Why the Draft Will Never Return

[Guest]

As usual, James Dunnigan cuts through the BS and lays it out.

In this essay, Dunnigan gives some very good reasons why conscription will never come back - it's mostly because nobody wants it, except clueless, opportunistic politicians...well, DUH!

"While most people now realize that an all volunteer force is superior, many still forget why a conscripted force could not compete, survive, or revive. But some politicians are not bothered by reality or historical lessons, and persist in calling for reinstating the draft. It will never happen, as 80 percent of American voters oppose it. Most people in the military would not want draftees either. And the potential draftees themselves are not particularly enthusiastic. "

.
mh
.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[billvon 3,171]

In the current climate I agree. If we need 250,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan in two years? And they start a "we are losing the war because we have no troops!" campaign? I'd expect to see a sudden surge of patriotism in 40+ year old republicans. I don't know if that would be enough to turn the tide, but the draft would start looking a bit better to people than it does now.

[Guest]

I don't think a draft will ever come back, mostly because it's so blatantly unfair and subject to abuse.

Our troops may not like what they're occasionally being asked (or ordered to do), but they can't say anybody made them "enlist or else". There was a time when judges offered young miscreants in our society a choice of enlistment or prison. Those times are long gone.

I may lack imagination, but I can't think of a single logical, worthwhile reason to reinstate the draft. However, just like Dunnigan, I can come up with plenty of logical, worthwhile reasons not to.

Politicians who think they'll somehow "force" the priveleged and wealthy to serve in the trenches via a draft are really deluding themselves.

edit for spelling

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[diverdriver 7]

Never say never Mark.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Could a draft be used to free up professional military from US based operations.
EG the regular army folks all go abroad for the conflict, but the draftees stay and do the home based stuff?
Similarly would an increased use of civilian 'contractors' in say support roles (dare I say it similar to the service Halliburton already provides) also free up combat trained personnel?

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[rickjump1 0]

It doesn't matter who you are or where you come from; every fit person in this country should perform some kind of national service before the age of 30. Too many people live here for security and freedom and have no interest in being an American. If you don't want to become an infantry grunt, you had better volunteer for something before they call you. PS: I'm just an old guy with a lot of friends who believe this too.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[steve1 5]

If we ever end up with a war as unpopular as Vietnam, I think we could very well end up with a draft again. Back then the standards were lowered tremendously to get enough people in the fox-holes. High School drop outs, people with criminal back grounds (up to a point). were accepted readily.

I think I'd take pride in being in todays military. I think I might even want to be a carreer soldier today because the standards are much higher. Back in the Vietnam era the standards for military acceptance were a lot lower, and I was glad to get out. Being a soldier in Vietnam was a very dangerous deal. Your chances of dieing or being crippled were great. And after all that, you received almost zero respect when you got home. I'm glad I missed out on that conflict. Not many people wanted to volunteer back then. I think the same thing could happen in Iraq if we start losing enough people over there, and if there is no end in sight. I hope it doesn't come to that though. I think there's a lot of truth to the fact that history does repeat itself. I'm not saying Iraq is another Vietnam, but who knows if we start needing huge numbers of troops over there, I think we may very well reinstate the draft. I'll bet the standards start dropping also.

And what a huge injustice this often turns out to be. As in most wars the ones who end up being cannon fodder are young people who are in need of work, or the poor who can't afford to go to college to avoid a draft.....Just my 2 cents worth....(I hope I don't piss too many people off with this one.)....Steve1

[rickjump1 0]

We do not pick and choose our wars; we pick and choose our politicians. This thread sounds like 101 ways to avoid military service.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[PhillyKev 0]

So, if we don't have enough troops without drafting, what does Dunnigan suggest? Just pull out with no exit plan?

Anyone know when they plan to create an exit plan for Iraq, anyway?

[Douva 0]

Quote

So, if we don't have enough troops without drafting, what does Dunnigan suggest? Just pull out with no exit plan?

Anyone know when they plan to create an exit plan for Iraq, anyway?

