Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA We watch the disaster that is Iraq, and many of those critical seem to feel that we don't have the proper manpower over there. So why don't we do it? Re-instate the draft, get the necessary number of troops to Iraq, and get the place stabilized or whatever the strategy is. Your thoughts?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder As it relates to Iraq, the war is so unpopular I don't think a draft would ever happen. The only way I see a draft being reinstituted is if we had an attack on U.S. soil, via a conventional army such as North Korea's, or several more attacks on the scale of 9/11. But just to buttress Iraq? No way.
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger I think it was a mistake to end the draft. We need some kind of tradition of national service, and people need to understand that it's expected of them. I'd like to see everyone drafted at the appropriate age, and when the military is at full strength, or if the draftee requests, they get assigned to agencies that build/maintain roads, disaster response, maintain national parks, etc. I'm sure a lot of people would go ahead and accept a military assignment, especially if you gave them a shorter term or hazardous duty pay. But I'd start it by putting everyone through a boot camp of sorts, just less emphasis on combat. Emphasize physical fitness and discipline.
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger Oh, but I don't think it would help in Iraq. I do think we'll be out of there by the time they could gear up for a draft. The pentagon doesn't want a draft, but their stated line of reasoning doesn't seem to add up. So I think it's really that it's simply politically undesirable.
Originally Posted By alexbook >>I think it was a mistake to end the draft.<< Yikes! I would never want to put any young person through the terrors of military conscription. I'm about five years too young to have been subject to the draft in Vietnam, but I remember how scared my older cousins were, and I remember how intensely relieved I was when the draft was ended. ----- As a purely political question, I can't imagine the draft being reinstated for nation-building in Iraq, or even to contain Iran or North Korea. None of these countries are enough of a threat to the United States, and after Vietnam we decided as a society that "stopping them over there" wasn't a good enough reason to commit to total war. The only way I could imagine the draft being reinstituted in this country in this generation is if some other country (not a terrorist organization, but an actual country like China) attacked the U.S. or one of our major allies (Taiwan?) in force.
Originally Posted By gadzuux The republicans would never do it because the backlash would likely unseat them from power. The democrats wouldn't be likely to do it either, unless absolutely necessary, precisely because of vietnam. Additionally, you have to remember that the US military is a highly discriminatory group. Not only do they not want gays, but they don't want felons, people with even minor disabilities, and plenty of other restrictions. By setting up a mandatory service rule, the military would then be placed in the position of singling out specific people they deem unacceptable. And in an environment were service is the norm, they are unfairly tagging these people as unsuitable for service which could unfairly impact them for the rest of their lives.
Originally Posted By imadisneygal Or you could tell him to tell the armed forces that he wets the bed. That one will have you declared unfit just as fast...
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Yikes! I would never want to put any young person through the terrors of military conscription. I'm about five years too young to have been subject to the draft in Vietnam, but I remember how scared my older cousins were, and I remember how intensely relieved I was when the draft was ended.>> My draft number was 20. I remember well the fear I felt when my student deferment ended and I get the letter telling me to report for my pre-induction physical. I remember my great relief and celebration when the draft was ended and I did not have to report. But I support a draft and would not allow college deferments. Our politicians would be a lot more careful about getting into wars if THEIR kids and the kids of the wealthy had to serve. The way it is right now it is pretty much the kids of the poor and the minorities who serve. And what the heck. If they weren't in the Army they'd just be working at McDonald’s right? They are pretty much expendable. And that allows for way too many adventures in the name of defense.
Originally Posted By ecdc If the draft were instituted, you'd suddenly see a quick about-face from white, well to do Republicans who have thus far had the luxury of supporting the war. Their children aren't the ones off fighting so it's easy to sit back and pontificate on message boards and at water coolers. With their children possibly the next to go, Iraq would be even more unpopular than it is now. But remember - Bush won't change the course, even if only his wife and his dog support him!
Originally Posted By jonvn "Or you could tell him to tell the armed forces that he wets the bed. That one will have you declared unfit just as fast..." Oh, didn't know that one....maybe he could act both gay and say he wets the bed.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad <<<people need to understand that it's expected of them.>>> ...and that would be??? Not sure I understand this statment, not sure I DISAGREE with it, but I don't understand it.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad Yes let's make those young people, who become...let's say physicians, spend an additional 2 years in the military, BEFORE they start their 12 year journey toward medicine. I can see the vaule of having our future chemical engineers serving in the Army. I'll be if Bill Gates had done two madatory years, Microsoft Windows wouldn't have any bugs. Steve Jobs may be a nicer guy. Eli Manning would be able to throw the football farther. While we are at it, what about women? Whould you have women serve as well? I can't see Hanna Montanna being a good soldier, once she comes of age. The draft and a mandatory service are two entirely different things.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad I'm not necessarily against mandatory service, but it does NOT make a country a better place to live, nor does it make the citizen at large a nicer person. Not only that but there is no way we as tax payers could AFFORD it, there is no way an elected official in our nation would vote for it, and there is no way people would go along with it at the current rate of pay. These are just a few of the reasons why it can't happen in the US.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I think national service for young men and women is wonderful, especially for those not going on to Higher Education. There are a number of skills to be developed and it offers support. It works well in Germany where people can take up military service, but most of it is working in schools, hospitals, conservation projects, elderly homes etc. I think the world could benefit greatly from adopting this approach. But just a draft into military service (I am not a fan).
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "Topic: What would happen if there was a draft?" The US might stop complaining about the number of Mexican immigrants, but Canada would probably complain about their new influx ;-)
Originally Posted By mele National service is one thing but a traditional draft for the military seems different to me. Not every person has the skills or ability to serve in the military, but nearly everyone could do *something* to help their country.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>The US might stop complaining about the number of Mexican immigrants, but Canada would probably complain about their new influx ;-)<< LOL! Point: Davewasbaloo.
Originally Posted By DlandJB I support mandatory military service or national service of some kind for those who are not able to serve in the military. 18 months to 2 years is not a lot to ask of someone who enjoys all the benefits of being an American. Plus, it could actually make kids mature a little sooner than they seem to now adays and it would make politicians think twice before sending these kids into harm's way. But, I doubt it will ever happen. Too political and too radical a concept.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad <<<18 months to 2 years is not a lot to ask of someone who enjoys all the benefits of being an American. >>> I must respectfully disagree. Being an American is all about a little word with a big meaning, freedom. To support such a practice is to think that the average kid of 18 isn't mature enough when he or she gets out of high school, and therefore they need some further time to mature. I don't believe that at all, in fact if we could somehow test this, my hypothesis says that the same people would achieve or under-acheive the same things as they do without the service, because there is no magic or cause within the service to make something be there that isn't there already. Oh sure, there are some who go into the Military and come out in 2,4, 6 years whatever and it does change them. But mandatory serivice...no way will 2 more years of military service forced on the masses make the average increase in their level of success or happiness or responsibility or whatever other measure you want to place on the effect. IMHO ofcourse.
