions. But, that isn’t possible. You can’t draft handicapped and mentally ill. You dont want people with extreme politcal views KKK, Nazis, Anarchists, Earth First and so on in the service. Single Parents, people with health cronic health probelms,drug probelms both legal and illegal would all make poor draftees. Then you got groups like the Amish you really think theyed make good soldiers?
Eagle Beak,
Going AWOL from active ANG duty is not a “sin,” it’s a violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ, and a violation of the oath Bush took when he joined TANG.
Getting a deferment isn’t a sin, either, but neither was it a violation of statute or UCMJ.
This isn’t a “mouse turd;” it’s the same kind of crap the most partisan Republicans have been throwing at people for years.
“A draft isn’t such a bad idea. I and my generation grew up with the idea that we owed 2 years of service to our country.”
You don’t have to be in the military to “serve” your country. Back when I was in the USAF, I proudly wore the uniform and served to the best of my abilty. But there are thousands of people that serve this country and its people everyday that are not in the armed services. People in the Red Cross, Americorps, Peace Corps and firefighters, doctors, nurses, teachers, cops and many others.
But there are thousands of people that serve this country and its people everyday that are not in the armed services. Posted by: Kev
Agreeable idea Kev. Many are not even suited for military life.
I don’t want a military draft as already stated, but if you must have one, don’t force people into the military.
Put them in the Peace Corps where they can live in some god forsaken country without running water or electricity.
Put them in the Peace Corps where they can live in some god forsaken country without running water or electricity.Posted by: Eagle Beak | August 18, 2007 at 11:38 AM
You mean, like Iraq?
Oh wait.
nevermind.
AWOL from the T.A.N.G.
Supply the paperwork that proves that?
No one has yet to do it.
Other than the Dan Rather and his forged documents.
You know, the one where the P.O. Box was marked 12345.
Classy forgery. :)
George W. wasn’t AWOL. Over 30 days absent is considered desertion.
How many of you who have served in the military have your DD214s? Or the equivalent to that, if your branch used another form? The military also keeps a copy (a record) of all forms.
So where IS George’s DD214?
If this was a war were most people agreed to the threat- as in WW2(save for a handful of isolationists, ect.) the draft wouldn’t be so hated. Many draftees served their country in WW2.
But when it comes to unpopular wars, due to the nature of our democracy, drafts have a dangerous history in this nation. We could site the new york draft riots of the civil war. There was a strong anti war movement in the north that thought lincoln should just let the south go it’s own way. Luckily we finally got a good General (Grant), won the war, and Lee surrendered instead of heading into the hills and fighting a gurrilla war.
Being in the draftee age group I can say that a large chunk of us think that the war in Iraq is a mismanaged joke, and have no interest in fighting in that god forsakened place. It would be one thing if there was a direct threat against our country- people would unite against the enemy. This is not the case in Iraq. Sadam may have been a brutal, horrible, dicatator, but he kept that volitile area quiet, by God. Now we have opened up the powder keg, and there doesn’t seem to be much that we can do about it.
Rox,
One can file for a duplicate DD214 at any Federal Repository of Records.
The story about Bush and his ANG time has all been dismissed by his former Commanders.
The Dems like to play wish and crap in the hand with the story though. It keeps them amused to spread false stories and revise history.
One of the few things they are good at.
Looks like the troll has an obsession with fecal matter.
“The story about Bush and his ANG time has all been dismissed by his former Commanders.”
Not true!!
Ushered into the Texas Air National Guard ahead of hundreds of other young men on the waiting list for a few coveted places, George W. Bush later insisted that he had never received any “special favoritism.” Perhaps he only benefited from the ordinary favoritism that the Texas elite enjoyed during the Vietnam War, when the Air National Guard became one of the primary means of escaping the draft. His father was a mere congressman at the time, but that was good enough to get Dubya in despite his low score on the pilot aptitude test. Pushed to the top of the waiting list, he was also awarded a highly unusual promotion to second lieutenant on completing his basic training, despite his lack of qualifications.
Exactly how all this happened remains a matter of dispute. In a civil lawsuit, former Texas Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes testified that he received a call from Sid Adger, a socially prominent Houston oilman and friend of the elder Bush. According to Barnes, Adger wanted to ensure that the unit at Ellington Air Force Base would take care of young Bush. (Adger had already obtained Guard slots for two of his own sons.) Barnes also testified that one of his aides forwarded the request to a Guard general. During the 2000 campaign, both Bush and his father denied using any such influence on his behalf. Pleading a bad memory, the elder Bush told reporters that he was “almost positive” he had never spoken with Adger, who died in 1996, about the Guard matter.
