Desperate times call for desperate measures.

The Pentagon is losing soldiers by the thousands to desertion and abandonment. They have no choice but to take a hard line - this is an attempt to keep the troops in line.

It's sad really, how far will they go?

When I first heard about the special unit that was set up to drag in people who rightly went AWOL in the war against the Vietnamese, the war that the French had not won after twenty years of killing those who wanted to break out of the Empire, I thought, "Why don't they pick up those who went AWOL otherwise". Rich boys who opted out of fighting even though they supported the killing, boys like G.W. Bush who was AWOL from his Texas Air National Guard Unit no matter how many statements you hear to the contrary. Denial being what it is I suppose they will only round those people up who refused to follow unlawful orders.

I say start at the TOP with Texas Air National Guards. Like in 1972 and 1973. First stop at the top then drop it.

It sounds like this is a preparation for re-starting the draft.

Any decrease in AWOL would probably be offset by a decrease in recruitment. But if a draft starts, this sends the message "Cooperate or you'll never be safe".

Bush has now started to sell troops in Iraq for 3+ years. Why? Maybe because Iran is next.

My assumptions as to why Bush used the National Guard instead of the reg Army was because:
(1) using the Guard would create its own pressure for obedience; the public members of the Guard have their public lives to think of and would not want to do anything that would cause them to be disenfranchised from the public life they worked hard to obtain.
(2) the family members of the Guard would be tenacious in scuttling public protest to 'protect' the soldier on the battlefield.
(3) the newly separated-from-society Guard would be more in tune with the 'friendly' aspect, more approachable, more willing to interact, listen, talk to the kids,etc.
Listening to Public Broadcast program in which MN legislators spoke, it was a surprise to hear that 1 in 4 service came back with a disability.
I had initially considered something as vile as Bush carring out a 'vendetta' against the Guard as his own record was lacking, but discarded this idea. Now, when the regular Army has established long-term bases in Iraq, why is the Guard still serving? There is no interaction with the Iraqui people that would create good will taking place now. Why is the Guard still there?
I think they will be there until the Bush administration feels the time is right to make the most political hay from announcement that he is recalling the Guard from active duty; that time being before the election.

Now, of course, I do wonder if using the Guard had a component of allowing them to take the 'hard knocks' and keep the regular Army safe not only physically but also emotionally by keeping them from being demoralized by the horriffic injuries the Guard endured, and allowing the Iraqui to feel that they have 'removed' the Americans when they leave and the regular Army is safely installed in it's insular life in the new bases.