The draft...

[Javaman]

I posted a topic here earlier talking about the draft, there were many impassioned responses. Thanks, that's what I like about DU.

A few people supported a draft without a clear reason why, fine, however, this is not a topic that should be tossed around lightly.

My point in starting the thread was to get people to think very seriously about the concept. If a threat of a draft is brought to the forefront then I think that would be enough to end the war post haste.

However, if we sit by and let it happen and hope to see a nation suddenly galvanized to action as an after effect, then to me that is a frightening prospect.

The draft should be spoken about openly, it should be examined, it should be well detailed, this is the only way a well informed public will decide.

My fear is that if the draft is proposed and it is voted on, all the fine print, the little details will be willfully kept from the American public (just like everything else we are told) and we will only understand the depth of our situation when it's way too late.

Let's keep the topic alive, least we be lead astray by smooth talking congress people who "claim to know what's good for America".

Mr. Romney is the type of person I fear the most. 5 sons who refuse to enlist in a war their father actively supports, but yet feel that serving at home is better for their fathers cause or interest. Mr. Romney hides behind his run for the presidency to protect his kids. That's a coward.

Let us call their bluff, lets open up the debate, then lets see how these various presidential candidates feel.

I think the real question, now as it appears as if Iraq will mutate into Iran, that needs to be asked is a simple one: If there is a draft will your children go serve without exception?

End of debate. When the first one of these hypocrites blinks, the draft becomes a thing of the past.

[ShortnFiery]

1. I regret that "the wealthy" and "the connected" sons will even MORE easily sky out of duty.

It would make the "deal making" by wealthy families during the Vietnam War look like "amateur hour."

The Wealthy and Connected have NOT EVER had so much power (well, before the American Revolution). Therefore, reimplementing a draft will *fully screw over* BOTH the Working and Middle Classes in America.

No. Way. :thumbsdown:

[Javaman]

2. That is always in the back of my mind...

That's the Achilles heal of my suggestion.

As much as we might want to have a fair debate, the deck is pretty much always going to be stacked against the average American.

[TahitiNut]

6. Is it better to have 80% privileged escape than 20%?? Than 5%? Than 1%?

Somehow, I can't tell whether it's a sense of equity or ENVY.

:shrug:

[whistle]

3. John Murtha has already begun the process by opening debate

...this ought to scare the freepers and reThuglicon chickehawks to reconsider withdrawal from Iraq and not allow Cheney to begin bombing Iran:

<snip>
Murtha Joins Debate Over Reinstating Military Draft
By Randy Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor
April 03, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - Seeking to boost the movement to reinstitute a military draft, Rep. John Murtha is arguing that the U.S. should have a "citizen's army" in addition to a "volunteer, professional army." However, a critic of the Pennsylvania Democrat on Monday called his statement "ridiculous" and "without merit."

"I voted against the volunteer army because I felt if we ever had a war, we wouldn't be able to sustain ," Murtha said during the March 29 edition of CNN's "The Situation Room."

<deep snip>
As Cybercast News Service previously reported, Rangel and Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) in Dec. 2002 proposed a reinstatement of the military draft in an attempt to stall possible military action against Iraq.

"I think if went home and found out that there were families concerned about their kids going off to war," Rangel said at the time, "there would be more cautiousness and more willingness to work with the international community than to say, 'Our way or the highway.'"

Rangel's proposal was voted down 402 to two despite his claims that the current volunteer military was the only employment option for minority youths living in impoverished areas.

However, the situation on Capitol Hill changed when Democrats won marginal control of both houses of Congress in November of 2006. As a result, Rangel now serves as chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, while Murtha chairs the Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on defense.

The concept of restoring the draft has received support from such individuals as John Roper, professor of history at Emory & Henry College in Emory, Va.

In a column for the Roanoke Times entitled "Call to Conscript Citizen Soldiers," Roper noted that the tradition of having civilian soldiers "remains dear to me" because "farm boys, factory hands, stock brokers, ministers and, yes, pimps, hustlers and petty thieves left those pursuits, got themselves through boot camp, learned how to use their gear and fought."

