irateplatypus

This post was partially prompted by a post by lordjeebus in another thread. There have been small preparatory steps taken to allow for the activation of draft boards recently. This is in response to increased American commitments overseas as well as a constriction in manpower that has taken place over the last 10-15 years. In essence, more international responsibility spread among fewer soldiers.

So...

1. Do you think the draft is a good idea in the sense that it will solve more problems than it creates? (this can be from a practical, ethical, fiscal, etc. point of view)

2. Do you think that its unfair to ask American reservists and guardsmen (guardspersons?) to do 15 months consecutive duty overseas?

3. Do you think the draft will actually make a comeback?

Sparhawk

1. Yes, under certain scenarios (ie no more rich kid/college deferments, 2 new divisions, adding women to the selective service act). I also think that the draft serves as a useful first test of a man's character. I judge many of today's politicians on what they did in regards to the draft (volunteered, got out of it in any number of ways).

2. No. What I think is unfair is to have them do a year in Afghanistan, send them home for 3 months, and pick them back up again for another year. The dependence the U.S. Army has on its Guard/Reserve components is shameful. I read today that 60,000 of our 138,000 troops in Iraq are Guard/Reserve.

3. I doubt it.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

onetime2

First I don't think these supposed steps are to reinstitute the draft, it's my understanding that these are things done semi-regularly to maintain that as an option should it be needed.

1. Yes. I may even be in favor of mandatory military service.

2. No, it's not unfair. You know there is this possibility when you sign up. Is it the ideal way to operate, no.

3. No because I think there would be more than enough volunteers if we were truly faced with a need to drastically increase the size of the military.

__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

lordjeebus

1. No -- I consider the draft an unethical form of involuntary servitude. Considering the low pay, it's one step away from slavery. I think that if we can't raise enough volunteer troops for a conflict, it's not a fight worth fighting. I doubt that the US would have trouble recruiting people to defend against a direct invasion of the country. I also believe that imposing the military mindset on those that are not willing to be a part of it stinks strongly of fascism.

2. Unfair, no. Unwise, yes. The military needs to consider the risk of losing its reservists and guardists if it does not treat them in a way that they would consider fair.

3. I don't think so. I don't think that much of the military top brass wants that. The president at the time would practically give up their chances of reelection also. Now if that president were serving his second term...*shudder*


According to http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/nation...3_draft08.html the Pentagon made its "first formal request to reestablish draft boards since the draft was abolished in 1973." Although I doubt there will be a draft, I think there's more behind it then routine.

james t kirk

It would be political suicide.

But it would benefit my country - Canada immeasurably since there would undoubtedly be a wave of young talented American men who would say F you and head north like what happened in Vietnam.

There was a show on the CBC a while ago and it traced the lives of many Vietnam Draft Dodgers who came to Canada. It was amazing to see what these guys amounted to. Since most stayed in Canada, the benefit was ours.

So, I say, please, re-establish the draft, it will give us an incredible talent pool of immigrants to pick from. These guys would all be English speaking north Americans with skills.

irateplatypus

and apparently tails... since they would be tucked between their legs.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Arc101

Good point that. Thankfully I live in England, and so there is no chance of the draft ever making a comeback in this country.

However, if the draft does make a come back in the USA then Bush should volunteer to do some front line service - and not bravely protect Texas from invasion. It would be interesting to see how long wars go on for if politicians had to do some fighting themselves.

Sparhawk

Wow, 2 posts in a row saying a draft would end a presidency.

Actually, looking back at the 60's we've got:

Kennedy: shot.
Johnson: Didn't run for second term.
Nixon: Resigned.

Okay, maybe it isn't a good idea...

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Peetster

1. No. There is no need. There are plenty of qualified volunteers. The dicipline problems that result from people that don't want to be there are not worth the extra manpower pool you get.

2. Yes. They signed on the line and took an oath. It's an oath they must keep. I know, they thought "easy money" and "one weekend a month", but reality happens.

