Are we going to reinstate the draft?

[elehhhhna]

What fool would love to join the military during a trumpet misadministration? Trump branded buildings are sitting ducks for terror. It's only a matter of time until the military will be deployed to something stupid – and who's going to follow a commander-in-chief who is leading a play fight against his best friend Pudin?

[greymattermom]

1. Yes, and it will include women this time

It's a fantastic jobs plan for certain rust belt states.

[DURHAM D]

3. Better not unless they quickly pass the ERA. nt

[former9thward]

7. Supreme Court 14th amendment rulings have surpassed the ERA long ago.

Any draft (which there will not be one ) would include women because of those decisions. However the military is very opposed to a draft and does not need one since it only needs 2% of 18 year olds in any given year to join. They are very selective as a result.

[LanternWaste]

18. while the 14th Amendment at times has been interpreted to benefit women, it offers them no assurance

The end result, however, allows courts to interpret the ruling as they see fit, with absolutely no guarantees of consistency from case to case. Courts also evaluate cases of governmental sex discrimination under an “intermediate” standard of review, and not under “strict scrutiny,” the highest level of judicial review that applies to cases of race bias. Claims of sex discrimination typically require extremely persuasive evidence to stick.

So while the 14th Amendment at times has been interpreted to benefit women, it offers them no assurances. We need consistency and the highest legal protection against discrimination. The Equal Rights Amendment would require courts to apply the highest level of strict judicial review.

[Laffy Kat]

26. Yup. n t

[Warren DeMontague]

61. Enough political capital to reinstate a draft will also mean enough to include women without having

to acquiesce to any demands like passage of the ERA.

It will be whether they want to do that, or not. I suspect they wouldn't because of "barefoot and pregnant" notions of where women supposedly belong, but who knows.

The good news is, I don't think we'll see an actual draft, either way.

[Thor_MN]

69. You mean create a new one? "THE" ERA is long dead.

I would have no issues with a new one being created, but saying "they quickly pass the ERA" is null content, as there isn't a ERA currently.

[DURHAM D]

72. Some argue otherwise.

Regardless, you point is off point as the Equal Rights Amendment is still needed.

[Thor_MN]

73. I agree, there should be equal rights for everyone, but it is your point that is off point.

There would need to be an unprecedented process to revive an expired amendment to "quickly pass the ERA". That said we are in strange times and unexplored territory. But I really doubt the ass that is set to be President is going to be cheer leading anything like a new ERA. If anything, he is going to try to make people less equal.

[Hoyt]

2. Mostly the same people who join now will sign up-- Those who

have been brought up believing Muslims and Asians are the enemy, and guns and bombs are what America is all about.

[linuxman]

8. Spoken like a man who has fuck-all experience in the military.

[NightWatcher]

9. Way to shit on the armed forces. I know many who serve honorably and who are not xenophobes

Many people actually love this country and volunteer to serve.

Your post is an insult.

Please delete

[Jersey Devil]

15. Thanks

Many, including my son in law, enlisted after 9/11 to defend our country from terrorism. His comment is an insult to all of them.

[Hoyt]

44. Don't know about your son-in-law, but some of the vilest insults I've heard about Muslims

were from members of our military. Personally, I find America's terrorists -- racists, militia types, gun nuts like Dylann Roof and George Zimmerman, the NRA, extreme white wingers, etc., much more concerning than "terrorism" from Muslim countries.

[Hoyt]

19. No. Military supported george war bush, polls show they support Trump, and

the gung ho types just itching to shoot or bomb someone are a big part of those who enlist nowadays. There might be some who see it as a way out or to get an education, but the fact is we have not been in a necessary/legitimate war since WWII and maybe Korea.

Worse, these guys come out of the military and join militia groups, NRA, promote guns, some become police, etc. A lot of them have serious problems.

You wait and see how the enlisted ranks fall all over themselves in support of racist, draft-dodging Trump and his warmongering. Christ, how many kids does he have and not a one has signed up for the military.