Any time somebody tries to tell me exactly what is or is not going to happen, regarding a draft, I take their words with a grain of salt. This is a serious issue with a lot of variables, from issues of national security to threats of civil unrest. It may or may not happen, but I've heard enough highly intelligent people speaking out on both sides of the issue to realize that anything is possible. For now, most of us will just have to wait for the issue to be formally placed on the table by our government. Those of us who fall within the draft age will just have to think twice before taking out any long term loans, for the next year or so.

--Douva

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[Guest]

Quote

So, if we don't have enough troops without drafting, what does Dunnigan suggest? Just pull out with no exit plan?

Anyone know when they plan to create an exit plan for Iraq, anyway?

The point of the Dunnigan story was that universal conscription is universally loathed by just about everyone, and for very good reasons. Heck, it didn't even exist until the 19th Century, when the concept of total war engendered the idea. (Almost) everyone knows that the best soldiers are professionals, who are in the military because they want to be, not because they somehow have to be.

And for all the media trumpeting about deserters, they are few, and for good reason - you can't sign on voluntarily to be a part of a huge death-dealing machine, and then decide you don't like this or that assignment. Kinda silly. I mean, what part of the word "Army" contains "Peace Corps"?

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[PhillyKev 0]

I agree with your asessment. But saying that it will never happen is naive.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

It doesn't matter who you are or where you come from; every fit person in this country should perform some kind of national service before the age of 30. Too many people live here for security and freedom and have no interest in being an American. If you don't want to become an infantry grunt, you had better volunteer for something before they call you. PS: I'm just an old guy with a lot of friends who believe this too.

Implied in this is that people who go to college to become engineers, teachers, or doctors (just some examples) aren't doing their nation a service. And that is wrong. The power of the USA doesn't stem from its military force, but rather its knowledge force. Capitalism and opportunity drive people to succeed. America benefits from the attempts.

If more attacks succeed on our side of the world, there could be a push to a draft. So long as it stays in Iraq, not a chance in hell.

[kallend 2,216]

Quote

Quote

It doesn't matter who you are or where you come from; every fit person in this country should perform some kind of national service before the age of 30. Too many people live here for security and freedom and have no interest in being an American. If you don't want to become an infantry grunt, you had better volunteer for something before they call you. PS: I'm just an old guy with a lot of friends who believe this too.

Implied in this is that people who go to college to become engineers, teachers, or doctors (just some examples) aren't doing their nation a service. And that is wrong. The power of the USA doesn't stem from its military force, but rather its knowledge force. Capitalism and opportunity drive people to succeed. America benefits from the attempts.

If more attacks succeed on our side of the world, there could be a push to a draft. So long as it stays in Iraq, not a chance in hell.

Case in point
http://www.trinityprep.org/MAZZAR/PhysicalSci/History/Moseley.htm

How much benefit did Britain gain from having this guy on the front lines instead of in an R&D position?

Fortunately they wised up by WWII. Nearly all the cryptanalysists who broke the Enigma codes were recent college graduates. As were the researchers on the Manhattan project, etc.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Guest]

Quote

I agree with your asessment. But saying that it will never happen is naive.

Kev,

I agree with you to "never say never" - we don't know what the future holds. After all, who could have foreseen that the USSR would implode, and former Warsaw Pact countries would become part of the European Union?

However, my remarks agree with Dunnigan - it's just a really BAD way to populate one's military. There are enough people enlisting voluntarily that it's not needed. If you read the Dunnigan piece, you'll see that back in the day, the Army wanted to end the draft, the Air Force and Navy DIDN'T, because it motivated the best and brightest to go to their services to avoid being Army cannon fodder.

Nothing about military service can be considered "fair" or otherwise egalitarian. When I was in the USAF, I considered myself to be mostly average in IQ and so forth; yet I had the highest ASVAB scores in my flight (50 guys), even though the ASVAB was (and still is) a JOKE!

I was also surprised after spending so much time around the Army as a Brat and then enlisting in the AF, only to find out that most of their enlisteds weren't much better than the Army! There were exceptions, of course. The best and brightest worked on the most sophisticated stuff (avionics, in my case, and another guy in my shop in Germany was a cross-trained Minuteman III technician), but the majority were your average LUGNUTS.