3. No. See 1.

It's interesting that I haven't heard a peep about this from my Manpower Requirements buds in BUPERS or OPNAV. I'll ask the question I guess.

nirol

I am with Peetster on this one.

We are a long way from a draft, but I think the military needs to adjust, we need more on the tip of the spear and less behind it. The logistics tail behind a fighting division is huge. The support troops (often doing jobs that could be handled by contractors, etc.) out number the front line troops like 11 to 1.

__________________
'Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
Samuel Johnson (1709 - 1784)

Sun Tzu

If the need arose (like the shit hitting the fan) things will be done that have to be. In my view if it’s a scenario that’s just and isn’t built on a foundation of controversy I think there would be plenty of volunteers.

As far as reservists go; they are volunteers that understand when they sign the dotted line that is a possibility, so if someone is going to collect the benefits they had better be prepared to serve. Even with full active duty once discharged (provided it was honorable) still have an obligation; I had a four year reserve status that I was obligated to after being discharged. I didn’t have to report like standard reservists do, but in the event of a war I would be eligible for a first round of drafting. That’s something I knew ahead before signing.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

ARTelevision

Yes, I'd say that it's a call based on need. When it is necessary then it must be. Until then, we are better off with a volunteer army.

Compulsory service of some kind, however - non-military or military - could be a very good thing.

__________________
create evolution

seretogis

I'd be more than happy to therve along thide thothe hunky military boyth!

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

BigGov

1) A draft has many benefits, and while many people say military service is horrible, that's almost slavery, many people find lifelong friends in the military, they gain more understanding of the world around them, gain a strong work ethic and sense of responsibility. The military is also paid pretty well considering room, board, and basically everything else is taken care of. (I'm still for giving our soldiers a pay raise however.)

2) No. It's been done before, and it's part of being a soldier.

3) No, unless we go to war with China, or WWIII starts (would actually probably be the same thing). The main problem about implementing the draft right now is that it would be career suicide.

__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

winsecure

I don't see a draft being viable for a couple reasons...

1) it would be virtual political suicide for the sitting president that approved it to go forward

2) it would lead to an overall degradation in the commitment of the average soldier and result in losing some of the edge the u.s. military currently enjoys due to the highly specialized training that is possible through the volunteer program

guthmund

1. When is the draft ever a good idea? If a country cannot find volunteers to do the work of the noble then maybe the idea isn't as noble as the country thinks. When as anything "compulsory" been a good idea? Especially something compulsory on the same level as serving in the military?

2. Nope. Even Guardsmen and Reservists volunteered for their role. They may not have appreciated the scope, but they volunteered all the same. Not to say that I don't empathize with the mixed up schedules and long tours, but such is the life of a journeyman soldier.

3. I seriously doubt it, but then again stranger things have happened. And, like it was pointed out, the draft boards are being re-established....and I find it hard to believe that our government does anything "semi-regularly" other than vote themselves raises.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

Rodney

1. I didn't think the draft was a good idea at first, but now I do. Not just for the military, but for noational service of some kind. People could have choices -- the military, urban education programs like City Year, working in ambulance crews, conservation projects, and so on. One thing we've lost in this country is the sense that we're all in this together. We have to remember that the common good is everybody's business, not just the people we hire to do it. Second, as a lot of old liberals are saying, military service sucks in every way you might think of, but it does introduce you to kinds of people you would never, ever have met , who come from different backgrounds and think entirely differently than you. We don't have that anymore; there's increasingly no place in our society where different classes of people mix. Even racial segregation in schools is at its lowest point in 30 years. Parts of our society are increasingly isolated from each other. In the long run, that ain't good.

The draft would have to be fair, of course -- everybody goes. And the hard duty -- armed forces, etc. -- would have to be shared equally by all socio-economic groups.

2. I'm pretty sure that most Guardsmen believe that they're signing up to protect the homeland, not fight overseas. It's probably a possibility they accept, but only in an extreme national emergency. This isn't one. If the country sends them overseas for long periods, the country had better be prepared to help them pick up the pieces at home, because unlike the family of an active-duty military person, guard families don't have the support struture -- institutional, financial, etc. -- in place to handle long absences without hardship. But so far, the Guard are being treated like the temps of the military -- use 'em, then lose 'em.
As for the reserve, the armed forces of this county have been drawn down to the point where the military no longer has enough of certain specialist units to handle large military operations, and _must_ call in reservists every time. I think this is wrong. While I believe we spend too much on the military, I think we could have five or ten billion a year off some of these boondoggle black projects we're not supposed to hear about and both beef up military numbers and military training, support, and wages.

3. Will the draft make a comeback. Maybe as national service, eventually. After all, most of these supposedly effete European countries have national service -- again, not strictly the military, but also other types of service -- and I see no rioting in the streets.

The middel- and upper-classes haven't pulled their weight in a war since (and including Vietnam). In Vietnam, much of the fighting was left to lower-class draftees. Since then, we've been hiring our soldiers. While I'd say that most of them are patriots, the most common motivation for going in seems to be educational benefits, job training, and so on.

Will the draft make a comeback? Don't know. But as someone who does not agree in rushing to war, I think it should come back. Because I think people in this country will be more thoughtful about going to war if more of them have loved ones and friends in service.

BigGov

The Roman empire has compulsory military service. They didn't do too bad.

__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

eple

...until it collapsed partly due to the campaigns initiated to keep the gigantic military busy...

Superbelt

What about the Spartans? How did their society do with their compulsory career military service? When and why did things start to break down with them?

Arc101

You really belive that a draft could be fair ? Not a chance, those with the power and wealth will make damn sure their sons and daughters will be kept far away from any dangers.

Seaver

The Draft was never even talked about by Bush or any Republican.

I hate to say dem. vs rep. because I'm neutral, but it was Democrats who put this out in order to subvert the two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It was to cause discussions like this and to make people look back to Vietnam.

1) Only in cases such as World Wars or against militaries that equal or are greater than our own does the Draft have benefits. In a non-draft military moral is FAR better than draft. Its the difference between making and active choice and believing in what you're fighting for (if only a little bit), and being forced into something. Americans tend to get pissed when they feel they're being forced.

Everyone knows what happened with draftees in Vietnam, there's a reason our officers aren't being shot in the back in Afghanistan and Iraq. Say what you want about the people that joined the military for college money, but they KNEW the possibilities when they signed up.

2) I think I stated my opinion in #1 here. They KNOW exactly what they risk while signing up. No one gives things away for free, and using "I didnt think we'd go to war" is not an excuse.

3) No the draft will not happen unless North Korea suddenly invades South Korea. Then we'd have a giant 11 million man army to go up against.

And no, a female draft will never happen unless China gets involved. As its obvious by now I'm in the military, I did not sign up so that I'd have to see my sister, my girlfriend, etc. get called into action. Not that I'm sexist, it's just something I'd fight to the end to prevent.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

Superbelt

It wasn't "the dems" it was a specific democrat who fought in Vietnam and thought that reinstituting the draft would be a good deterrent against us ever getting into an unnecessary war like Iraq again.

Rodney

Thing is, the sons of wealth used to go to war a lot -- as officers, sure, but they went. I remember reading that some rather large number of males from Ivy League colleges did military service up through the '50s. Now hardly anyone from the Ivies goes in. Same with congressmen. I just read this somewhere: back 25 years ago, something like 325-350 of 500 congresspersons had military service under their belts. Now it's down to something like 125.

So, that says something about our country. Used to be everybody felt the obligation to get involved. Now, we just send in the little people. If somebody made a direct attack on the U.S., would the children of privilege then sign up? I really have my doubts.

So, like you, I'm pessimistic on that level. On the other hand, national service on the European model also includes non-combat and non-military service. So okay, the sons of the rich would still be kept out of the line of fire, but maybe most of them could be doing some socially responsible job for a year or two that would broaden their brains. Except maybe if Daddy's so powerful he can get junior a soft appointment flying obsolete jet planes in the Texas National Guard or something...