[Calculating]

23. A surprisingly large amount enlist to get money for school.

If you're young, poor, unemployed and going nowhere in life the military can be a great stepping stone to something better.

[Hoyt]

28. We need to change that. Killing for school ought not to be their only option.

[etherealtruth]

66. That is a sad truth

Young people with no options have had little choice.

I think we should institute the draft ... to make sure that a bunch of rich "white guys" are not getting us into wars thinking that someone else's kids will be fighting and dying (never theirs)

[Lil Missy]

33. The post you responded to is not in conflict with yours.

If you take it personally it's because you bent over backwards to do so. n/t

[NightWatcher]

56. I responded to a post calling troops racists and xenophobes

It wasn't a large leap for me to read that. You must also agree to jump to their defense and attack me.

[Lil Missy]

68. My but you do go to great lengths to read SO MUCH more into comments

than there is written in plain English and in black and white. Now really, feigning such poutrage does nothing to further your argument.

[resistance2016]

64. You think THAT'S insulting?

Try this:

FUCK THE MILITARY.
Fuck them for taking my best friend away from me.
Fuck them for turning my father into a violent, raving madman.
Fuck them for turning what were formerly good people into cruel, violent racists who felt the need to threaten MY life just so they could brag about it and show how "alpha" they were.
Fuck them for thinking their "culture" is what being a man is.
Fuck them for producing a POS who raped one of my sisters.
Fuck them for all of that.

[sarisataka]

67. As a lifelong Democratic

and a veteran, thank you for tarring us all with that brush. Hopefully you feel better getting that out.

[Calculating]

12. Wow

Way to dump all over the armed forces.

[SQUEE]

16. I can't begin to express my disgust at your besmirching my family and friends

That have both served and voted, donated time and money and voted for Democrats in the last 50 years.

That bar to enlistment must burn you deep.

[Hoyt]

25. The bar to enlist is not tough, don't kid yourself. I know several kids who

were recently forced to enlist or go to jail by a judge. Don't know what it is like today, but recruiters when I was growing up slobbered when I passed the OCS test with 100%. Didn't think much of it because the test was primarily drawings of tools with 4 possible answers. Example -- Drawing of a hammer. Question -- this is used to (a) smooth out wet concrete; (b) beat people; (c) drive nails; (d) all of the above.

[sarisataka]

34. Flag on the play

What crimes were these kids convicted of to be given such a choice? How did the judge intend to enforce the sentence since judges cannot make the military accept anyone?

As for your ludicrous description of the testing, I assume you had completed a 4 year degree as that is a requirement to apply for OCS, here is a sample test for the ASVAB http://official-asvab.com/samples_app.htm

[Hoyt]

37. Drugs and juvenile delinquency type stuff. I know darn well it happens.

Heck, how many parents used to, and still do, take their problem kids and put them in military school.

[SQUEE]

43. take their problem kids and put them in military school.

So you agree with Trump that military school is the same as military service? Is that your stance now?

.

[sarisataka]

49. Drug charges are the hardest convictions

To get an enlistment waiver. The military has a big enough substance abuse problem without bringing in new ones. There isn't any recruiter anywhere who would touch a kid with a fresh conviction.

Juvenile delinquency would apply to juveniles, obviously. They would not therefore be enlisting in service.

Unless you are talking of one of the three service academies military school is not the military. They may have many former military on staff, wear uniforms and parade around butt they are not in the military and never will be until they go through an enlistment process. There is no requirement for any military school person to enlist in the military.

[Hoyt]

57. Do you not get the Judge is giving the kid a choice -- go to trial and get convicted or join

the military and have the charges dropped. I'm sure some kids might agree and then not join, only to be arrested later. Others, like the ones I'm referring to, took the deal. The military didn't have any problem taking them. And you are right, the military is full of drug issues. One of the kids got back in a bigger mess than when he joined.

[SQUEE]

36. And again

You opine on that which you know little about.

"I know several kids who
were recently forced to enlist or go to jail by a judge"

Goto Army/Goto Jail is pretty much a myth today. Current drawdowns and transition to "peacetime" rolls have the Army cutting positions, and being VERY selective with it's incoming recruits...Little things like FBI checks, security clearance and a huge pool of willing recruits have waivers harder and harder to get.

And OCS test? , So, were you a college graduate or an E4(P)? because otherwise, I have a serious doubt to your 100% especially as most military exams and battery tests are percentile scores.

[Hoyt]

38. I took the test, my cat could have passed it too.

This article written during the last year of george war bush's regime says standards are pretty low --

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2008/01/dumb_and_dumber.html

[SQUEE]

41. 8 years ago is not recent.

You said "recently forced to enlist or go to jail by a judge" Even edited your post to add it.

This is not true.

And again, how did this "OCS" test happen when you do not qualify to attend Officer Candidate School.

[Hoyt]

47. Oh, the kid being told to join the military is like 5 years ago.

Well in 1971 I had my first college degree. I passed my draft physical and was given the test for Navy OCS. I went to Macon, Ga for my final interview. Unfortunately (or fortunately), two young cocky Lieutenants in their dress whites made fun of my big thick glasses by saying, "you look like you are wearing Coke bottle glasses." My response was, "well, you guys look like popsicle vendors." That was pretty much it. But that's OK, they were talking about a bunch of gung ho kill Vietnamese stuff anyway, same as the instructors in the 3rd year of Army ROTC that made me decide I really didn't want a bunch of Trumpsters telling me what to do.

Now what's your excuse for supporting war?

[SQUEE]

50. nice strawman.

My distaste for your dishonesty and smears against people you never met and never will is no indication pro or con on war..
I support war when needed and done properly, I am alive because of it actually.

I think it's kinda cool you have lived in such a trope filled life, really.
I have never met a person subjected to so many stereotypes in their day to day.

[Hoyt]

53. So did you join up, or would you have, after bush invaded and killed thousands

of innocent Iraqis? Would you enlist to support Trump's crusades and intimidation of much of world?

[SQUEE]

70. I joined the Army under Poppy Bush

As soon as I was able, the President was not a factor to me then, and would not be now.

I giggle at your excuses.

Pacifism is admirable in some people, in others... it strikes me as a convenience.

[Hoyt]

71. Daddy bush really wasn't that bad, but he shouldn't have killed quite so many Innocent Iraqis.

Plus daddy bush didn't get reelected. Hope something similar happens in 2020. Wish Sanders and Clinton would each mentor a candidate. Then, Sanders or Clinton could serve in Admin.

I'm a pacifist, jus't don't like killing Muslims or Asians who are not a threat to us. Militarism really isn't admirable either.

[Lurks Often]

24. What a pathetic post, applying your usual broad brush attack against those in the military

is a new low, even for you.

[Hoyt]

39. Another gunner promoting the MIC, not surprising.

[HassleCat]

29. Please reconsider this statement.

I consider this a flaming personal insult. I may alert on it.

[Hoyt]

40. That's your prerogative. Are you in the category I described? If not, don't fret.

[HassleCat]

46. Yes, I am in the category.

I served in the military.

[Hoyt]

48. That's obvious. My question was were you brought

believing Muslims and Asians are the enemy, and guns and bombs are what America is all about. If not, then it wasn't directed at you. In any event, the OP's question was who is going to enlist with someone like Trump as CIC. I answered.

[HassleCat]

58. Your initial post made a pretty sweeping generalization.

I interpreted it to be directed at all persons who served in the military. I notice several other people took it the same way.

[Hoyt]

59. Are you denying SOME people join the military for guns, bombs, glory, and all that BS.

We can argue all night on how many do that. I think it is a lot. The guys who joined up right after high school where I came from were looking for the WWII type glory, were into guns and the gung ho junk, were quick to believe some peasant in a rice paddy was going to take over the USA, and similar BS.

Do you think the majority of the military who supported george war bush, and apparently support Trump, are there for some other reason?

One can serve their country in a lot of ways besides joining an organization where you will be taught to lay down a barrage that will likely kill a bunch of innocent people, push buttons that launch bombs and will kill a bunch of innocent people, or peel potatoes to feed those that do. I'm sorry, this is not WWI or WWII. It's hard to call any of the wars we've been in since then as wars of necessity.

You never have answered why you joined up.

[HassleCat]

60. I was in from 1972 to 1978.

My impression was that many people do join the military because they see too many John Wayne movies. A large proportion of those people join the Marines, as you might expect. I was in the Navy, in a technical field, and only one or two people I knew were hard core patriotic types. In my field, almost everyone was there for the technical training and experience. Even the SEAL team members who sometimes travelled on our ships were not "baby killer" types, although that was their job, obviously. I joined because I knew that my specialty would not put me in front of an angry yellow man with an AK-47. If I had not done this, I would have been drafted into the Army.

Yes, many people did believe some peasant in a rice paddy was part of communist aggression, which would envelope the world unless we opposed it with military force. This was very common thinking at the time. In fact, it may be very common thinking now, but with a different slant on it. Many citizens trust their government not to send them off to kill innocent people with no provocation. As we have seen, such faith is often severely misplaced, but not everyone discovers that before they decide to join up.

Part of the problem, a large part, in fact, is that we now have a professional military. The pay and benefits are pretty good, at least for those who make it a career. In return, we expect them to shut up and kill when told to kill, and not raise moral objections about it. Our military is very close to being a mercenary force, certainly much more so than when we had a draft and the citizen-soldier concept was still alive. We did this, not the people who serve. We intentionally set out to replace the citizen-soldier with the professional soldier, fully expecting that the professional soldier would be much less inclined to object to whatever we told him or her to do. So if there are many people in the military who joined up so they could kill, that's what we wanted. If we want it to be otherwise, we could return to the draft and the concept of the citizen-soldier.

[Hoyt]

63. That's a commendable explanation. Navy was my preference too, well after the Coast Guard said I

didn't meet vision (eye sight) requirements. Screw them, I was a darn good swimmer. I did not like the gung ho types in Arms ROTC for 3 years during Vietnam, so I dropped out of that before having to sign up. I swear some of those guys consider Lt. Calley a role model (look him up).

Anyway, based on post above, I certainly was not referring to you earlier.

[KamaAina]

52. Your autocorrect is seriously dorked.

How it got that gibberish out of "have little opportunity in their small towns or urban neighborhoods, and see a chance to better themselves while serving their country" is beyond me.

[gratuitous]

4. The apparatus remains in place

Mrs. gratuitous was a 20 year member of the local draft board, attending monthly meetings and going through training and simulated situations even though there is no draft in place. One of her last trainings had to do with the lottery system, and the military officer who ran the sessions said that those large drums with their little capsules stand in storage, ready and waiting to return to service on very short notice.

[deaniac21]

5. The future is hopeless.

We are all going to die.

[Calculating]

11. Indeed

Everybody reading this is going to die.

[MineralMan]

6. Unlikely. Current warfare doesn't really involve the

massive number of troops as previous ones. Only if we got embroiled in some war with a major nation would a draft even be contemplated and perhaps not even then.

All you have to do is look at the death and casualty numbers for Vietnam and Iraq to see what I mean. We conduct wars very differently now than we did before.

[Girard442]

10. Not so sure our military has outgrown the need for large numbers of warm bodies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-loss_policy

[MineralMan]

20. That's a good point, but the sheer number of people

in the military is far, far lower than it used to be. They used stop-loss during various situations, mostly because the time required to train new recruits was too long for the demand for "boots on the ground."

For the same reason, much use was made of National Guard troops to generate the numbers needed to pursue whatever conflicts were current.

Now, I don't know what Der Drumpf has in mind for foreign actions. I doubt that he knows, either. Pentagon officials will inform him about the difficulties of putting together large ground forces, and that may limit his enthusiasm.

I suppose the draft could be reinstated, but that will require Congress to play along, and it would not result in an immediate increase of trained troops ready to be deployed.

A lot of things militate against any large ground force actions these days, and I don't think it's likely that any such actions are very likely to be taken. The draft would be a desperation move for any administration, and would be hugely unpopular nationally, even with Republicans.

I don't see any such thing occurring in the near future, anyhow.

[meadowlark5]

32. I remember an interview years ago with a General or someone like that

Who said that it would not be cost effective to draft people randomly in high numbers. The equipment and training is far more technological and in depth than the old boot camp of previous wars. They want/need people who can be trained well over a longer period of time and that's not something that can be accomplished in a 6wk boot camp and then shipped off to fight.

That was one man's explanation so who knows. Trump really doesn't have any empathy for other human beings so one never knows that the lunatic will do.

[DinahMoeHum]

45. IOW, the military doesn't want or need cannon fodder.

n/t

[0rganism]

13. my son turned 18 last Saturday

he has 30 days to register for selective service
i'm just hoping he gets assigned to a wall-building detail far away from live fire zones

[Lurks Often]

27. Your son is not going to be drafted

[0rganism]

30. and Donald Trump will definitely never be president, right?

2 months ago i would have agreed with you

[Lurks Often]

51. Anybody who posted that Trump had a chance was ignored, mocked and alerted on.

which why so many here were surprised.


As for the draft, the military, the politicians and the public don't want it. The chances of another draft are incredibly small. Even the infantry is a specialized job these days requiring far more training that our fathers and grandfathers ever got for Vietnam and WWII.

[Warpy]

14. I think there are a lot of young, male fools out there who think

there is glory in war instead of mud, misery and death and who think Twittler will get them into the glory of battle sooner rather than later and will quit school to join up.

Yeah, there are young female fools, also, but their numbers are fewer.

[Jersey Devil]

17. Really? You think all who enlist are "fools" out for "glory"? (nt)

nt

[Warpy]

21. Hardly. I do think many of the ones looking for a fight under Twittler are

I love having the all volunteer, professional military, limited to people who have the talent and inclination to be warriors.

The hotheads and glory seekers, not so much.

[Lurks Often]

22. Not this nonsense again

No one, ESPECIALLY the military wants a draft. There also is no political support or, no popular support for the draft.

[zippythepinhead]

35. I was in the army during 1964 thru 1967

I got drafted but joined for three years and signed a contract to serve in germany, which kept me from being sent to vietnam.

The morale then was really bad because the draftees were mostly sent to vietnam.

I never met a rich draftee.

The favorite expression among the troops was "FTA" [fuck the army]

I am all in for the draft. It keeps us from becoming a banana republic and a military coup.

Nixon is the one who started the all volunteer army.

I was anti war while I was serving but wound up with an honorable discharge, spec5, pro pay and a good conduct medal.

My battery commander called me "hippy"

[zippythepinhead]

42. FYI

Militia in the decades following ratification

Ketland brass barrel smooth bore pistol common in Colonial America
During the first two decades following the ratification of the Second Amendment, public opposition to standing armies, among Anti-Federalists and Federalists alike, persisted and manifested itself locally as a general reluctance to create a professional armed police force, instead relying on county sheriffs, constables and night watchmen to enforce local ordinances.[64] Though sometimes compensated, often these positions were unpaid—held as a matter of civic duty. In these early decades, law enforcement officers were rarely armed with firearms, using billy clubs as their sole defensive weapons.[64] In serious emergencies, a posse comitatus, militia company, or group of vigilantes assumed law enforcement duties; these individuals were more likely than the local sheriff to be armed with firearms.[64] On May 8, 1792, Congress passed "[a]n act more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States" requiring:
[E]ach and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia...[and] every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear, so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.[119]
The act also gave specific instructions to domestic weapon manufacturers "that from and after five years from the passing of this act, muskets for arming the militia as herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound."[119] In practice, private acquisition and maintenance of rifles and muskets meeting specifications and readily available for militia duty proved problematic; estimates of compliance ranged from 10 to 65 percent.[120] Compliance with the enrollment provisions was also poor. In addition to the exemptions granted by the law for custom-house officers and their clerks, post-officers and stage drivers employed in the care and conveyance of U.S. mail, ferrymen, export inspectors, pilots, merchant mariners and those deployed at sea in active service; state legislatures granted numerous exemptions under Section 2 of the Act, including exemptions for: clergy, conscientious objectors, teachers, students, and jurors. And though a number of able-bodied white men remained available for service, many simply did not show up for militia duty. Penalties for failure to appear were enforced sporadically and selectively.[121] None is mentioned in the legislation.[119]

The Model 1795 Musket was made in the U.S. and used in the War of 1812
The first test of the militia system occurred in July 1794, when a group of disaffected Pennsylvania farmers rebelled against federal tax collectors whom they viewed as illegitimate tools of tyrannical power.[122] Attempts by the four adjoining states to raise a militia for nationalization to suppress the insurrection proved inadequate. When officials resorted to drafting men, they faced bitter resistance. Forthcoming soldiers consisted primarily of draftees or paid substitutes as well as poor enlistees lured by enlistment bonuses. The officers, however, were of a higher quality, responding out of a sense of civic duty and patriotism, and generally critical of the rank and file.[64] Most of the 13,000 soldiers lacked the required weaponry; the war department provided nearly two-thirds of them with guns.[64] In October, President George Washington and General Harry Lee marched on the 7,000 rebels who conceded without fighting. The episode provoked criticism of the citizen militia and inspired calls for a universal militia. Secretary of War Henry Knox and Vice-President John Adams had lobbied Congress to establish federal armories to stock imported weapons and encourage domestic production.[64] Congress did subsequently pass "[a]n act for the erecting and repairing of Arsenals and Magazines" on April 2, 1794, two months prior to the insurrection.[123] Nevertheless, the militia continued to deteriorate and twenty years later, the militia's poor condition contributed to several losses in the War of 1812, including the sacking of Washington, D.C., and the burning of the White House in 1814.[121]
Scholarly commentary

[Hekate]

54. The US may have to. We are being cyber attacked by Russia, which is making moves on Europe...

And we are being pushed and prodded by China, which is moving into the Pacific.

While certain persons were claiming that Hillary is a "warmonger" who would "get us into war," I was reading the newspaper.

My conclusion was and is that non-Middle-East war is going to be thrust upon us, regardless of who is POTUS (and I do mean regardless). Obama has earnestly tried to keep us out of shooting wars, and has tried to disengage us from Bush's wars, with the able assistance of his two SoS's, Clinton and Kerry.

But now we have Trump, the real Joker in the deck, who apparently is not playing with a full deck anyway.

If I understand correctly, our existing troops have been overdeployed for years -- thanks to Bush's wars. I don't see how we can keep doing this without adding more.

As for one comment here that was rightfully called out for disrespecting all our troops -- good grief.

Many join out of a sense of patriotic duty, especially if they come from military families. After 9-11 there was a real uptick in volunteers from all over: my own son and daughter gave it serious consideration, but decided to wait and see. Given how Bush conducted himself, I am eternally grateful they didn't join then.

Then there is what I call the Poverty Draft. If you are a young person from a poor rural community with no prospects, the military offers a chance at education and skills training. Many take that opportunity, gambling they will get out alive and healthy.

smh

[sarisataka]

55. Maybe all of those

Backward ass people in the flyover states that we don't care about will join the military

[Warren DeMontague]

62. No.

If it came down to needing that level of manpower they'd sooner trash the economy and eliminate the minimum wage, spurring an economic pseudo-draft.

But I don't think that's happening.

[dumbcat]

65. I hope so

but not likely.