I realize this is long winded and somewhat off-topic, but the point I'm trying to make is that the lower end of the food chain is going to go into the service, if for no other reason than they are not bright enough to do much else. The best and brightest (and wealthiest) will find some way or other to avoid the dirty work, the heavy lifting, or getting shot at. That's the way of the world ("Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid."). The services know it, congress knows it (except for a few nameless buffoons), and the citizens know it. So yes, the lower end of the food chain ends up in the trenches, but although it isn't fair (who said life was fair?), it's a lot more fair than conscription is or ever will be.

This hogwash about drafting EVERYBODY is pointless. There's no way (at least in our society) anybody in medical school could or should be involuntarily put in a trench to get shot at.

Therefore, the only thing that can really change the status quo (by giving all these goodies and incentives to recruits, BTW, the services can in turn afford to be more selective about who gets them. Yes, it's bribery, but so what?) is something really catastrophic, like nukes taking out DC, and the military imposing martial law and grabbing everybody with a pulse and putting them in uniform.

Simple quotas won't change things.

Giving skilled troops a reason to STAY is a lot more effcctive than creating a high turn-over of first-termers (according to Dunnigan, Special Forces operators cost more to train than FIGHTER PILOTS) through involuntary service.

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

There are enough people enlisting voluntarily that it's not needed.

Right now...that could change quickly.

Quote

The services know it, congress knows it (except for a few nameless buffoons), and the citizens know it. So yes, the lower end of the food chain ends up in the trenches, but although it isn't fair (who said life was fair?), it's a lot more fair than conscription is or ever will be.

I don't agree that it's more fair. We have a defacto draft in effect now. Those who have been neglected by society, who have no education, no means of support are who make up the majority of the grunts. They're paying the biggest price for our freedom and reaping the least benefit. If politicians and corporations sons were at risk, it might make those in power think a little harder before commiting our troops (or at least commiting our troops in too few numbers with too few ideas about how to keep them safe).

Quote

Giving skilled troops a reason to STAY is a lot more effcctive than creating a high turn-over of first-termers

I agree, but the way it is now, the only reason they need to keep a lot of them is to give them food and shelter because they couldn't provide that for themselves. I'd rather see money spent elliminating the NEED for people to join and keep it at those who really WANT to. And if that's not enough, draft equitably across racial and income classes.

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

There are enough people enlisting voluntarily that it's not needed.

Right now...that could change quickly.

Quote

The services know it, congress knows it (except for a few nameless buffoons), and the citizens know it. So yes, the lower end of the food chain ends up in the trenches, but although it isn't fair (who said life was fair?), it's a lot more fair than conscription is or ever will be.

I don't agree that it's more fair. We have a defacto draft in effect now. Those who have been neglected by society, who have no education, no means of support are who make up the majority of the grunts. They're paying the biggest price for our freedom and reaping the least benefit. If politicians and corporations sons were at risk, it might make those in power think a little harder before commiting our troops (or at least commiting our troops in too few numbers with too few ideas about how to keep them safe).

Quote

Giving skilled troops a reason to STAY is a lot more effcctive than creating a high turn-over of first-termers

I agree, but the way it is now, the only reason they need to keep a lot of them is to give them food and shelter because they couldn't provide that for themselves. I'd rather see money spent elliminating the NEED for people to join and keep it at those who really WANT to. And if that's not enough, draft equitably across racial and income classes.

How can that possibly be done? The simple answer is that it CAN'T, and that's why the draft was abolished in the first place.

This seems to be another case of "It didn't work the first time because the right people weren't in charge!" Now where have I heard that one before?

BTW - the services DON'T WANT the uneducated illiterates, and they DON'T have to take them. Conscription would mean they'd have to take the rock-stupid, and there are a lot more rock-stupids than there are genius IQs of service age.

BTW - Meaning no offense, but your "food and shelter" remark doesn't make sense to me. In the context I was using, it's far more cost-effective to give people in high-demand specialties (technology, medicine, aviation, Special Operations) incentives to stay than it is to try to replace them. As for clerks, cooks, truck drivers, id est, those with a low training curve, retention isn't as critical an issue.

