Y2K Bug Resurfaces, 14,000 Dead Men Called To Register For Draft
42 replies, posted
[URL="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/2014/07/10/men-get-draft-notices-years-after-the-fact/Bgjk0abnmR2eAv5zBJT8BN/story.html"]Source[/URL]
[quote]No, the United States isn’t trying to build a military force of centenarians.
It just seems that way after the Selective Service System mistakenly sent notices to more than 14,000 Pennsylvania men born between 1893 and 1897, ordering them to register for the nation’s military draft and warning that failure to do so is ‘‘punishable by a fine and imprisonment.’’
...
The glitch, it turns out, originated with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation during a transfer of nearly 400,000 records to the Selective Service. A clerk working with the state’s database failed to select the century, producing records for males born between 1993 and 1997 — and for those born a century earlier, PennDOT spokeswoman Jan McKnight said Thursday.
‘‘We made a mistake, a quite serious selection error,’’ McNight said.
The Selective Service didn’t initially catch it because the state used a two-digit code to indicate year of birth, spokesman Pat Schuback said. The federal agency identified 27,218 records of men born in the 1800s, began mailing notices to them on June 30, and began receiving calls from family members on July 3. By that time, it had sent 14,250 notices in error.[/quote]
Wouldn't you only be 17-16 if born in 1997 though?
That would be pretty neat, honestly, if I were sent a draft letter for my great-great-grandpa. I'd save it as a piece of family history.
Mistake? Sure. Neat reminder of your ancestry? Most definitely.
I am just impressed that the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has electronic record of people born during 1893 and 1897.
[QUOTE=zakedodead;45353170]Wouldn't you only be 17-16 if born in 1997 though?[/QUOTE]
That only one year away from draftable age.
[QUOTE=zakedodead;45353170]Wouldn't you only be 17-16 if born in 1997 though?[/QUOTE]
If you want to apply for federal aid for college you need to register for Selective Service. Not sure why they'd be threatened with a fine or imprisonment since there's no draft, maybe there's a state law in PA about that.
[QUOTE=zakedodead;45353170]Wouldn't you only be 17-16 if born in 1997 though?[/QUOTE]
And for those who are 117
[QUOTE=outlawpickle;45353191]If you want to apply for federal aid for college you need to register for Selective Service. Not sure why they'd be threatened with a fine or imprisonment since there's no draft, maybe there's a state law in PA about that.[/QUOTE]
It's just the punishment for not registering for selective service. It is a federal law though.
That'd be one hell of a thing, recruiting troops who woulda fought in World War 1. Thankfully the Selective Service System isn't capable of temporal displacement, otherwise a lotta Pennsylvanian young adults/teens woulda been ripped out of the early 20th century and into our timeframe.
Come to think of it, that could be the plot to a rather weird sci-fi war movie, with nearly 30,000 World War 1 soldiers trying to adjust to life in the 21st century after being plucked out of time by a glitched-out AI linked to an experimental "conscription drive", whilst the government tries to send them back to the past and somehow try to keep the timeline from twisting itself into knots due to them seeing the future. Rest assured that'd be a script that the Hollywood Fat Cat Suits would give to the intern to put through the shredder, since it doesn't have enough Michael Bay shallowness or softcore tits and is just plain weird.
So did they intend to send these letters to actual living people right now? Cause I don't want one.
[QUOTE=ironman17;45353232]That'd be one hell of a thing, recruiting troops who woulda fought in World War 1. Thankfully the Selective Service System isn't capable of temporal displacement, otherwise a lotta Pennsylvanian young adults/teens woulda been ripped out of the early 20th century and into our timeframe.
Come to think of it, that could be the plot to a rather weird sci-fi war movie, with nearly 30,000 World War 1 soldiers trying to adjust to life in the 21st century after being plucked out of time by a glitched-out AI linked to an experimental "conscription drive", whilst the government tries to send them back to the past and somehow try to keep the timeline from twisting itself into knots due to them seeing the future. Rest assured that'd be a script that the Hollywood Fat Cat Suits would give to the intern to put through the shredder, since it doesn't have enough Michael Bay shallowness or softcore tits and is just plain weird.[/QUOTE]
Sounds like something that would have been good in the 80s if directed by someone like Ridley Scott
us generals confirmed for necromancers
jolly good boys, time to get up out of your graves and fight the great war again
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;45353273]Sounds like something that would have been good in the 80s if directed by someone like Ridley Scott[/QUOTE]
True that. Maybe an alt-universe Ridley Scott got that script and made "Centennial Drive", set in the distant cyberpunk future of 2014 and loaded with all the things that folks in the 80's thought we'd have 30 years after the film came out. Kinda like Back To The Future 2 only a bit grubbier and with less Michael J Fox, or Blade Runner only slightly shinier and with Rutger Hauer as a German soldier plucked from the trenches. Hell the movie could draw to a close after "Battenheimer" goes on a shooting spree, and phases back into 1916 just as he's been gunned down by the New New York Police Department, where he gives a familiar, albeit altered speech to the medic who finds him in those ghastly trenches of the Somme.
"I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe. Motorcars that fly across the skylines of America... I've watched blazing lights flicker on the side of the Statue of Liberty. All these, wonders will be forgotten, in time. Like... tears, in rain. Time... to die." And as that last breath leaves his body, rain starts to fall and the camera zooms up from his lifeless body, as the sound of gunfire echoes around him accompanied by the familiar "BZZZMPT"s of other WW1 soldiers being warped back onto the battlefield. And yes, I just imagined an alternate future where this movie happened in place of Blade Runner. Like I said, [B]weird[/B].
I think there might be a great-grandfather paradox involved.
Like, you take an army that was fighting a war in the past and displace them into the future. What happens to America in WW1 without their army? How would it exist if it had lost? Would the industries which built the AI exist?
[QUOTE=Krinkels;45353523]I think there might be a great-grandfather paradox involved.
Like, you take an army that was fighting a war in the past and displace them into the future. What happens to America in WW1 without their army? How would it exist if it had lost? Would the industries which built the AI exist?[/QUOTE]
Well, the way it'd pan out would be that a dashing rogue hacker character, the same one who was hired to hack the AI (but accidentally made it some sort of SHODAN analogue), manages to defeat the rogue AI in a cyberspace battle akin to the climax of Legend only looking like an illustration by H.R Giger (may he rest in peace), fix the displacer machine and send everyone back, just as Battenheimer goes down in a blaze of glory.
However a few of the displaced soldiers were killed during Battenheimer's rampage, causing a few changes, for instance the inventor of the time displacer "remembers" that his great grandfather disappeared during the war and was never found, and the hacker's partner-in-crime, who's great-grandpa originally died some time after the Great War, ends up vanishing altogether, only for that one red-headed hardass chief-of-security lady to change dramatically, where it turns out she was the hacker's partner in the altered timeline (acting as a "friend on the inside"), as revealed through a sequence of altered earlier scene snippets where the original partner is replaced with the redhead.
But overall, most of the soldiers return to the Great War and die at their predestined times, whether it was in a hail of German bullets, in a cloud of the insidious gas, or in the case of Thomas Chester on his deathbed some time in the 80's, recounting his experiences to a guy played by Ridley Scott, insinuating a faux "based on actual events" spin on the tale and a bit of meta depth.
[QUOTE=find me;45353255]So did they intend to send these letters to actual living people right now? Cause I don't want one.[/QUOTE]
you dont need one if you've already signed up, like an intelligent person
as someone who's passion in learning about WWI, and spreading knowledge about it, it would have been pretty cool if I had gotten one.
especially considering my birthday was in 1996.
[QUOTE=find me;45353255]So did they intend to send these letters to actual living people right now? Cause I don't want one.[/QUOTE]
Maybe cause nobody has whined yet about me not signing up.
Probs should send that in soon before I get arrested.
This would suck for me, since my family's lineage on my father's side all have the same first name, including me.
Thanks, Pop Pop, now I'll be mistakenly drafted under your name. [sp]Just kidding, I love you Pop Pop, rest in peace[/sp]
Although they'll be super confused to see "I" previously was enlisted in the Italian military back during WWII.
[QUOTE=Soukuw;45354913]Maybe cause nobody has whined yet about me not signing up.
Probs should send that in soon before I get arrested.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, what exactly is this? Do you sign up that you agree to be drafted in case there is a military emergency at some point in the future or something? Why is it mandatory?
[QUOTE=Soukuw;45354913]Maybe cause nobody has whined yet about me not signing up.
Probs should send that in soon before I get arrested.[/QUOTE]
Just sign up online, they have a system for it(your parents may have done it for you actually).
Reminds me of that time our government sent us a notification that my grandpa had failed to pay his taxes for seven years. Only one problem; he'd been dead for seven years.
[QUOTE=Stopper;45354946]Sorry, what exactly is this? Do you sign up that you agree to be drafted in case there is a military emergency at some point in the future or something? Why is it mandatory?[/QUOTE]
Pretty much. Whereas other countries like South Korea where all male between a certain age have to serve a number of years, in the US, the Selective Service is responsible for collecting a list of names to be drafted during military emergencies. Basically, it is the lucky of the draw. However, I keep reading rumor that people born during certain time of month have less chance of being drafted, or people in the lower income area are more likely to be drafted, or people with non-white name get drafted more.
However, you don't agree to be drafted, you are by law REQUIRED to be registered.
Still, I just think that forcing people to serve in the military is wrong. As well as the fact that I think it is wrong to say to somebody, "I am ordering you to leave your home and love ones to get shot at rather you want to or not." Also, some people are just not cut out for military service and some people shouldn't receive military training at all.
If Putin is a dick v 3, European arty runs free, then the draft would probably be reinstated, which is why you have to sign up
[editline]11th July 2014[/editline]
Well you did a much better job
Finally they're going after those freeloading old bastards. If I had to sign up, they should too. I don't care if you're 130, you have a duty to your country.
[QUOTE=Person234;45355045]Pretty much. Whereas other countries like South Korea where all male between a certain age have to serve a number of years, in the US, the Selective Service is responsible for collecting a list of names to be drafted during military emergencies. Basically, it is the lucky of the draw. However, I keep reading rumor that people born during certain time of month have less chance of being drafted, or people in the lower income area are more likely to be drafted, or people with non-white name get drafted more.
However, you don't agree to be drafted, you are by law REQUIRED to be registered.
Still, I just think that forcing people to serve in the military is a mistake. Some people are just not cut out for military service and some people shouldn't receive military training at all.[/QUOTE]
What if you're a conscientious objector?
[QUOTE=Stopper;45355082]What if you're a conscientious objector?[/QUOTE]
Then there are two options for the conscientious objector. If they just don't want to kill but ok with serving in the military, the military will probably train you to do something other than front-line infantry, ex: cook, mechanics, clerk... However, given that frontline are pretty much gone in modern warfare, anybody can run into combat situation and you will have to be pretty delusional to think that you can survive a war zone without learning some weapons handling. Remember Jessica Lynch? She was a supply clerk in a Maintenance Company. Her convoy took a wrong turn and got attacked and captured by Iraqi troops.
The other option is for people who absolutely refuse to serve in the military, then the person will be ordered to alternative services. Mostly, it is some works that also helps with the war effort.
Anyway, a draft is SUPER BAD for morale whether it be the public's or soldiers'. From what I understand it's basically impossible to do in a modern western democracy.
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;45355329]Anyway, a draft is SUPER BAD for morale whether it be the public's or soldiers'. From what I understand it's basically impossible to do in a modern western democracy.[/QUOTE]
Agree. A population's support for a conflict will dwindle if they realize that their love ones or someone they know could get sent away to get shot at. The best way to keep up the support for the war (as well as propaganda) is to keep the civilian population as far away from the war as possible. To do that, you minimize the effect of the war has on the economy (Don't ration or raise taxes), you keep the news positive, and you don't draft people to get shot at.
This also raised another interesting point. Never in history have a civilian population been so unaffected by a war their country is currently fighting in. A few years back, while Canadian soldiers were still in Afghanistan, I woke up, go to classes, go do some grocery shopping, return to residence (or dorm for you Americans), while waiting for the bus, I saw a person reading a newspaper with a picture of a Canadian soldier, then I remember, "We are at war."
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.