reinstateing the draft?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2

Shaka of Carthage RE:reinstateing the draft? 9/9/2003 10:42:42 PM

I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with bringing back the draft. ================================================== Reduced personnel costs so the military can be larger? Military service as a prereq for citizenship? Citzen-soldiers, especially since it will include the rich, will ensure the military is only used for national security? ================================================== As far as the military not forgetting its "lessons learned", thats something the US military has always done, despite its best efforts. Thats more of a institution problem, something a draft won't fix. Should the military be larger? I'll answer that a different way. We are short peacekeepers. Constabulary troops. Nation builders. If we get more of those AND it requires an expansion of the military to get them, then so be it. But the other alternatives to getting those troops should be exhausted before we have to end up expanding the military. Should young people perform some sort of national service to thier nation? Yes. But it doesn't have to be in the military. Not everyone is cut out to be a soldier. Homeland Security, as in the Coast Guard and Border Patrol, have a greater need for people than does the Military. AmeriCorps and Peace Corps should be non-service options as well. But I still wouldn't support "conscription" for that. Lets not forget that any draft is gonna put alot of people in the National Guard who are trying to avoid "active" duty. As far as trying to make sure all the different groups within the US equally serve... it will never happen. The US doesn't have a military "tradition" as a nation. The majority of us don't have any great need or desire to defend the nation, since its not like we have ever been seriously invaded. Remember that movie "Red Dawn"? If we had some of that in our past, we'd have family traditions and understand the need, since all of us would have lost someone. Lucky for us, though, we don't need large numbers of people to have an effective military. Our problem isn't winning the war, its our lack of people to win the peace. Don't throw "asymetrical, 4th generation warfare" into this. Thats not what is happening in Iraq. If you want to turn the National Guard into Homeland Security only, then have a universal draft so its gets fresh bodies every 2 years or 18 months to perform those Homeland missions, than I'd seriously consider that. Then those who want to do active duty could bypass this, assuming they qualify for duty in the active military. But understand, the NG has now just become some sort of paramilitary force, any serious combat support or service support roles should be in the Reserve or Active. So we still have the problem with the active military not having enough peacekeepers. But we sure have enough warm bodies to attach as auxiliaries to the Border Patrol or Coast Guard to perform Homeland Security, not to mention "swagger" around the airports and ports.

Quote Reply

Thomas RE:reinstateing the draft? 9/10/2003 3:32:07 AM

While reinstating draft is something a nation can never renounce in case of an emergency or pending emergency, I would not think it a good idea at the present moment for the USA (evaluated as an outsider): 1. I have been drafted - and the the training quality was substandard - by any standard. This is hard to avoid in anything but the highest priority units. The draftees (privates and NCO's) are NOT motivated, and use every trick in the book to dodge everything - from the draft to daily chores. 2. The oversees missions are not suited to draftees. France made the foreign legion as a result of the casualties in Algier - the population would not accept it. 3. The appropiate training time will be cut, so the whole point in training is lost. To clarify: the traditional drafted army - the German - had before WW1 to years of service. Basic training 1/2 year. Function training 1/2 year. 1 year active. Then (I believe) 4 years reserve. Cutting training to less than a year leaves you with a defenceless mob. The training cannot be made more effective - dispite claims - due to the very low motivational level. Rather waste time, than do what the idiot says - even though it would have been much easier to do what he said. This attitude might change in case of an emergency - but don't count on it. I had 9 months of national service - and it was a crime to call us soldiers - I have not seen ONE Home Guard soldier - with 200 hours TOTAL training that wasn't better. Today they are reducing national service to 4 months - as a sales promotion for contracts to the international tasks - they expect 16% to take them up on the offer!

