Why we should have a draft.

[Raven]

I had a conversation yesterday with a 57 year old man here in New Hampshire who recently retired from the Army Reserve after 25+ years. He had served over a year in So. Korea when he was a young man. He has his own business, in fact, he IS his own business...property maintence and repair, caretakering. He told me that his old reserve unit from Peterborough, NH was shipping out to Iraq today. He said that had he not retired, he would be with them and he would have lost his business. I asked him what the ages of the people in this unit were and he said that many were in their 30's, 40's and 50's with families and young children.

I know that the question of a draft is another "third rail" of American politics and, as far as I know, none of the candidates are talking about it. I know that George Bush will avoid a draft at all costs because of the political consequences. But I think, as a people, we need a national dialogue on this issue. Should a President be required to implement a draft before he/she calls up reserve troops or National Guard troops for combat duty?

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. Your header is misleading.

Are you in favor of a draft or not? The only people who seem to be in favor of one on this newgroup are those who are pursuing it as politics of desperation. Sort of an Alice in Wonderland kind of argument that goes like this: Force the draft on the Republicans and control the deferments so that everyone is affected by it. In this way, no one will vote Republican.

The flaw in the ointment is that Democrats haven't been able to control any legislation in Congress because the Republicans word-smith the bills behind closed doors. So, it's pretty much a strategy for lemmings.

[Raven]

5. I am in favor of a draft that is fair.

I am certainly not in favor of sending 40 or 50 year old people into combat and then extending their tours indefinately.

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. Nothing in our politicial system is fair. Why should the draft be

any different?

Those who signed up for the military, and spent their entire careers in the military are better prepared for what's happening in Iraq. And if for some reason they decide that backing the Republicans was a bad idea, they are also in the best position to change the course by voting ABB in the next election.

If you want a strategy that will work, this is mine: Don't support a draft and don't make it easier for the career military. They got themselves in this mess, they can get themselves out -- with our help, which we would gladly give it in the way of voting for a Democratic president that will steer us away from the path that Bush has put us on.

[bowens43]

20. They signed up, it is certainly fair that they go.

It is not fair to kidnap those who don't want to participate.

[goddess40]

40. In defense of those that "signed up"

Those that enlisted did so trusting the gov't would not get them involved in an illegal and immoral war.

[The Backlash Cometh]

44. I think we can all sympathize with them at the same time that we can

conclude that they put their trust in the wrong people.

[Hippo_Tron]

71. History should remind them that they can't be sure of that...

As our government has done so in the past.

[rfranklin]

2. The draft is coming...

as soon as Bush is reselected. It's all in place and ready to go. Americans should be made aware of this. We do know, however, that Bush will deny it trick statements that contain hidden escape clauses.

Any person in the military who supports the Republicans should not whine about being sent overseas and the consequences to their family life or business. Any person who is against the Republicans has my deepest sympathy. And I believe they should all come home and Iraq can go to hell.

[Valjean]

60. Actually

Actually, one thing is missing. Bush would need another major catastrophe to justify the draft.

I'm sure he will have no problem engineering such a problem. One could argue that they ignored 9-11 warnings to the point of gross negligence. Either that, or convenient plotting.

[Hippo_Tron]

73. In all fairness 9/11 warnings were ignored because of lack of organization

And communication between the intelligence agencies. This probably didn't start under Bush and probably didn't start under Clinton either. However, one could argue that Bush did nothing useful to make sure that this does not happen again.

[Hippo_Tron]

74. You forget that the GOP still has politics to worry about...

Even if shrub is re-elected in '04. If the draft is implemented in '04 they'll get an ass-kicking in the 2006 elections (no matter how much our congressional leadership sucks) and whoever the dem in '08 is, Hillary Clinton perhaps, will have a very easy time. 95% of voters under age 25 and their parents and many new voters in this category will be racing to the polls to vote for anybody who is against the draft. The GOP is not willing to sacrifice congress for the next 10 years as well as the 2008 election for a draft that they don't need.

[Renew Deal]

3. I have recieved my draft board application.

I am scanning it and putting it up ASAP.

[bfusco]

4. It's a tough decision but I understand the need for discussion

When Charlie Wrangle first proposed it, I thought he was nuts but I now see the what he was getting at and the need for an honest discussion. Our troops are over-extended, our reserve units are stretched and heavily burdened beyond what is expected from reserves, soldiers are not being allowed to leave and reenlistment/enlistment is plummeting. As much as I would deplore seeing my child die for these scum bags oil grab, I think Americans will think twice before getting behind these adventures. War has become detached and removed for Americans and it has become easier to support when it appears like a video game and some poor schmuck trying to get money for college is dieing in the desert. Maybe it's time for everyone, including the children of the wealthy/politicians to share in the sacrifice.

[Raven]

8. My thoughts exactly but

you expressed them vastly better than I ever could! I was a 23 year old "waiting wife" during the Vietnam war and I know that the tide changed in this country when the draft became a reality and when various exemptions were abolished.

[The Backlash Cometh]

14. Why make it easier on career military to vote Republican?

A draft will only extend this war the way that Vietnam was extended and more Americans will die because of it. Put the decision in the hands of the career military by not supporting a draft. Let them decide if they want to continue fighting for Republican ideals by voting for Bush, or if in a moment of lucidity, they figure out that they supported the wrong man in the last election and change the course of the next election by voting Democratic.

[bowens43]

16. If you think that in any case

the children of the privileged will see combat I have some ocean front property in Kansas you may be interested in. The answer isn't to throw more bodies into the fire, the answer is to bring the troops home. I can't believe that people would suggest that because the military is spread thin the government should be able to kidnap children and send them to kill and die. A country that would do that is not worth fighting for. You want to sacrifice your kids, tell them to volunteer but you keep your hands the hell off of mine. You would 'deplore' seeing your child die for oil? Do you have a draft age son? My guess is you don't because 'deplore' is a very weak word when you are talking about the death of your child.

[SemperEadem]

75. until America is invaded and taken over by a foreign force

Americans will never understand how war directly impacts one's life... they will always think that it's no worse than those video Navy Seal games put out. As long as dead bodies aren't seen on the news every night, the population as a whole will be indifferent to the misery it causes, especially those who've never served a day in the military or those who aren't old enough to remember the Vietnam footage back in the '60's and 70's.

[HawkerHurricane]

6. Don't worry!

If Bush is re-elected, they'll re-instate the draft in 2005!

To answer your question, no, the President should not have to implement a draft before he calls up the reserves or national guard. Would you have him inplement a draft before he sends the regulars into combat? Our lives are disrupted too!
"But you're active duty, your lives are supposed to be disrupted!"
Yes, and so are the lives of guardsmen and reservists. You sign the paper, you take your chances.
It takes 2-3 months of 'basic training' to get a civilian ready to become a soldier. It takes 1 more month to a year to train in a specialty beyond basic infantry. So, should the President prepare for emergencies 3-15 months in advance, so the draftees will be available?
Now, if you want to say that if the President knows the military might be needed for, say, more than a year, he should have to ask congress for a draft, then I'll consider it.

[PSR40004]

7. there will never be a draft...

the army doesn't want it, congress won't vote for it without the army demanding it and the pres knows it's a loser position.

As to having a draft before they call up the reserve....we have the reserve for that purpose. If we had to have a draft before calling up reserves why have the reserve, I guess we could just call it the "week end warrior retirement fund wihtout any risk of actually doing what we are paying you for" service :)

[Raven]

10. Good points. Why not

limit tours to 1 year and that's it. Why doesn't the army want a draft? It can't be because they think their reserve and guard units are that well prepared. My friend also told me that the Peterborough ubit had to travel to some base in NY before shipping out but that they couldn't start their vehicles in the cold. He said that the Army rented a fleet of Ryder trucks and was keeping them running day and night. That does not sound like a lean, mean fighting machine to me!

[Toots]

54. That may be why we have the Reserves but why do we have

The National Guard? They are not Army Reserves, they are "National Guard" For domestic concerns like flood and earthquake, hurricane, riot control etc. etc. I think what this Administration is doing to the Guard is criminal. I bet very few people want to join the guard now. If they wanted to go to war they would join the reular military. We are all going to suffer severe consequences for allowing this Cabal to come to power.

[HereSince1628]

9. How's that an argument for the draft?

We may need a bigger active duty force but that doesn't mean there should be a draft.

You point to places where service can be disruptive to an individual or their family...I would say those are issues that must be weighed at the time of enlistment, rather than arguments that young people should be exploited because their lives seem to someone else to be more easily disrupted.