SSJwrestler

i disagree with the draft, because not all men are in the position to go. but i am in favor of national programs where all men of legal age are required to do 2 years active seervice. it would create better health, higher repsonibility, tougher men, greater morals, and also allow men to gain some money

guthmund

Well, I can't seem to find any Romans to refute that.....

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

dragon2fire

o god my they never draft again

that said there are so many ways i could get out of one if it happened

not the lest of witchis my elipesy

MuadDib

I have very mixed feelings about the draft. On one hand, I agree with the sentiment that its wrong to force someone to serve and potentially die for a cause they don't believe in. On the other I can see how it might be considered a duty for all citizens to serve its country in a time of need. Of course, I think the latter is limited to times of our country being invaded or in times of eminent security threats.
A deeper and more pertinent issue for me is whether or not voluntary service is racist or classist. A great number of military personal are their because they need the college money or because its the best paying job they can get. This makes it so that its the poor and minority classes are the ones that bare the brunt of American militarism. You can look at the numbers and see this is clearly the case. Its not fair, but it would seem that the only solution would be compulsory service, but this doesn't take care of the problem of involuntary service. What do you folks think of compulsory service?

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

Tophat665

1. Hell no! If it's an invasion and this country actually needs to be defended, I might volunteer (though I would probably be more useful in an administrative capacity. Let's face it, I can't run for shit. Never could.) but, with the possible exception of WWII, the draft is used to provide bodies to unjust and ill considered wars.

2. They paid for your college, yet you begrudge them a couple of years of service? Of course it's fair. That's what reserves are, the troops you use when your standing army is fully comitted. Of course, it's going to cause recruitment problems down the road, and might lead to an intelligent president having to make some tough choices about what's really important enough to risk lives on. Or an unintelligent presidet reinstating the draft.
3. Well, that depends. Shrub wins in 2004, look for the draft by 2006. Someone with more than a teaspon of grey matter wins, then it'll never happen.

My buddy the colonel's wife warned me about this. This is not just your standard fill up the selective service boards. This is gearing up. Shrub doesn't know his ass from his elbow, but Dick knows they're overextended.

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

GakFace

1, It can be... as long as it truely is needed.. which leads to 2.

2. No, its not really unfair.. we're a citizen, should we receive a call to defend our nation... we should receive it.

3. I hope not.. I could kill if I had to, but I'd really hate to have to. Right now lots of people have joined, especially after 9/11.. assuming we don't go out and get everyone we have killed.. we won't need to.

Like Dragon2Fire, I could probably get out of it. I have really bad allergies, and asthma to boot! Those two make military people say "Well Darn" and keep walking. Oh yeah.. my vision sucks too That just means I get those Beer Goggles though. heh

__________________
RoboBlaster:
Welcome to the club! Not that I'm in the club. And there really isn'a a club in the first place. But if there was a club and if I was in it, I would definitely welcome you to it.

thegreek

alli know is i am scared of the draft, especially for a war that is a little questionable... im 17, so one more year... maybe ill be too tall or somethin.

i also heard that bush wants to pull out of iraq now, kinda interesting after all this talk about how great the war was going

smooth

I just read an interesting op-ed from the Times that described our use of reserve troops as a check on questionable wars. The writer argued that, due to the disruption deploying volunteer troops causes to families and communities, the public will think more critically and respond to the elected officials negatively if our nation keeps engaging in questionable affairs. It was a pretty good read and should still be around from yesterday.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Mojo_PeiPei

1. I think that military/government service should be mandatory for two years. If your not about joining the military join the peace corp. That way kids will be productive, be making money, and get a better education.

2. Reservists joined the military, they gained the benefits from it, now its time for them to pay it back. Sure it might suck, but they must've known what they were doing when they signed the papers.

3. I doubt there will ever be a draft unless there is a full scale world war.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

irateplatypus

wow, good responses from a range of views on this thread. some things i've noticed...

thegreek, where on earth did you get that idea about Bush wanting to pull out? besides, the war is over. did you mean the continuing operations? were you referring to the overall "war on terror?"

The reason I asked about question #2 (about the reservists) is this. I believe that when most of them signed up for the reserve, the maximum foreign tour of duty was 12 months... but Uncle Sam extended it to 15 months in the middle of their contracts. I mean seriously, the government couldn't have anticipated a war less costly than the Iraq war. I mean seriously, their army folded quickly and there is always an occupation/rebuilding process afterwards. It sounds like the government is taking advantage of their position to strong-arm our reservists. If the politicians expect the military to have a global presence to enforce their policy, they shouldn't have to call up every reservist and guardsmen, while screwing their contracts for such a relatively minor conflict (in the grand scope of things).

are they going to mobilize the league of women voters if North Korea gets feisty? Only joking...

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

User Name

1. I think a draft is a terrible idea, even for the Bush administration. It would create a labor shortage, and guess who would be blamed for that. It would be another Vietnam, and the opposition to Bush would be increased exponentially.

2. I do not think it's unfair to the reservists and guardsmen. They signed a contract with the military or whoever to be ready to fight if they are called upon to do so. If they didn't want to go to war, they shouldn't have joined.

3. I do not think the draft will make a comeback anytime soon. Even Bush isn't stupid enough to do that. The division would hurt the country.

tritium

We are a long way from a draft -- to call a draft without an obvious encroaching enemy would be political suicide (reference: Charles Rangel) not only for a president that signed the authorization but for every congressman and senator that voted in favor of the motion.

Not only that, but the long term risk to the economy would greatly diminish the likelihood of a draft motion surviving Capital Hill.

On a side note, I've always felt that the draft process is incredibly descriminatory -- not on a race basis, but more on gender. I feel strongly that women of age should also be required to sign a draft card, not with the possibility of frontline duty, but on a limited service level. There is no rational explanation, in my opinion, why there should be legal rights for everything else except this. Women are quite capable of serving in the military in both times of peace and war in behind the lines capacities-- and even on frontline posts were the need to arise. Why am I required, as a male, to enlist in a process that carries with it an incredibly burden, but women should be excluded? I understand the logic behind preventing women from "frontline service" (whatever that means in this current day and age of biological weapons and ICBMs) but I don't understand why a women couldn't be drafted into military manufacturing or supply/maintenance roles. I know this happens anyway, but why am I compelled by law?

But, that's my little soapbox...

__________________
Blah.

sleepingbeauty

Here is the link to see the preparations
http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

irateplatypus

tritium, i agree with your viewpoint on women being drafted. certainly they should be required to sign up for a similar service requirement that would keep them out of physical combat roles.

so few people express compassion for reservists on the grounds that if they didn't want to go to war... then they shouldn't have joined. i would agree if they were complaining about going to war at all, but that isn't the case. the complaint often lies with the government changing their commmitment requirements in the middle of their service contracts and/or unfairly presenting the criteria for their deployment.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Sparhawk

This surprised me about the responses as well. I think people tend to forget that these are all 18-20 year old kids, signing probably the first contracts of their lives. Ask 4 out of 5 of them if their recruiter lied or misrepresented facts to get them to join, they'll say yeah. And please don't say Caveat Emptor to me, say it to the 18 year old in an afghani foxhole.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

XenuHubbard

This made me laugh. A post like this coming from Seretogis is just so unexpected.

Coming from a country where all men go through military service (unless you know what to say to get out, and a skinhead with a humpback I had in my platoon that had to try out for three consecutive years before getting accepted) I don't think it's a bad idea.

It would, however, most likely not work in the US considering the current foreign policy. Drafting to support nation-building would most likely cause bad PR domestically.

The US has a big enough population to build a satisfactory professional defense force without a draft.

__________________
The above was written by a true prophet. Trust me.

"What doesn't kill you, makes you bitter and paranoid". - SB2000