Quote Reply

UH1Charlie RE:reinstateing the draft? 9/10/2003 2:11:29 PM

Thomas, I was Regular Army. I went thru eight weeks of basic training and another eight weeks of Advanced Infantry training, before I shipped out; we had about two weeks of jungle training. Did this prepare me for hard reality we were going to face? 20% yes, 80% no. As NFG's the first comments from 'in country' warriors was, 'Chuck' was not to be taken lightly, if you failed to understand this, you'd find it's meaning the hard way. Drafties, as well us RA troops, understood that in order to live, you had to learn to survive. No amount of training prepared new men/units from first contact with the enemy. Good leadership, was one of the most important factors in your survival. You could tell the quality of this factor by the look in a man's face's. The 'walking dead' units often suffered from the lack of good leadership. Hackworth's book, 'About Face' vividly describes this subject. So your first point does not seem to factor in what really motivates a man under combat conditions. As for your second point as to the 'unsuitability of draftees for overseas missions', may seem logical, but in battle, a man is judged by his peers in another light, exposure to combat will quickly reveal a man's fighting qualties,not his enlistment status. Is the United States facing an emergency that will require the draft? I believe it is, and on a number of fronts. Facing that fact may be unpopular, but our national survival may depend on it. The overextension of our Armed Forces is a reality, should we face a serious threat from another corner of the world (e.g. North Korea) our options will be dictated by our capability. If we lack the conventional means to counter the threat then the temptation to use tactical nuke's will increase. North Korea has never given up it's goal of re-unification. Seven million men under arms, 50% of the GDP goes to the military. It's not a question of if the North will strike, but when. 37,000 brave Americans are stationed close to the DMZ. There's already been discussion of moving them farther South, as well a discussion about our presence in South Korea all-together. The election of a new liberal South Korean President who was elected by the people on a platform of 'dialogue with the North', and 'eventual re-unification' indicates to me that Kim Jong il's (the great leader)carefully staged antics on the world stage for the last two years, has produced it's desired effect on the South, and much hand wringing, and indicision in Washington. The President called North Korea a terrorist state (it fits the definition) the reaction was ugly. The administration has been strangly silent. Our 'get tough on terror'policy has not had the desired effect on this rogue state. The 'Great Leader' has upped the ante a number of times in effect calling our bluff and adding insult. There seems to a uneasy silence in the administration regarding North Korea, has the problem gone away, has our resolve weakened, or are have we been caught with out pants down ? My Uncle, a Army Captain spent three years in a North Korean POW Camp #2 (officers only),the death rate was 40%...do we need a draft?

Quote Reply

Shaka of Carthage RE: reinstateing the draft? ... UH1Charlie 9/10/2003 7:49:47 PM

Based on your second post, you seem to feel that there are "major" threats to the security of the US, that will require the US to have a much larger military than it has now. You mentioned North Korea, and hinted at others. South Korea by itself is capable of dealing with the North Korean threat. Even so, the US still has forces that haven't been committed to Iraq that are available for any Korean conflict. I don't see these threats that you mentioned. Especially when you consider that during the Cold War, the Soviet Union and its "hundreds" of divisions, was countered by 18 Army divisions (and certain strategical alliances of course). The US military doesn't need to be expanded based on the threats you alluded to. They don't exist. And we certainly don't need an expansion in combat power per your implications. Seems we have widely different viewpoints on what the US force structure should look like.

Quote Reply

Thomas RE: reinstateing the draft? ... UH1Charlie 9/11/2003 1:57:03 AM

1. Unsuited to overseas operations. It's not the soldier as such that are unsuited, the pressure on the home front make the idea unsuited. The Vietnam war is an example. As Lyndon B. Johnsons said when Walter Cronkite adressed the issue: "The war is lost, I lost Walter." 2. I did not imply anything as fancy as being prepared to face the enemy. A vonlunteer can be better pregraded as to physical shape, than a draftee. To whip draftees into shape you need physical training. It takes 3 months before the muscle buildup is satifactory and a further 3 months before joints and sinews are up the task. Infantry is hard physical work - if you are not prepared for that permanent damage will result. The additional 1/2 year is to prepare the draftee to meet the enemy - as well as you can in peacetime - which isn't too well.