Having been among the last year-class to be drafted I think I understand something of young people's concerns in this regard.

[Raven]

11. How would we get a bigger active duty force without a draft?

We would certainly have to treat our military better than we do now (ie. pay, health care...). And then, do we want a large standing professional army?

[bowens43]

19. We don't NEED a bigger active duty force!!!

What we need is to stop US imperialism! What we NEED is to STOP attacking defenseless nations. What we need is to bring the troops home from the over 100 countries they are now in. What we need is for the military to be a defensive unit. You want a bigger active duty military force then sign up but don't you dare try to take my kids. Are you of draft age? Do you have children of draft age? If not your opinion isn't worth squat on this issue. If you are of draft age sign up, if you have children of draft age encourage THEM to sign up but leave our kids out of it.

[HereSince1628]

23. Armies can grow and shrink as needed

the US has used that approach for its entire history.

True you need to create appropriate pay and benefits to make it a choice.

But attracting the serfs away from low-paying, dead end jobs, for the glory and reward of membership in the imperial shock troops is a tradition that goes all the way back to the dawn of civilization.

[Valjean]

61. What about Germany.

I'm very surprised that we still have so many troops deployed in Germany. The Evil Empire is no longer knocking on the doors of western Europe. I'm very surprised that they haven't redeployed a lot of German stationed troops to Iraq instead of calling up so National Guard and reserve units. They apparently have forgotten what "reserve" means.

[bowens43]

13. NO!!!!

Those now in the reserves and national guard are there because they CHOSE to be there! Don't you dare suggest that the government kidnap my children and send them off to murder people in other lands because these folks have changed thier minds. Do you have draft age children or are you of draft age? Seems to me that the vast majority of those who would like to see a draft have nothing to lose. We do NOT need a national dialog on the draft. What we need is to remove from power those who are sending our troops all over the world to secure 'US interests'(oil). The military was meant to be defensive not offensive.

[Raven]

22. I will ignore the tone of your post and respond.

First of all, I have a child who is past draft age now. His father and I were directly affected by the draft during the Vietnam war and his dad spent a year in Vietnam. So, I think I have some standing to speak about this.

Second, the people who "chose" to enter the guard or the reserves are generally doing it because they need the money. They are generally in the lower or lower-middle economic bracket in this country. As with Vietnam, the early years of the war were fought by poor folks and minorities. It was not until the draft hit places like Harvard that this country began to turn against the war.

Third, I am not suggesting kidnapping anyone to murder people for our oil interests. If it is possible to have a discussion without ranting about the obvious (Bush and his evil administration), I'd like to do so.

[demolifer2004]

24. They still had a choice

The guardsmen and reservists chose to enter the military, they weren't forced in by a draft. I agree that many entered because they saw it as a relatively easy way to make some extra money and/or pay for education. Still, they knew their obligations and were well aware that combat was a possibility.

[Raven]

26. Isn't that like saying

that low income people or elderly make the choice not to buy health insurance? At some point, isn't this an "economic draft"?

[bowens43]

27. No it isn't.

They didn't have to sign but they chose to.

[demolifer2004]

29. Not really

There are many other ways for low income people to earn money, but few have the benefits of reserve duty. I think most people who joined were gambling that they would never be called to active duty. Many reservists lost this gamble and were sent to Iraq.

In contrast, people who don't buy health insurance, often want to be are financially unable to afford it. They aren't making a choice, they're forced into a situation.

[bowens43]

25. Don't ignore the tone of my post.

So the answer is no, you don't have draft a age child. My guess is that if did you wouldn't be so caviler with the lives of our children . It's like I said in my other post, it's almost always those who have nothing to lose who want to see a draft. People who are in the guard and reserves KNOW that the possibility exists that they will called to active duty. They signed up. They took the money and now they're paying their dues. You want them home work on ending the war don't try to get MY kids sent to be killed. There is no need for discussion , there is no need for a draft.

[Raven]

30. "Cavalier with the lives of our children"???

Me? I don't think so. This post was meant to generate some rational discussion. I thought I could learn something and did not expect a personal attack. Alas, this is the reason I post here so infrequently and afterwards always vow never to return.

[HereSince1628]

31. In 1970 I would have pointed out

the draft is most often promoted by people that aren't eligible for it.Maybe that same thing is true in 2004.

As someone who did the whole "have your life determined by lottery" thing, I can say I respect that in a democracy everyone gets to speak, but it doesn't mean that speech isn't influenced by advantage or disadvantage.

[DulceDecorum]

15. Why don't we start off

by sending off ALL registered Republicans
since THEY are the ones who support this war.

They talk the talk, let them now walk the walk.
Even the ones with a pain in the ass.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,777433,00.html
http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=13645

[deminflorida]

17. If this country were directly threatened by a powerful foreign nation

bent on destroying us, then I would say a draft is warranted if the Regular Armed Forces or Reserve could not properly defend us due to current size limitations. But, to make people send their sons and daughters to hostile zones after the country was intentionally lied to about the reason for the conflict is nothing less than monstrous.

[forgethell]

18. NO, he shouldn't

be required to call for a draft before calling up the Guard or Reserves. Every Guardsman and Reservist knows his obligations when he signed up. Nobody made him do it. He took the Man's money and it's time to earn his pay.

The draft is SLAVERY, pure and simple. The ONLY justification for it would be a threat to the existence of the USA that could not be met by the existing forces.

Even so, it should be as limited as possible. None of this "community-service" crap as an alternative. Especially if it is hypocritically sold as "fairness". It isn't "fair" to draft the first guy, drafting the second guy does not make it "fair", it makes it twice as unfair. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Could the Vietnam War have been pursued for so long without the draft? I don't think so.

[demolifer2004]

21. Great points

A draft should only occur after the volunteers (Guardsmen, Reservists) have been all been called to active duty.

[rockymountaindem]

28. Perhaps it's not a bad idea

I think that perhaps the draft is not such a bad idea. Speaking of someone who is eligible to be drafted, I personally wouldn't mind. But it's not just about me.

A lot of people in America, I think (feel free to pounce on me if I'm wrong), spend their whole lives in one place with one group of people. If we had a draft of both men and women, then young people from across racial, socio-economic and geographic lines would be brought together. Hopefully this would inspire greater racial togetherness, and an understanding between the poor, middle-class and rich that the "others" aren't so bad. I know a lot of young people like myself who have every intention of never leaving Colorado and their middle-class cocoon. They continue to see others, such as East-coasters, in a negative light. If they were drafted they would be forced to interact with people from all over the country and see them as fellow Americans.

Lastly, I think that a universal draft would increase democratic participation now and in the future. For now, those who have children inducted into the military would hopefully pay closer attention to what is happening to their country for the sake of their children. In the future, those who were drafted would have a background in national service and would theoretically have more interest in their country. Perhaps this is the ticket to increasing voter turnout.

[The Backlash Cometh]

32. The military, during time of war, isn't the best place to begin race

sensitivity awareness. Research Vietnam. Fragging became the great racial equalizer. Why do you think the military submitted a Friend of the Court brief in the Michigan Affirmative Action case? You need to forge those lessons BEFORE you put men's lives at risk.

[Philosophy]

33. That's retarded

What's the point of even having a reserve if they can only be used as a last resort? Maybe we should draft kindergarteners and puppies before we send the reserve soldiers to war too - they don't have families to support, in fact they contribute nothing worthwhile at all to society. If reserve soldiers think their lives would be ruined if they actually were called upon to do their job, then they should get out of the reserve.

[TreasonousBastard]

34. I see you came from the Viet Nam era, too.

You may remember the arguments back then about reserves vs. draft. It was decided, for better or worse, to have the draft and leave the reserves in reserve. It was a political decision then, as using the reserves is now.

I side with those who say essentially that there is really little need for a huge force. WWII saw us with a tiny military made up of careeer cadre, but we mobilized a huge one almost instantaneously when we needed it. We have hundreds of bases around the world for "security" which is now largely simple intimidation, and most are no longer necessary with the end of the Cold War.

Britain saw the end of its empire and the vast costs associated with it as a great relief. Perhaps we can, too.

No one here, so far, has brought up the concept on "national service." This hoary old idea simply says that service is not limited to the military. Would anyone seriously have an objection to a "draft" that gave everyone a list of choices for service?

[Raven]

36. Do you remember why the dicision was made

back during the Vietnam war not to use the reserves?

[TreasonousBastard]

45. Not exactly.

Didn't pay much attention back then, and there was some discussion of this not long ago when MacNamara was making news. I kind of tuned out the details this time, too. Much duplicity and contradiction and we'll probably never really know all the details.

I should check into it, though. Too many parallels betwen then and now.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

67. During the Vietnam war, troops were kept home to deal with unrest!!

I think I read this in Noam Chomsky's 400 page book called 'Understanding Power.' Highly recommended reading, transcripts of talks and seminars from 1989-1999. But timeless info on how power protects itself universally.

There are questions from activists to Chomsky about whether there are any real results from protest and activism. Chomsky cites how the military command structure decided not to send a few hundred thousand more troops to Vietnam because they wanted to keep troops on hand at home due to the widespread dissent and unrest. They were afraid the country was going to come apart!

This is the danger of the draft. Yes, it could wake up the young and the middle class to the life and death reality of war.

But it could also give the petro-nazis the manpower to crush dissent in the streets under the apocalyptic FEMA rules whereby the gov't takes over everything in the country during 'national crisis.'

Troops are also wanted to maintain 'order' after a domestic WMD incident such as a terrorist nuclear attack.

It doesn't look good for domestic tranquility, does it? I'm picturing the film I've seen of the young troops being trucked in to crush the protests in Tienaman Square, China being beseiged by civilians who surrounded the truck convoys and pleaded with the soldiers to realize that they were being sent against their own people.

We must reach and educate every new generation of children to understand who the real enemies of the US Constitution are so our own children can't be put in uniform and turned against us in the streets.

[Art_from_Ark]

68. Interesting observation about Tiennamen Square

According to different Chinese acquaintances of mine, the original soldiers sent to Tiennamen Square were Mandarin-speaking, that is, they spoke the local language and, as a result, responded positively to the pleas of the students and others not to shoot. It was only after these troops were replaced with Mongolian-speaking troops that the massacre could be perpetrated.

[HereSince1628]

39. So, a choice to work sugar vs cotton would have ended slavery?

I know that comparison doesn't work entirely, but I think mandatory service only takes us a step back toward serfdom. Frankly I see nothing progressive about about facing and marching back toward the way things were a couple hundred years in europe.

[evil_orange_cat]

35. conscription, compulsory service go against the ideals of freedom

unless we are invaded, these two things should never even be considered...

[TreasonousBastard]

46. Why not?

What is this "freedom" you and some others want that implies no responsibility?

The person above you compared it to serfdom, which it would not be. Serfdom and slavery are not quite the same as "semi-voluntary" service.

I look at is a a more communitarian idea. We are all expected to give something back to the greater community, and it's kind of left up to us what to do, or whether or not to do anything at all. Making it mandatory would not be easy, it may not even be possible, but is a rational extension of the idea of building community and national cohesion.

[Cleita]

37. Did you put your flame retardant suit on Raven before you posted this?

Charlie Rangel has proposed such a thing because he has legitimate concerns that the military is becoming populated by the underclasses rather than all Americans serving their country. There has been talk too that we are hiring military or in other words mercenaries. I believe that most of the "coalition of the willing" are from countries who are being paid to send military to Iraq.

If we bring back the draft, I have some changes I would like to make. First I think every high school graduate, who is physically able to, needs to do two years of basic military service, whether they are male or female. I think we should give them the means of going to college, like the old G. I. bill we used to have afterwards. So this way we have a trained army of citizens who can go back into service in case of a war and need only a few weeks of training to catch up. Anyone who wants the military as a career can reup.

Next, and here's the clincher, going to war should be voluntary. I don't think there would have been an invasion of Iraq, and in the past Korea and Vietnam if it had been voluntary. Americans will go to war for a just war like they did in WWI, WWII and recently Afghanistan. I remember in WWII, young kids right out of high school falling over each other to sign up. This would stop any warlord Presidents from using the most powerful military in the world for pillage. This is what the Bush administration is doing to our soldiers.

So to summarize, yes I think we should have a draft, and everybody has to go put their time in, but actually going to war needs to be put back in the hands of the people by volunteering to go. Okay my flame suit is on.

[Raven]

38. Turn me over, I'm done on this side!

Good points, Cleita. :hi:

[GreenPartyVoter]

41. He won't avoid a draft

He gets reelected, expect the draft to be reinstated the next day.