"They defeated the professionals who were well trained and who were, on paper, better suited to the battle," he added. "Citizen soldiers accomplished the stated mission in every war from 1775 to 1973.

[YOY]

4. They won't send the Romney kids or the Twins! These people have a backdoor.

They'll send my little brother and cousin.

They'll send every poor and middle class kid they can. Granted it would be a wakeup experience for the class-C republicans (Class A Billionaire, Class B Millionaire, Class C Fucking Imbecile) but they'll die along with my family.

& 30 years from now the Young Republicans will gush on what a buch of quitters we were as they sip their champagne...

Just brings a Harvey Danger line to mind: "-they'll take the world apart and break my baby brother's finger
-so he can't shake my hand"

[pnwmom]

5. Embracing the draft would be the kiss of death for the Democratic party.

If we want to lose in 2008, let's all of us support returning to a draft.

[Javaman]

7. That's just it...

it's not for the dems to embrace but to put the repuke hypocrisy on trail. Put the ball in their court and see how the screw themselves. :)

[SlipperySlope]

8. I support the draft, but with some major caveats.

Philosophically I support something quite a bit like a draft, even though I came to the position reluctantly.

My reluctance was very simple (and deeply rooted). I don't support the idea that our government can force a citizen into any activity. I initially no more supported the idea of being forced into military service than I would support the idea of being forced to any other kind of labor.

But, after considerable thought, I had to reverse myself. I think that *defending* the nation is a public good, and that it is a burden that should be shared by all citizens, much like Jury duty. I also think that having an all volunteer army is dangerous as it creates something of a military elite.

So, the draft I would support would be different from any prior draft as follows.

1: Universal service - all citizens (male and female) would actively serve for 2 years.
2: Domestic use only - the purpose is for public defense - not offense. Draftees could not be sent outside of the US and its waters. An all-volunteer corp could serve that purpose.

I know that plenty of people will disagree the idea of a draft, but like I said, I do believe that defense is a valid national function, and that an all-volunteer army is dangerously close to a mercenary army.

[Warpy]

10. Young women can serve when young men have babies.

That is all.

[wuushew]

12. Please flesh out your non-egalitarian proposal

either you are saying that

(A) pregnancy serves as disqualifer for service

(B) gender serves as disqualifer for service


How about differed service after a set maternity leave period?

[Warpy]

15. Statement of fact, slick

Safest years for childbirth are 18-26.

Facing childbirth means facing death and disability.

Requiring women to do 2 years in the military during their peak childbearing years is not only stupid, it places them in double jeopardy.

Like I said, you guys start having babies, we'll think about toting guns.

[Colorado Progressive]

18. not to mention that its men that start them, let them fight them

[wuushew]

21. How will childless women be punished for gaming the system?

:shrug:

[TahitiNut]

14. My reasoning followed a very similar path.

Until it is made unnecessary, then all should share in the obligations of national service. Every autocrat since the beginninig of time relied upon an elite cadre of "professional military" - from the Republican Guard back to the Praetorian Guard and before. The Founders envisioned a citizen Army of activated militia and limited any Army funding legislation to two years. A "standing professional Army" was seen as antithetical to a democracy. Wars should be fought by those who hate war, not just by those who enjoy it.

[Selatius]

17. The Founders likely wanted a system similar to the Swiss militia system today

What we have is pretty alien compared to the community and state militias seen 200 years ago. The National Guard is considered the equivalent of the militia, but in practice it's just another arm of the federal government, given the recent expansion of presidential power to "federalize" these "state militias."

[TahitiNut]

20. LBJ refused to comprehensively call up the Guard and Reserves ...

... under the "theory" that it'd assure domestic opposition to the war. When we think about it, we get some idea how times have changed and how the draft changes in 1970 made so much difference.