Quote Reply

doggtag RE:reinstateing the draft? 5/11/2004 4:28:26 AM

As we see how some American citizens view our government and military today, I'm not sure mandatory military service is a good idea: if a soldier conducts themselves that they don't want to be there, it will seriously affect the morale of the soldiers who do. "Lickbag" is the term we like to use: people who don't want to run the risk of being in a war or conflict: they just want the money, is one example. You cannot force patriotism. And we saw how badly our troops were regarded by a certain percentage of the American people during 'Nam, too. I don't think that is in America's best interest. Some smaller countries in certain areas, I understand it works for, because the average citizen realizes how close the conflicts and risk of losing your nation are (Israel is a good example). Former President Clinton had at one time suggested a "National Service Act" to, ideally, promote patriotism and more faith in the country and government for the younger, fresh out of high school, generations. I would imagine that the drafters of the plan assumed that if enough younger people got a little bit more national pride, they might serve some of it in the military...? Perhaps now the government realizes it may have been wrong in "downsizing" troop strength a while back.

Quote Reply

fnord RE:reinstateing the draft? 10/30/2004 6:48:40 PM

Drafting people into the army is probably not going to happen, but there has been some talk of drafting doctors, etc.

Quote Reply

qwertyuiop RE:reinstateing the draft? 10/30/2004 11:42:16 PM

i have mixed feelings about this. i don't know if it is fair to the people who enlist if they have to serve with underqualified draftees who don't want to be their. i plan on joining the marine corps, so this would not effect me so much as the marines probably wouldn't draft. however, on the other hand, do to the lack of patriotism of many of america's youth in the country it might be necessary to reinstate the draft. i am certain on one thing, the stop-loss policy is not a permanent fix.

Quote Reply

lookingpastforever RE:reinstateing the draft? 10/31/2004 11:00:05 PM

There are many reason both for and against drafting civs into the armed forces. You've brought up all of them at a larger level but none of the personal concerns and that I wonder about, the personal mentality of drafting and peoples' views on it as applies to themselves. I come of a family that has always served, and have served myself. But I must say that I cannot see how I could take an attempt to draft me as anything but a form of slavery. I have learned since a little child that you serve because you are willing to be loyal to the man who commands you and that is it. That if the person who would command you is someone you believe you can trust to honor the obligation they take on in return by accepting your allegiance it's all good. But my question is why the hell should I consider doing anything but fighting against a man i don't think trustworthy who still demands I serve him. If I can't trust him why should I be loyal to him, why should I obey him? Because ultimately the only true loyalty is to a man who you are willing to serve not anything as vague as a nation. And a man I can't believe in trying to make me do his bidding is an enemy by definition regardless of what position he may hold.

Quote Reply

F22 RE:reinstateing the draft? 12/6/2004 2:01:30 AM

I don't believe in the draft. I do believe military service would benefit all Americans (I wish I had served), but it should still be voluntary. We don't need the draft if we need to increase the size of the Army from its current active duty strength of 10 divisions. At the end of the cold war, the Army had 18 divisions...with no draft.

Quote Reply

rikopotomous RE: wow...2 thumbs ^ 12/22/2004 10:55:15 PM

wow youve made the same points Pat Buchanan and I have for the last 2 years. I'm 15 and I'd like to get into light force operations in the Army. I agree there ought to be a draft because the american ppl do not care about the military. Only when someone they love is getting their ass shot at will they care. A draft guarantee's the military wont be used unless the american ppl support it (if the president wants to get run out of office then he can abuse the power) The only way a nation like the United States will ever fall is from within. Just like Rome. I am seriously worried about the long term effect of these neo conservatives on the United States if they are not checked. I pray I can be there to turn it around in 20-30 years from now if it rly gets out of control. They have got it all wrong, you lead by example not at the point of a gun, and its blunt hypocracy to hold a gun to someones head, say "do what you wish", then claim its freedom.

Quote Reply

F22 RE: wow...2 thumbs ^ 12/23/2004 12:49:30 AM

I'm 15 and I'd like to get into light force operations in the Army. Good for you! I wish you well. :) I agree there ought to be a draft because the american ppl do not care about the military. Only when someone they love is getting their ass shot at will they care. I don't see things this way. From my perspective, I think the American people care very much about the military. Check www.AnySoldier.com and other related sites. A draft guarantee's the military wont be used unless the american ppl support it (if the president wants to get run out of office then he can abuse the power) No guarantees in life. The Civil War and Vietnam were unpopular wars fought with draftees. The only way a nation like the United States will ever fall is from within. Just like Rome. True. They have got it all wrong, you lead by example not at the point of a gun, Good argument against a draft. and its blunt hypocracy to hold a gun to someones head, say "do what you wish", then claim its freedom True, but if this is your characterization of U.S. actions in Aghanistan and Iraq, then you are setting up a straw man argument. I'm curious as to what you are getting at here.

Quote Reply

joe6pack RE: wow...2 thumbs ^ 12/23/2004 1:16:55 AM

"I agree there ought to be a draft because the american ppl do not care about the military" I think that's wrong, all but the most far left nuts at least give lip service to supporting the military. For the most part, I think the American people are firmly behind the US armed forces. Although, I do find it hypocritical that the same people that spent the 90's trying to gut the military are the same ones moaning about us being stretched too thin. That said, I do think a lot of people just don't understand the military. There are all sorts of misconceptions out there.. and it's unfortunate how many people buy in to the Michael Moore type BS that troops are mostly oppressed poor minorities that are basically forced into service. I've often found that those that favor the draft have never served themselves or have not served since the military moved to an all volunteer force. For myself, I'd much rather serve with and lead people that wanted to be there. I think F22 pretty much hit the other points I'd have mentioned. As a potential leader there Rik, keep this in mind: Leadership is not a popularity contest. It often happens that the unpopular decision is the correct decision. A President, should have the authority to use military force if he feels it necessary, even if it's unpopular that's why we elect leaders instead of just running opinion polls. As someone that served during the Clinton administration, you want to see a disaster it's when military decisions start getting made entirely by opinion polls.

Quote Reply

rikopotomous RE: F22 and joe 12/24/2004 12:05:40 PM

yah they support the military as long as its someone elses child getting their ass shot at. A draft during an unpopular war will force the president to shoot for a quick decisive end or get out of a stale mate. "at the point of a gun" is what the neo-cons are trying to do in Iraq. Afghanistan was right, we had to go in there and I wouldnt have cared if the world had been against it. However, they were were with us and so were the Arabs because Al Qaeda was extorting them. I know leadership is not a popularity contest. I have plenty of ppl that dont like me just because of that. My style is K.I.S.S Keep It Simple Stupid. If im in charge of something whether im appointed, elected, or fill a vacuum; everyone knows what the goal is, I give them individual jobs, keep all the directions simple and brief, if anyone starts arguing with me I try to get em back on track and if they dont I give the job to someone who is capable and give the person who was arguing a different job, if they cant handle that then I just isolate them. I dont rub it into these ppl afterwards but the reason they get pissed off at me is because its either obvious to the ppl around them that they are an objectionable prick. If its in school then their grade suffers on that project and they blame me.

Quote Reply

Sentinel I wouldn't send my son??? 12/24/2004 12:26:12 PM

As a soldier. I get really tired of people saying nonsense like this. "not my son!" First of all, It is not part of a parents right to determine weather or not their son or daughter joins the military. The military recruits adult volunteers. It's not up to my parents. While I would expect any good parent not to want to send their sons and daughters to a war, We are not children. And we can make that decision for ourselves.

Quote Reply

Pages: 1 2

	News As History - December 4, 2008
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us