I do not think we SHOULD have a draft. I disagree with those folks who think that rich and powerful people would be less likely to push for war if their sons and daughters were on the line. They'd get out of it, just like they always do.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

43. No draft

Even if there were universal manhood conscription (mandatory year or two of service at a certain age) the majority of the sons of the rich and powerful would get bogus medical deferments.

There definitely seems to have been a big change in the era between WWII when the sons of the American aristocracy (Bush I, JFK etc.) and sports celebrities etc. tended to serve and Vietnam to the present where they wouldn't be "caught dead" (so to speak) in the military.

[Terwilliger]

42. NO

I will further suspect all wars as being unnecessary or achieved through dishonest motivations...there should never be a draft ever again

[Crewleader]

47. A Big NO!

Not just because I have a son who is 17 years old. I've lived through Vietnam too. My husband in the Navy did two tours in Vietnam and my brother served as a draftee in the Army.

I was not married to my husband at the time but know of his experiences and why he served two tours and joined the Navy because he did not want to be drafted.

Now my brother did get drafted along with alot of undesirables who had a choice, jail or Vietnam and most picked the latter.
My brother's job was one of the worse in the Army, his duty was tunnel rat, small framed men , short in height had that duty to climb in the holes and look in the tunnels for enemy dead or alive.
The memories of this experience has truly affected his entire life still has nightmares, a marriage that failed and he is angry. And felt America abandoned them when he and his friends served in the Vietnam War with protests of no support for the troops and spitting on them when they returned.
Now Veteran benefits being cut and many homeless on our streets through the USA, those who were drafted seems to have the most troubles.

I believe a draft does not work,from history on, the civil war as young as 13, very young men serving, only made to, does nothing to help morale and history has told us, joining not drafting does wonders for morale as a soldier for any cause,in battle or at peace.

My brother witness alot and most who were there in the Army were drafted and angry for being there especially when they were not able to fight back many times because of decision the political leaders were making. Turn out to be a very political war and we should of never been there.
Just like in Iraq now, we should not be there.

Now with a two political party system, Democrat or Republican, like history there will be Presidents that will get us in Wars we should not be in and there are Presidents that feel fighting a War will be a last resort and look for ways to avoid it for the betterment for all.

The conflict of having a draft out weighs the benefits.

My son who admires General Wesley Clark says he would serve him proudly and join but he would have to be drafted to serve Bush and his heart would not be there and does not believe in the man.

Like my son, there will be millions of others like him, asked what they can do for their country or be told by a draft to serve.

The answer which best suits morale in our arm forces that is necessary for strength and unity to fight to protect the American people is simple, only those who want to be there,to join, will serve proudly and be the best they can be,
not those who were ordered to, by a draft.

[salin]

53. While I don't favor a draft... if we talk of expanding our wars then we

have to have a national dialogue about how to man those wars - including perpetual service and at what point a draft would be needed.

The discussion HAS to be on the table - as it is part of any real policy debate of the real costs of these military excursions. If we can't man them - then we sure as heck shouldn't be using more war talk about North Korea, Syria, Iran, etc.

Not saying that we should institute a draft - but a draft SHOULD be part of the national discussion when Rummy, Bolten, Wolfie, etal keep talking about additional actions.

[Crewleader]

55. I just noted that in Raven's inbox Draft Or Not this should be discussed

Folks must respect each others'opinion here and has you can see this topic affects some more emotionally then others.

As a mother, a sister and wife, I see and feel a Draft is not necessary with correct leadership of a President who can rally up support by asking.
You don't stretch your troops and police the world by making problems like Bush as done.

There would be no hesitation if any enemy physically invaded our shores, I'd pick up a gun myself trying to defend my loved ones and neighbors. But as the case in the War on Terrorism we must improve our intelligence and strength our search with agencies like the CIA.
Our special forces is trainned to meet all conflicts, it's not how many can serve, it's individuals who want to be soldiers wanting to fighting to protect America.

It comes down to the leadership and the cause of War, freedom to choose I hope always rates not being forced,
being drafted just isn't successful in my opinion.

Thanks for posting Salin and Raven for bringing this topic out.

[salin]

58. Believe me.... it worries me

I have five nephews that are either draft age or soon to be draft age.

However - policy discussions which have been absent in the bush admin - need to occur - and need to be realistic. Including what is required to carry out said policies. Indeed pursuing more wars (which their rhetoric suggests) does require manning those wars. And the public should be forced to recognize this point and discuss what that means and whether they really agree with those wars at that cost (and vote accordingly).

For whatever reason, the politicians and media have gotten comfortable with ostrich positions on the war and on fiscal policy. Just pretend that the consequences don't exist and voila we can talk about the policy and push it and love it (eg lower taxes)... all is swell and positive.

My comments aren't so much directed to you - it just seemed a logical place to say that while I agree that we should not have a draft, the policies being pursued are untenable - and if the admin keeps pushing them - the discussion about the inevitability of a draft has to occur with the discussions of future military actions.

We are not in disagreement in the sense that I am saying that it is the push of this admins policies (or - in your words their poor leadership) - that force the need for having such a discussion. Without their policies there would be no question.

[ComerPerro]

48. I am sorry, but no

What we need is a media that shows Bush for the warmongering asshole moron that he is. Instead, however, we get, "Alright! We got Saddam! ALL of our problems are OVER!!!"

I do sympathize for the gentleman in your story, and I think that its complete BS that people in the reserves and guard are being called up (and then they still have the nerve to call this army "volunteer"). Yeah, volunteer. "Pay for college by serving one weekend a month". Fuck that shit. These lying assholes need to pay.

The best response to this is not a draft. The best response would be to get news agencies to actually tell stories like the one you told above.

[rogerashton]

49. Why we should have slavery

If a case can be made for the draft, a case can be made for slavery. Both are forced labor, and in some ways the draft is worse -- slaves are not USUALLY required to kill other human beings. So why is nobody making a reasonable case for slavery on its merits on this board? For a good reason: we have adopted a principle that slavery is wrong, whatever the commonsense economic benefits might be. I hope the time may come when we are sufficiently enlightened to adopt the parallel principle with respect to the draft, and to all other forms of forced labor. Until we do, we will not really have arrived at capitalism (let alone socialism or humanism).

[Cleita]

50. This is not a very good argument.

Military gets paid. Slaves don't. You should want to serve your country under a true democracy. But, I agree that this would be slavery today because we no longer have a democracy.

[rogerashton]

51. Actually, slaves often did get paid.

Slaves were rented and allowed to keep a portion of the rent as a means of motivating the slave. This was especially true if they were skilled craftsmen.

On the other side, draftee pay is not enough to compensate the daftee for accepting military service -- for if it were, there would be no need for a draft.

Needless to say, I don't think your argument is very good, either -- and my reason is that it does not comport with the facts. But suppose it did. Why would a payment make forced labor permissible? And how much payment does it take? A penny a year -- presumably not, I would suppose (correct me if I am wrong in the supposition). So how much? where do you draw the line? And why? I draw it by saying that the person should be paid enough to induce the person to volunteer -- so that no draft is necessary.

[Paranoid_Portlander]

57. The military pay was about 11 cents per hour...

during the Vietnam war for draftees, if I remember correctly. This assumes a base pay of about $78 per month divided by 720 hours in a month, assuming a 24-hour day when you either work or are forced to be there. I was never in the military, but pay rates have been published somewhere.

[2bfree]

52. No draft!

I have two draft age sons (18 and 21) that do not want to participate in that useless war going on in Iraq. Forcing our young men (and women?) to go off to war (unless our country is being invaded or something) is immoral.

[Nashyra]

56. I also say no to a draft and

I have a son who is a freshman in college that expcects to go to OCS when he graduates, he is on a partial military scholarship from the Retired officers of America, it requires him to take militery science classes. Although he does want to serve, he wants to fly he does not think there should be a draft. Without college deferments it is more fair but obvisously the rich will be able to pay their way out. If there is a draft any youth who is drafted should be given the opportunity to finish college first and if you can not afford to go to college the price for your body in the armed services should be a college education BEFORE you serve. It should be your choice when you go if you have to go. And to the argument that the reserves and guard members knew what they were signing and they took the money, yes they did, they gambled and lost, but to say they "took the money" is a misleading argument, there was no real money involved, for most it gave them a reasonable living wage as a second job. It is entirely true that most, not all join the armed services for a job or a second job to supplement a family, there are some exceptions, my son for one, we can afford to send him to school scholarship or not and he still chooses to go to the military after graduation, he is a very calm peaceful kid, well liked and respected by his peers if I may say so myself, also very popular. He started in CAP when he was 11, it is an aux. of USAF. He played Varsity sports in High School and was the JR and Sr class president and he wants to serve his country in the military, his instructors have told him he is the exception rather than the rule, most kids that can afford not to go military don't want anything to do with it. I hope and pray that this is his choice to make, not the * administration for his sake and the sake of all our young people, rich or poor, they are all someones kid.

[mlawson]

59. Categorically not! Conscription is an idea that should have gone out

many years ago. Without a draft, the war in Vietnam could not have gone on for a decade, and countless lives would have been spared. WWII would have still gone on successfully, because enough men would have volunteered.

As for the 'necessity' of sending more soldiers (nat'l guard) to Iraq, that is as bogus as the war, and is the farthest thing from a necessity that I have ever heard of. The soldiers there now should be brought home NOW!!!

[Art_from_Ark]

69. According to the 13th Amendment,

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

If a draft does not constitute "involuntary servitude", then what does?

[JustJoe]

62. Is a woman for the draft

like a man against abortion rights?

[Guaranteed]

63. I totally agree with you, Raven.

Most people aren't seeing the political consequences of a draft. It has a way of keeping the middle class and our political leaders honest when it comes to foreign policy. More to the point: a draft would keep these corporate motherfuckers from starting wars, because suddenly the idiot soccer moms who unthinkingly support invading another country unprovoked are going to have a heckuva lot more to lose.

Further, having a military made up of "professionals" (I won't call them mercenaries- but some do) doesn't help us at all. Military lifers enjoy what they do too much. In the event that we have to go to war, draftees want to get the job finished so that they can go home. And that is the best way to fight a war.

[Gemini Cat]

64. No draft.

I am not interested in having my children fight, die, or otherwise be maimed in a war to protect the oil interests of the PNAC.

:dem:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

65. I would support a proposal to draft

the draft-age relatives (children, grandchildren, siblings, nieces and nephews) of any Congresscritter or Senator who voted for war.

That would ensure that no federal legislator would vote for war unless they really believed that it was in the vital national interest.

We should remember that during World War II, almost all members of Congress had children or other close relatives in the military.

[Astarho]

66. No draft

Why should a President conscript people before sending people who chose to be in the Reserves? If it's not fair to send people in their 40's then how is it fair to send people in their 20's? Speaking of fair, the rich will always get out of it. They can afford to send their kids to Europe for a few years.

As someone who is on the high end of the draft scale (mid-20's), I don't see a need for it. I think invasion would be the only excuse for conscription, and this country has not been invaded since the war of 1812. If the country were to be invaded I don't think that a draft would be needed then anyway, as people would defend their homes and families anyway.

[Fight_n_back]

70. If we had a draft

there would be no war in Iraq.

The main reason the anti Vietnam war movement got so huge was the draft lottery was made more fair and rich, white guys started getting drafted. Next thing you know there was a large movement.

A draft is MORE democratic than a mercenary army of inner city minoritie and poor rural whites.

[hedgetrimmer]

72. Wow! Raven, you have really distorted the issue...

Is it really the issue of draft or the issue of aggression? This nation has acted upon a "first strike" idealogy and if you or anyone else agree to those ideals then go fight for them. This nation has an ill gotten commander in chief, this nation has embarked upon war for reasons that are false... under these circumstances we the people of this nation are FOOLS to support the notion of defense as patriotic. When we, in fact are not defending but, killing for the imperialistic powers of the wealthy to further enhance the trickle up economics that come from aggressive war in authoritarian societies. When the ill gotten wealth of a few is achieved upon the blood strewn forth by the children who will pay with money and lives to further the trickle up economics, and we the people go willing into battle for ill gotten reason, we are not free men and women but slaves to an empire that does not serve the people. Those in the National Gaurd and other reservists are bound to the lie, unfortunatly for them now they are slaves... that does not give rise to the cause of a draft for ill gotten purposes to induct those who have not bought the lie. We are not the pervayers of slaverey and death but the foundation of liberty... Let us not try to enslave others but free our brothers and sisters in the National Gaurd and Reserves and bring them home and let them no longer feed the machine of imperialism.