[paparush]

9. The draft did not end Vietnam...it took years and many lives for the war to grind to a halt.

[JTFrog]

11. In the ten years a draft would

take to stop a war, my three teenage sons would have plenty of opportunity to become statistics.

Just the thought of a draft during a fucking illegal occupation and the threat of another makes my blood boil. And seeing how many support it makes me wonder just what hole I fell down recently.

[Javaman]

22. Scary isn't it...

I think there is a major disconnect out there. Many people think it's a good thing until reality hits them. Once one of their loved ones suddenly is drafted, see how quickly their tunes change.

during any war there is never a lack of armchair generals willing to sacrifice the lives of other peoples children.

[Colorado Progressive]

13. DITTO!!!! I have a son too!

How dare any son of a bitch even think about drafting him, unless its to DEFEND his country!

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. I support NATIONAL SERVICE in general

and the draft, I am going be overtly cynical, in particular for political reasons

And this conclusions did not come up easy

1.- We have a generation that has been disengaged from the country at large. You talk to them and its all about Lohan, Idol and the latest 360 game. Don't get me wrong, I like my gaming, hell I make my iiving out of gamers, but they are not the priority.

2.- We need to develop a sense of community to rebuild the country, and I don't know whether it is too late any lomger

You do not need a military draft to do this... hell the WPA would be just as effective,

Now to the draft in particular.

Way too many people, even today, truly don't give a damn about the war because it is somebody else's kids fighitng it. If this war is so damn important (a la WW II important) then we do need a draft. We need a full economic commitment and we need a full social commitment. The fact that this has not happened tells me the war is a scam. That said... the only thing that will get many of these cynical folks involved will be the threat of having skin the game.

Oh and the draft should be universal and include women... period

Oh and as is, we do have two drafts

a- An economic draft, which many even round these parts are fine with

b- the Backdoor draft, again many round these parts are fine with that one too.

So it is time to put up or shut up

Oh and why haven't the repukes gone down that path? Rangel pointed it very well some years back

So chew on his statements folks

[Javaman]

23. So the purpose of a draft to you would serve as a "wake up" call

to todays youth?

This is a new twist on the age old phenomenon of the older generation complaining about the youth of today.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Given at least six kids have told me this in no uncertain

terms, yes...

I have been told and I quote

Why should I care, does not affect me

What will make you pay attention

A military draft.

And those kids, they are not alone.

Nor are they unique

They care about their 360 xbox, and paying their money and don't think they can make any difference in the world, nor do they want to try.

And yes, you get a draft going, that youth will wake up in a heart beat, something bout your ass being on the line

Oh and to add, most folks round these parts are FINE by the economic draft, since that keeps their kids out of the firing line

Folks who are not in favor of a draft that will affect their precious should be outraged that we have an economic draft... they are not. This alone speaks volumes and the only thing people care for is their own skin

[fed-up]

19. I started thinking about a draft sometime during my pregnancy 19 years ago-I knew then that I

would do whatever it took to keep my as yet unborn child from fighting in what would most likely be a war for corporate/personal/political profit.

For whatever it is worth I have raised a child that will not blindly follow orders and will never willingly participate in the murder of other human beings.

I will do whatever it takes to ensure that he is NOT drafted and/or has a means to get out of this country should a draft be instated.

[Done]

24. We have to make a decision.

The congress has to get off their ass. We get out of Iraq, or we start a draft. We are running our military in the ground. Make a stinking decision now. I prefer getting out of Iraq.

If we do stay in Iraq we will have to go back to the drawing board and restructure the Iraq government...there are a number of ideas out there, but with any one of them we will be in Iraq for a while. How long? Maybe another trillion dollars long and ten thousand more dead soldiers long. If we stay in Iraq it is also (even more) imperative that we remove Boosh and cheney from office. They will only screw things up, and there's a good chance that they will attack Iran.

If we stay in Iraq for the next five years, the chances are that Iraq will be no better off. Even five years from now supporters of the war will argue that if we pull out of Iraq the country will fall apart and be a haven for terrorists.

[wuushew]

25. kick

:kick: