Question about Draft Card

[srs]

I missed out on the "Bringing back the draft" after MikePA called it a day with 182 post, so I couldn't ask this question there.
Anyway does anyone know what the classification of I-H meant on the draft card? I was a high school senior when I got my card in 1972. Thank you.

 

[Bird]

According to this site it meant "Registrant not currently subject to processing for induction". Of course, I don't know anything about the reliability or accuracy of the information, but I'd guess that's right; that you weren't subject to processing for induction until you graduated from high school.

 

[Junkman]

I gave up reading it when the day after I read everything from top to bottom, there were 42 new posts. I figured that Mike would pull the plug on it at some point, so I could catch up on the reading. LOL /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[AndyM]

It was a very interesting thread, with many viewpoints, and it lasted much longer than I had originally thought. Most people were civil the whole time, without personal attacks, which I assume is the reason why it wasn't closed right away.

 

[Bird]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Most people were civil the whole time, without personal attacks, which I assume is the reason why it wasn't closed right away. )</font>

Correct, Andy. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I figured that Mike would pull the plug on it at some point )</font>

It was NOT a unilateral decision on Mike's part. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[srs]

Thanks Bird, you da man!!!! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[OkeeDon]

<font color="blue"> It was NOT a unilateral decision on Mike's part.</font>

More than you know. A few of us who are not moderators discussed it in PM's before it was closed, and also thought it was time to wrap it up before it started repeating itself.

 

[Libertine]

srs:
<font color="blue">I missed out on the "Bringing back the draft" </font>
So did I. But anyone objecting to Irag ought to read cowboydoc's post of 4/20/03 12:58am post #412200 (I don't know how to set up a link to other posts). And if they don't get it, read it again a couple of times. Then, reflect on the fact they're only paying $2 gallon for fuel instead of $5 gallon. Then, read a little history.
JEH

 

[TBone]

<font color="red"> "I missed out on the "Bringing back the draft"
So did I. But anyone objecting to Irag ought to read cowboydoc's post of 4/20/03 12:58am post #412200 (I don't know how to set up a link to other posts). And if they don't get it, read it again a couple of times. Then, reflect on the fact they're only paying $2 gallon for fuel instead of $5 gallon. Then, read a little history." </font>

Ok, I read Richard's post, then I re-read it a couple of times, I reflected on the $2 gas, then I brushed up on my history.

AND I STILL DON't BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY BUSINESS IN IRAQ.

TBone

 

[OkeeDon]

<font color="blue"> Ok, I read Richard's post, then I re-read it a couple of times, </font>

Now, research it. It's about 60% fiction or misleading. The thing that made me question it was the statement that girls are going to school for the first time. Girls have always gone to school in Iraq. Anyone who wants the links I used and the facts I dug up, PM me.