It's also cyclic. When I was in the beginning and middle of my first (and only, thank goodness) term, HUGE re-enlistment bonuses were offered, but by the time my ETS came, they were GONE, because the USAF had already met the retention goals for my specialty. In a way, I was kinda glad, because the bonus wouldn't have been worth another four years of my life.

Still, it was my decision to enlist in the first place. As the son of an Army officer, I was eligible for the service academies, and could have prepped for the USAFA (in fact, my wicked stepfather told me that if I had the grades, he'd pay for me to attend MIT), but I chose not to. Fresh back from Korea at 19, I didn't know what I want to do with my life, but I wanted it to be hands-on technology of some kind, and I didn't want to wind up flipping burgers.

So even if I'd had college funding (and I could have gotten loans, and I'd already been accepted by a University), I didn't want to do it. I wanted to travel some more, and I wanted to work around fighter jets. I got to do that, and more.

So please don't be disdainful of military service. A lot of people sign on because it's a real kick and a challenge, not just because they can't find anything else. It can be risky (just ask anybody who works on a carrier deck) but a lot of young men are attracted to the service because their hormones call them to it, not just because they can't find another line of work.

And at least they can choose.

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[rickjump1 0]

>Implied in this is that people who go to college to become engineers, teachers, or doctors (just some examples) aren't doing their nation a service. And that is wrong. The power of the USA doesn't stem from its military force, but rather its knowledge force. Capitalism and opportunity drive people to succeed. America benefits from the attempts.

I'm not implying anything like this. I'm talking about a little sacrifice on the part of everybody. The military or a national service had a place for doctors, engineers,teachers.

After Desert Storm the Army had a critical shortage of nurses because people got mad and quit when the President had the nerve to call their reserve unit up.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

" How much benefit did Britain gain from having this guy on the front lines instead of in an R&D position?"
Hehe, I clicked on the link thinking you were referring to Oswald Moseley.....
Different guy altogether.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[steve1 5]

Quote

We do not pick and choose our wars; we pick and choose our politicians. This thread sounds like 101 ways to avoid military service.

In my mind that is a serious problem. If poor leadership is in control would you blindly follow them. I wouldn't. Let's say Adolph Hitler were elected president of the United States and told everyone we are the super race and we need to conquer the world. Would you go along with it? Or for example, if he ordered you to start killing Jews. What then?

I know this is an extreme example, but it illustrates a point. I think if the United States is involved in a war that is wrong to begin with, people need to voice their opinions and stand up for what they believe in, not just follow blindly whatever the government dictates. If a person decides not to serve I also think need to pay the consequences. Not everyone who refused to serve in Vietnam was a coward. I'll admit that during the Vietnam conflict I hated most draft dodgers. I still don't like Jane Fonda much. I think she should have been tried as a traitor to her country. But at the same time, maybe some of the people who refused to be drafted into a grunt outfit during an unjust war may have had the right idea.

Many who served during that time period did so by choosing an MOS where they were almost guaranteed not having to serve in combat. If you were drafted you were almost guaranteed a slot in an Army or Marine grunt outfit. As a clerk typist you were probably going to work in a safe area in air conditioned comfort, and many chose the easier route. Sure they may have served, but I'm not so sure this wasn't just another way of avoiding the draft.....Steve1

[rickjump1 0]

I agree Steve. Lets hope our system of government will prevent someone like Hitler from coming to power in the first place. In the end it will be left up to the individual whether he serves or takes off.

During Vietnam, a lot of people joined the National Guard to stay home and avoid combat. This was good as long as there were slots available. I'm sure some had "connections".

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[steve1 5]

I guess I'm a draft dodger of sorts, when it comes right down to it. I was A-1 in 1969. The draft board was filling out the papers to draft me, because I wasn't in school. I really couldn't see any sense in the War that was going on. I mean why were we there? Everyone said it was to stop Communism, but I really couldn't see how that really made sense. Each week there were plane loads of bodies being flown back to the states. And yet the politicians thought they could somehow win over there, if they only had several thousand more troops.

Being young and dumb and still quite "gun-ho" I was thinking seriously of joining the Marine Corps. I didn't want to be a clerk typist, and since I had always been a hunter, I figured I wanted a job where I could shoot a rifle. I know this sounds really stupid, but back then I probably was. These were some of the thoughts going through my head. I was also unemployed, and didn't have money for school (which would have kept me from being drafted).

I hunted all Fall and came within days of being drafted. I mean they were filling out the papers at the draft board.
And then, my old scoutmaster who was also a Sargent Major in a Special Forces National Guard Outfit called me up. Of course he was making some cash off of this by signing me up. I had some friends signing up also, and I thought I'd look really cool wearing a Green Beret. What I didn't fully realize until I arrived at Fort Polk, Louisiana (for Basic and Infantry training) was that you would have to spend about a year in training, and this training would be no picnic. I mean nobody was stupid enough to join an outfit like that. You didn't have to be connected to sign up either. There was no waiting list at all. So, I signed up.

I didn't really realize what Special Forces was back then. To tell you the truth, I didn't think I could make it through the training, because they flunked out tons of people. I was 19 and looked several years younger. I also didn't realize that a special Forces soldier was a teacher and adviser in many cases, and that you would have to learn how to teach classes in the final phase of it. You know I kind of liked the ten mile runs, night jumps, shooting weapons, etc. I had one of the fastest times in the obsticle course in our training company, and was pretty lean and mean. But the thought of actually having to teach a class scared the hell out of me. I mean I was so shy I could barely give a book report let alone teach a class in front of large group of soldiers. I even thought of quitting over this alone because I didn't think I could do it.

One thing they taught us during Method of Instruction week was to be fully prepared. So I'd stay up all night trying to memorize every word I was going to say, and somehow I made it through. I think this gave me the confidence to go on to be a teacher later in life.

I spent 11 1/2 months on active duty before returning home to my Guard Unit as a weapons specialist. A friend of mine spent a year and a half in training as a medic before he returned.

But you know I never felt good about wearing that Beret. Many of the people I trained with were going to Nam, and many weren't coming back. I'm sure they also felt I had no right to wear it even though I went through the training. I would have gone to Vietnam if I were activated, but the chances of that back then were slim. So in that sense, I was a draft dodger....Steve1

[billvon 3,171]

------------------------
Nick Confessore
American Prospect online edition
May 18, 2004

IT'S DRAFTY IN HERE. A friend of mine who is currently an inactive Army reservist forwarded me some memos he received regarding future mobilizations -- memos that indicate that we are not far from some kind of conscription in the next few years. According to my friend, recruiters are telling inactive reservists that they're going to be called up one way or another eventually, so they might as well sign up now and get into non-Iraq-deploying units while they still can. There's also a "warning order" -- i.e., a heads-up -- from the Army's personnel command that talks about the involuntary transfer of inactive reservists to the active reserves, and thus into units that are on deck for the next few Iraq rotations.

My understanding of how reserve call-ups work is imperfect, but if memory serves, the inactive reservists -- known as the Individual Ready Reserve -- are people who have already fulfilled their term of enlistment but can be called up as individuals if the military needs their particular skills or specialty badly enough. In other words, after a couple of years of dipping into the main reserves -- essentially chewing through them to sustain post-9/11 deployments, the Afghanistan occupation, and then the Iraq invasion -- we're now dipping into the inactive reserves. And if we still need more manpower after that -- well, then we start drafting.

There is no question we do not have enough manpower (among other things) in the active-duty military to sustain our current "operations tempo," as the military wonks call it. And there are many good arguments to be made for reinstating the draft, albeit one that would look very different from the corrupt and unfair Vietnam-era draft. It's worth thinking now about what kind of draft we'd like to see if the need for one becomes inavoidable.

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

I guess I'm a draft dodger of sorts........

You are not a draft dodger and don't think that way. You did your duty. I meet a lot of people who did not run, but are now sorry they didn't go. Sure, not many days go by when I don't think of people I knew who were killed, but it was all for nothing. Be thankful you did not go. Count your arms, legs, and kiss your wife, kids and your scout master. Like that yankee general said,"War is Hell".

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

• Quote