Having made a six-year commitment to the Guard, Bush successfully completed the challenging course of training in the F-102 fighter. In his 1999 autobiography, “A Charge to Keep,” he offered lyrical memories of his Guard stint. “I continued flying with my unit for the next several years,” he wrote. But that simply wasn’t true: Lt. Bush never flew another jet after being suspended from flight duty in August 1972 for failing to take a mandated annual physical. That was a fact he simply couldn’t remember when asked to account for the discrepancy in 2000. (”A Charge to Keep” also omits his stint as head cheerleader at Phillips Andover, his old prep school.)
Among the most questionable assertions in his book is that he sought to volunteer for service in Vietnam “to relieve active-duty pilots.” In a more candid mood in 1998, Bush had told a reporter for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram: “I don’t want to play like I was somebody out there marching to war when I wasn’t. It was either Canada or the service and I was headed into the service.”
Bush also wrote that his military service “gave me respect for the chain of command.” Not enough respect, apparently, to report for duty as ordered, since his records show that he ignored two direct orders to do so — and in fact was absent from duty for a year between May 1972 and May 1973.
By the time he applied to Harvard Business School in 1972, Bush claimed, “I was almost finished with my commitment in the Air National Guard, and was no longer flying because the F-102 jet I had trained in was being replaced by a different fighter.” That too was false. According to an interview with his commanding officer that appeared in the Boston Globe, Bush’s Guard unit continued to fly the F-102 until 1974, an assertion confirmed by Air Force records. “If he had come back to Houston, I would have kept him flying the 102 until he got out,” said retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges.
In 2000 a few journalists asked the Bush campaign to account for his near-total absence from duty during the final two years of the six-year stint he agreed to serve. The Republican candidate and his spokespersons replied that he made up his missed days in an Alabama National Guard unit, but there is scant evidence to confirm that claim. Bush sought a permanent transfer to a “postal unit” in Alabama that didn’t require weekend drills or active duty, which was approved by his Texas superiors. In May 1972, National Guard headquarters denied his request — which would have amounted to a permanent vacation from duty. The following autumn, he was assigned instead to temporary “alternative” training at the 187th Squadron in Montgomery, Ala.
According to two former officers in that Alabama Guard unit, however, Bush never showed up. Retired Gen. William Turnipseed, the unit’s former commander, said he was certain that Bush did not report to him, although the young reserve airman was specifically required to do so. The orders dated Sept. 15, 1972, were clear. “Lieutenant Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training.”
Bush has insisted, usually through a spokesman, that he did report for duty in Alabama, although his campaign could offer no proof. In late 2000 a group of Alabama Vietnam veterans offered $3,500 to anyone who could verify Bush’s claim that he performed service at a Montgomery, Ala., National Guard unit in 1972. No one ever claimed that reward. Nor could his campaign produce a single witness who confirmed that Bush had attended any Guard drills in Houston after he returned from Alabama in late 1972.
According to the Boston Globe, Bush’s discharge papers list his service and duty station for each of his first four years in the Air National Guard. After May 1972, there was no record of training on those forms and “no mention of any service in Alabama.” The supervising pilots at Ellington Air Force Base wrongly believed that Bush was serving in Alabama. In a report dated May 2, 1973, they explained that they were unable to rate his efficiency because “Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report. A civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non-flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama.”
As for Bush’s curious failure to take his Air Force physical in July 1972, his only excuse is that because he was then in Alabama working on a Republican Senate campaign, he was unable to return to Houston for a checkup by his personal physician. That too was untrue. A pilot’s physical, required to continue flying, can only be performed by a certified Air Force flight surgeon (as Bush must have known, since he had undergone at least three such exams). An investigation of Bush’s military career published in June 2000 by the Times of London noted that the Air Force had instituted rigorous drug testing a few months before he failed to show up for the medical exam.
The commander in chief’s official National Guard record shows no evidence of service between May 1972 and May 1973. Although he was certainly in Houston during most of that period, he didn’t return to duty at Ellington until the spring of 1973. The records show that he spent 36 days in drills (though not flying) from May through June 1973, apparently to compensate for all the months he had been absent. By then he was preparing to attend Harvard Business School. His final day in uniform was July 30, 1973, and he was officially released from active duty the following October — eight months before he would have finished his original six-year commitment to the Guard.
The next time Bush strapped himself into a fighter cockpit would be 30 years later, when he was flown to the deck of the USS Lincoln for a triumphal speech marking the American victory over Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship. Privately, Republican media advisers admitted that they were likely to use the “Top Gun” videotape of the president strutting across the carrier deck in his flight suit for campaign commercials in 2004.
Despite all the remarkable contradictions between his military record and his self-serving stories, and despite the plentiful evidence that he had shirked a year of his service and then lied about it, the “liberal media” never subjected Bush to the searing interrogations inflicted on Quayle in 1988 and Clinton in 1992. Only the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Dallas Morning News, and a Democratic Web site bothered to explore the curious absences and lapses of duty that resulted in Bush’s grounding after two years of fighter training. Nobody insisted that he hold press conferences to explain himself. Pundits dismissed the issue when they mentioned it at all. The cultural assumption that Republicans are paragons of flag-saluting martial virtue is rarely challenged, regardless of reality.
Yet the startling fact is that liberal Democratic politicians are at least as likely to have done military service as their Republican opponents and critics. Among the U.S. senators in the 107th Congress, the percentage of veterans was slightly higher among Democrats than among Republicans (if service in the Vietnam-era National Guard is excluded). That sort of statistic wouldn’t matter so much if not for the right’s continuing indulgence in venomous attacks on the patriotism of liberals and Democrats. Lining up the conservative civilians alongside the liberal veterans is an unpleasant but necessary exercise in an era when right-wingers and Republicans are inclined to exploit patriotism for partisan advantage.
The long, distinguished list of Republican tough guys who never served descends from Vice President Dick Cheney, who has explained that he had “other priorities” during Vietnam, all the way down to Rush Limbaugh, who frequently impugns the patriotism of liberal veterans like Tom Daschle. It includes former Majority Leader Lott; former Speaker Newt Gingrich and his successor, Denny Hastert; the two Texans who actually ran the House after Gingrich’s departure, Tom DeLay and Dick Armey; White House political advisor Karl Rove; and Phil Gramm, the senior senator from Texas who retired in 2002.
That’s nice Ken, your source is the Boston Globe.
The same newspaper that stated that John F. Kerry’s statements were all true when he testified before Congress about all the murdering and raping the U.S. Military did in Vietnam.
You know, John F. Kerry was never challenged on the fact that he lied before Congress.
I think we should bring that up again. :)
Again Ken, using unofficial sources to document your proof is laughable and also very sad.
The ANG has no record of the dismissal.
A draft bill is not only on the table, but in full view. In fact, there are two. The House and Senate have (thankfully) continued to ignore them…since 2003, which was the intention.
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.89:
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.163:
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/09/02/allison/index.html
One person’s account of Bush’s time in Alabama, while “serving” in the Alabama ANG.
You mean Brownback uttered a sentence that didn’t include “God”?
That is news.
“The story about Bush and his ANG time has all been dismissed by his former Commanders.”
Posted by: Kansas, aka troll | August 18, 2007 at 01:11 PM
You mean the ones who signed the forms such as these:
“Reason for Suspension” Failure to accomplish annual medical examination.”
Annual Officer Effectiveness Report part 2…”Not Observed at this unit during the period of this report.”
Kansas must be very proud to defend a pilot who was suspended from flying — and who marked the “Do not volunteer for overseas” box. (avoided Vietnam)
Gee is anyone interested in the subject of restarting the draft?
Or are you all still crying the blues over history?
I don’t think I own a Kleenex box big enough to pass around.
But since we are on the subject of passing around,
Clinton did NOT inhale that joint.
And he most certainly did NOT have sex with that girl!
Won’t it be ironic when the first woman President, Hillary Clinton, brings back the draft and for the first time, Hillary has women drafted along with men.
Hillary will make the girls serve, even though her boy Bill skipped town.
Max,
Clinton most certainly did skip town. Gone like a fart in the wind.
Coward.
That’s nice cosmos. I’ve actually had OER’s written on me, know what they are and what they look like.
Which one of those forms cosmos proves Bush was AWOL?
BTW, I’ve had “Not-observed” entries in OER’s as well. It happens when you get deployed on temporary duty, such as a school or another location or change of station or when your supervising Officer is not on station.
Was I AWOL too cosmos?
Kansas,
WHERE was Bush, when his “not-observed” OER’s were written?
cosmos,
Your question implies an answer that he was not AWOL. It is the way OER’s and APR’s were written.
If he were actually AWOL, the Judge Advocate would then take possession of his supervision and entries would have been in other documents not the OER form.
As I understand it, he transferred to an Alabama unit I think, don’t know would have to see the documents. If the transfer occurred while he was technically assigned to the Texas ANG, then the supervisor may have written “Not observed.”
I knew a full Colonel who lived in San Antonio, but who had officers he monitored all over the state of Texas. He was at the headquarters level and although in the chain of command did not actually see any of his troops regularly because he was the endorsing official.
The supervision was done by the installation Commander or some other Commander. The Colonel could have easily put “Not Observed” on the OER as well as a comment.
“Not Observed” does not equate to being AWOL.
In fact, if a person was indeed AWOL, there would have been a behavioral entry along with the appropriate back up letters in the person’s file. A statement of inappropriate behavior as conduct not becoming an officer would have been so advised by the legal staff and certainly the admin types at the HQ.
To my knowledge, no comments exist.
To my knowledge, no comments exist.Posted by: Kansas
They exist only on the liberal tape recordings and electric democratic koolaid acid test.
They have no minds of their own.They keep whining and crying about Bushy being a criminal, waa-waa-waa!
And they get no respect for it. Hell, the press cannot even get any mileage out of this story anymore. The extreme is CBS.
So many crying libs, so little kleenex. What’s a lib to do?
“Toto, we must be back in Kansas, damn it!”
“I can tell because the news still gets here way behind the rest of the country. See? They are still talking about President Bush being AOL. They must be about three years behind the times.”
“Toto?”
“arf!” “arf!”
:::tail wagging:::
“As I understand it, he transferred to an Alabama unit I think, …”
Posted by: Kansas, aka troll | August 18, 2007 at 08:29 PM
Okay… now provide links to the documents of his service at that “Alabama unit”.
now provide links to the documents of his service at that “Alabama unit”.
Posted by: cosmos
Why cosmos? To what end does this serve? All you can do is wee-wee-wee all the way home with it. You applying for 60 Minutes or something? You think you will reveal a scandal not seen before? Ewwwwwwwwww! You think anyone CARES?
Bush was elected twice. He can’t run again. Mission accomplished.
Today, he is the Commander and Chief.
Jeckle,
So no documents???
cosmos, so what?
Has nothing to do with the price of beans in China.
The subject of this thread was the DRAFT.
I am not in favor of bringing back the draft. Why? Because it wouldn’t even catch unemployed knuckle heads like you.
I am all out of kleenex tonight. So you will have to wipe your snotty crying the blues about Bush nose somewhere on your body.
Bush rocks until his second elected term in office ends.
Booooooooooooo Hooooooooooooooo!@
Anything on the draft? I didn’t think you could think for yourself and post about the renewal of the draft.
All you have are your koolaid tapes.
It’s all yours.
But, but, it’s all Bushy’s fault!
Don’t you want to hear me singing the blues?
It’s all Bushy’s fault!
The draft? What about it?
It’s all Bushy’s fault!
I’ve always been in favor of the draft…when we make the decision to go to war everyone needs to think of the consequences and everyone needs to share the sacrifice equally…you can bet if we had an active draft, we would NEVER have invaded Iraq. The draft would force the ones who make these decisions to consider the consequences of getting involved in international conflicts. When all citizens are involved, we’d have more power to call the shots. As it stands now, too many of us don’t pay much attention because they can stay detached from the whole mess if they choose to.My brother is a big supporter of Bush and his war..he has 3 sons, two who are old enough to serve…I (playing the devil’s advocate) asked his oldest if he was planning to join the military, and his parents gave an empathic “NO”. If my nephew had had no choice in the matter..I doubt my brother would be such a stanch Bush supporter..as it is, he’s very comfortable in his role of arm chair warrior.
Luckily, my generation does not believe we owe the government two years service!Would you be willing to spread the word about http://www.draftresistance.org? It’s a site dedicated to shattering the myths surrounding the selective slavery system and building mass civil disobedience to stop the draft before it starts!Our banner on a website, printing and posting the anti-draft flyer or just telling friends would help.Thanks!Scott KohlhaasPS. When it comes to conscription, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure!