Does all volunteer miltary work?

[newsstand 0]

There are a lot of posts here that touch on this topic but none are explicitly about it, or no recent ones anyway.

The US government is considering a draft and naturally there are a lot of opinions. One side is the that all volunteer force better represents the country. The other is that drafting can be made equal. I am able to agree with both. By making the rules pretty simple, as the current administration seems to have done, it probably guarantees an equal representation of the population. However what to me seems more important is that if you can't get enough volunteers then maybe the populace doesn't really believe in the war.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[TomAiello 26]

In my opinion, conscription falls only a few steps short of enslavement.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Skyrad 0]

I belive that a volunteer force will always be more profesional than a conscripted one. Can't imagine a worse scenario than having my back covered by someone that has no interest in the profesion and is only there because the alternative was a prison sentance. Sounds like a fasttrack way to lower moral.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Sounds like a fasttrack way to lower moral.

Its more then a moral problem, the US military spent many many years trying to clean up the problems in the enlisted ranks after the Vietnam draft ended. Infact, many historical scholars believe it wasn't until the early to mid 1980s that the US military was properly back to what it should be.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[BikerBabe 0]

Can't. help. self...must...correct...argh!

moral - Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral quandary.

morale (with an e) - how the troops are feeling, the atmosphere of the group or unit.

I think conscription costs morale, money, and lives. We're long past the point in history where wars are solely attrition-based. If we needed cannon fodder, we'd have a draft. I don't think there will ever be a war from now on where we need cannon fodder.

Sorry for the crudeness of term, but thats often what conscripts have been considered in the past, i.e. expendable.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[quade 4]

There are at least two really important things about the draft or lack thereof (and for the most part this just applies to enlisted personnel -- not so much commissioned officers):

Generally speaking, an all volunteer military means that it will attract a slightly disadvantaged group of people. People that are having a difficult time finding work for anyone of a number of reasons. This leads to a slight class stuggle with disadvantaged people more likely to sign up and people with advantages not serving.

While this may actually not be such a bad deal during peacetime (which hardly exists anymore), I think it's kind of outrageous when you think about who has to really fight the battles for the U.S..

To me it just seems unfair.

Think about it. How many upper middle class and above kids sign up for voluntary enlisted service?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[juanesky 0]

Nowadays? Many. From experience, you will be surprised how many are highly motivated, and taking a huge pay cut to do so.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Can't. help. self...must...correct...argh!

Thanks, that's what I get for posting really tired.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[kjarv 0]

I've always liked Heinlein's idea from Starship Troopers... In order to vote, you must have had served some form of military/goverment service...

[quade 4]

"Many" is not always the same as "proportional".

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Guest]

Quote

"Many" is not always the same as "proportional".

You'll see hell itself before you see "proportional", draft or not, and here's why:

A lot of the squawking for a draft is coming from leftists, of all places (the same people who by and large object to war, oddly enough).

They seem to think of conscription as more egalitarian somehow.

I don't see how they can think that.

If there is a draft, the well-educated, wealthy and powerful will CONTINUE to avoid military service via deferral of some kind, or good old-fashioned influence (READ: CORRUPTION).

Egregious example: You're a wealthy and powerful constituent in your CongressCritter's district. You may even be on very good terms with said Critter.

Your son is in medical school when he gets a draft notice.

Can you see where I'm going with this?

DOES ANYBODY REALLY THINK A DRAFT IS SOMEHOW MAGICALLY EGALITARIAN? IT ISN'T!!!

If this kind of scenario happens JUST ONCE, it can and will happen lots of times. This is one of the major reasons why conscription was done away with in the FIRST PLACE.

This is human nature, and it's just the way it is. The well-educated, wealthy and powerful will always be able to choose, and the poor, uneducated slobs won't be, and thus will be drafted to fight. At least with a volunteer force, they can decide for themselves. I've cited myself as an example in another thread. I was the son (okay, stepson) of a career Army officer, and when I was 19, I could have gone anywhere I wanted: I could have gone (with some prep, o'course) to one of the service academies, I could enlist, or I could avoid it altogether and go to University instead (I was already accepted). The point here is that I HAD A CHOICE.

There are those who would deny the many a choice, just to try to (unsuccessfully) stick it to the few.

You can take this as the LAST WORD, and GOSPEL...

CONSCRIPTION IS OVER. AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

mh

.

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

[Guest]

Quote

Think about it. How many upper middle class and above kids sign up for voluntary enlisted service?

More than you may think, Paul. You'd be surprised, you really would! One of my roommates at Bitburg was the son of a doctor (and a department head at a large Chicago area hospital). He enlisted and became a jet engine mechanic because he not only wanted to do something different, he wanted to make his own way in the world, away from any influence his father could have on his life.

He was no rare exception. In my four-year hitch, I met a lot of people from well-to-do backgrounds, many of whom signed up not because they couldn't do any better, but because like me they wanted some adventure before they went back to the hum-drum, work-a-day world.

Conscription would change all that.

mh

ps - if I had it to do all over, I would have prepped for the USAFA, and I would have ended up flying jets of some kind. If not, I would have completed my service commitment and departed. No way would I make the service a career.

Once again, I can't see how denying choice to the many will somehow motivate the few to serve when they don't want to. Sure, the system as it exists is unfair (if you're mentally or physically unfit, you're not serving, and that's that. A high-school friend of mine [and daughter of an RN] tried to enlist, but was medically disqualified - scoliosis, IIRC])

And yes, I grant you, that those who are at some kind of economic disadvantage are more likely to be attracted to military service, but standards are pretty high these days - the services won't take anyone who doesn't pass the physical, and the lower they score on the ASVAB, the less likely they are to have any kind of vocational choice, but that's true of life in general.

I've said it before: LIFE IS TOUGH - IT'S TOUGHER IF YOU'RE STUPID.

(In fact, I'm going to make that my sig line)

mh

.

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

[Luv2Fall 0]

You have a point.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Think about it. How many upper middle class and above kids sign up for voluntary enlisted service?

I think my son falls into that category. (Depends how you classify me). He is a sergeant, currently in Korea, imminently on his way to Iraq.

...

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

[Luv2Fall 0]

There are a few....................usually do one stint........sometimes not even that.

Standards are higher than they use to be.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

LIFE IS TOUGH - IT'S TOUGHER IF YOU'RE STUPID.

I don't think that's the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I know a number of pretty stupid people who have comfortable lives on account of inherited wealth.

I'd make it:

LIFE IS TOUGH - IT'S TOUGHER IF YOU'RE POOR AND STUPID.

...

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

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

LIFE IS TOUGH - IT'S TOUGHER IF YOU'RE STUPID.

I don't think that's the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I know a number of pretty stupid people who have comfortable lives on account of inherited wealth.

When it comes to people, there are always exceptions to every rule.

A counselor I knew once put it well: "The wealthy still have problems; the only difference is that theirs are more expensive."

There are those who advocate conscription in the (very) misguided belief that it will somehow correct what appears to them to be injustice, but I submit that they haven't thought it all the way through.

Conscription will create GREATER injustice than exists today, because the wealthy and powerful will ALWAYS find ways to evade. That's just human nature. Those who somehow think "Oh, it'll be different this time!" aren't learning the lessons of history very well.

Who cares if even more poor young slobs die, as long as liberals can feel good about themselves by making conscription "egalitarian"? Ask yourself a question: Do you want what is best for the armed forces, or are you advocating a hopeless, pointless goal that serves a purely political end?

Were I a soldier, I would not want to trust my life to an involuntary conscript who didn't want to be there in the first place.

Here's an excerpt from Shakespeare's "Henry V" (Act IV, Scene III)

WESTMORELAND. O that we now had here
But one ten thousand of those men in England
That do no work to-day!

KING. What's he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin;
If we are mark'd to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.

mh
(edit to add location and scene of Shakespeare excerpt)
.

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

[seekfun 0]

Does an all volunteer military work?

Yes. It works much better than one with a draft. Many people have already touched on motivation, morale, and fairness. But, another issue to consider is technology, for two reasons.

1. The battlefield is infinitely more high-tech than it was during Vietnam. Though many don't believe it, today's rifleman is not the village idiot. These brave young men and women handle sophisticated weaponry, complex communications systems, operate under utterly confusing rules of engagement and still kick ass time and time again. I'm proud to have served alongside many of them (as a medic). And, you have to maintain standards for this type of military. A draft won't support these standards.

2. We don't need to draft when we have the most sophisticated weapons in the world. We need to stop being such damned humanitarians and simply teach terrorists what happens when you make bad decisions. We could end the war in Iraq in 48 hours if we started to value the lives of brave American sons and daughters over the sanctity of some damn mosque that was housing terrorists.

The last country that thought we were weak and tried to harm us in our homeland was Japan. We dropped two atomic bombs on them. Radical Islamic Militants are challenging us now. We need to drop some heavy munitions on them.

I don't like the idea of shedding innocent blood. But, it's funny how the world pays attention to things that make impressively large booms.

Our tax dollars pay for these fancy weapons systems so that thousands of brave Amercians do not have to die. A select few brave Americans spend their youth learning how to use these weapons systems so that their little brothers, sisters, nieces, and nephews will never have to be afraid to work in a high-rise building or fly in an airplane.

Don't draft and don't let legislation keep warriors from bringing the battle to the evil-doers.

Send in the U.S. Marines...And a few Corpsmen

Rock on Milwaukee,

topher

EDITED TO ADD: "as a medic" You see, a rifleman I was not. I simply admire them their bravery, their intelligence, their patriotism.

"...there is a there out there..." - Tom Robbins

[Gawain 0]

You make a very interesting point. I watched a program about the B-52 on Discovery Wings and the pilot said this *paraphrase* "The B-52 weapon system makes people and governments stop. Yeah, it's nice seeing one bomb go through a door and take down a single building, but when you knock down an entire block, that just makes people stop."

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

Quote

Think about it. How many upper middle class and above kids sign up for voluntary enlisted service?

I think my son falls into that category. (Depends how you classify me). He is a sergeant, currently in Korea, imminently on his way to Iraq.

My nephew, too. He's currently in the Navy on a nuclear sub. Graduated at the top of his military class.

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[Guest]

Here is something you will see less of if conscription were to return (and it AIN'T. It's a MOO point - that is, it's something that only cows would care about, but I digress):

From James F. Dunnigan's Strategy Page: Regiments Return to the US Army:

------------
The latest wrinkle among the many army reforms is the use of a web site that allows soldiers, who have sufficient time left in the army, to volunteer for available jobs in the new brigades that are forming. While everyone in the army volunteered to get in, the act of volunteering again brings with it some stature. It means you are committing yourself still more. Thus Army Rangers will point out that they are triple volunteers (for the army, for airborne training and to be in the rangers.) Having more “double volunteers” in these brigades builds morale and cohesion and makes the units more effective and deadlier in combat. (my emphasis)
------------

If lethality is the best measure of combat effectiveness (and it most certainly should be), then it's obvious that the best way to achieve that is through volunteers.

If, however, the goal is silly-assed social engineering (of which the military has seen a lot of since the Klinton years), rather than lethality, then, a draft would surely take place.

But it AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN! GOSPEL! IT AIN'T!

mh

.

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

[Guest]

The Draft and Why it Won't Work in Peacetime

by James F Dunnigan

Unable to attract sufficient volunteers for the armed forces, calls to bring back the draft are once more being heard in Congress. Conscription is always a popular proposal, for many Americans see it as a way to fill the ranks while also exposing a wide spectrum of young Americans to adult supervision, public service, and each other. It has long been noted that two years of military service shapes up many and enlightens a few. It's also the only way young men from difference ethnic groups and economic classes get to work closely together and get to know each other. While these are positive things, they are little more than making the most of a bad situation. In general, young men have never liked the idea of being hauled off for one to six years of "national service." While an ancient practice, it became common in the first half of this century. Public opinion being what it is, most nations have gotten rid of the draft. By popular demand, so to speak.
But now the United States, with the largest volunteer armed forces on the planet and the most robust economy, wants to bring back the draft to keep the ranks filled. Won't work. The draft is basically an all or nothing arrangement. To avoid popular unrest, your conscription plan has to be fair. You can't be fair if you only need about 20,000 new troops annually and the eligible pool of prospects each year is over a million.
Who gets taken? This is not an easy question to answer. In fact, it was a similar situation to this in the early 1960s that laid the foundation of the anti-Vietnam war movement later in the decade. It was all a matter of numbers. After the Korean war ended in 1953, the draft remained. It had been stopped a few years after World War II, but brought back quickly when the Korean war began in 1950. But in the late 1950s, the size of the armed forces was reduced. Thus there were several hundred thousand more young men available for the draft than the military needed. What to do? The local draft boards that actually selected who was to go were local for good reason. The members of each board were respected pillar-of-the-community types who worked hard to do the right thing, and still deliver their monthly quotas of conscripts. The important thing was for the families with draft age boys feeling that the selection of who would go was fair. When not as many conscripts were needed, the draft boards stretched the definition of who was exempt, or deferred. This was common, even in wartime. When you need more people, you dog down deeper into the pool of eligible. By the early 1960s, it was routine to defer all manner of students, married men without children, cops, teachers and medical personnel. These rules varied with the needs of each draft board, as some boards had more young men to select from than others.
When the Vietnam war came along, all the deferment categories made famous by rampant Vietnam era draft dodging already existed. But while many people saw it as fair to defer or exempt a cop or teacher in peacetime, it was another matter when there was a war going on and draftees were getting killed. Thus the draft became wildly unpopular, and was eventually dropped again in 1972, because most people saw it as unfair.
And this is why another peacetime draft will not work. In 2000, there will be over 1.6 million 18 year olds eligible for the draft. Some have proposed drafting women as well, so there's another 1.6 million. Exclude those not eligible for health (mental and physical) or situational (in prison, pregnant, vital defense job, student) and you still have far more people than are needed. Do you use a lottery? That's one game of chance that is not popular at all. "Win the draft lottery and lose two years of your life," will be the cry before long. The only fair draft is the wartime one, where all are eligible and all serve.

mh

.

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

[Guest]

How the Draft was Really Dodged

by James F. Dunnigan

Dodging the draft during the Vietnam War was seen by many as a patriotic act, a protest against an unjust war. But since most protest dried up when the draft was eliminated, one can assume that many were avoiding the draft to save themselves from the dangers of combat.

In reality, avoiding the draft just to avoid combat was the act of someone who was stupid, or, more often, simply didn't want to be bothered with military service at all. During the Vietnam War, nearly nine million Americans served in the armed forces. About a third served in Vietnam and fewer than 300,000 were in the bush getting shot at regularly. These soldiers took more than 80 percent of the casualties during the war.

In other words, you had about a three percent chance of seeing a lot of Vietnam combat once you were in the armed forces, but if you wanted to avoid combat, there were ample opportunities to do so without dodging the draft. First, consider some basic facts. The men most likely to find themselves fighting in the bush were draftees who didn't finish high school. While many men could not remedy their educational status, they could avoid the draft. The most direct way was by volunteering for service, which meant you now had less than a 20 percent chance of going to Vietnam at all.

Nearly all draftees went into the army; the other services had plenty of volunteers. Since draftees were in only for two years, the army, quite reasonably, put them into jobs that required little training. This included infantry. Thus if you volunteered for three or four years, your chances of going into the infantry were quite low.

Education also made a big difference, especially for draftees. A college graduate draftee had only a 42 percent chance of going to Vietnam, high school grads a 64 percent chance and high school dropouts a 70 percent chance. College grads were seen as easier to train for a more complex job, even if they were only in for two years. A common saying in the post World War II army, and still generally true, is that if you can type, you will never have to carry a rifle (fight in the infantry).

Few liked to talk about these tricks to avoid military service. The draft was a law enacted by the people's representatives. But most young men coming of age between 1945 and 1975 (when the draft ended) had not voted for it and wanted nothing to do with two or more years in uniform. Many did not want to admit this reluctance too publicly, but judging from the number who wheeled and dealed to avoid the infantry or any service at all, many of the lads knew what they were doing.

Today, many of them will admit what they were doing back then, unless they are politicians.

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

[nanook 1]

Quote

Generally speaking, an all volunteer military means that it will attract a slightly disadvantaged group of people. People that are having a difficult time finding work for anyone of a number of reasons. This leads to a slight class stuggle with disadvantaged people more likely to sign up and people with advantages not serving.

I might not be able to argue too well about the "disadvantaged" group. I would say most are because a lack of knowledge of their options and the marketing skills of the military in general. Those recruiters can make the service look like sunshine (or else!!!) I find the most common type of enlisted sailor is from the two parent home that was able to put them through college. Maybe 20 to 30 percent came from poor families. Todays navy has enough volunteers to where we don't need to tolerate any attitude-disadvantaged people. We chop them real quick. Now class struggle; we do have some rich kids and poor kids but they make the same amount of money and everyone knows that. They can't be impressed by how much their dad makes. The jealousy just isn't there. As far as to who really fight the battles. the fact that only poor people die in wars is a myth brought up by people who only pay attention to certain numbers. You definitely are going to see "poorer people" die more often. There is a lot more of them than officers and/or rich kids. I have yet to see a single war where there were no officer casualties. I would say the death ratio of rich family/poor family service member is roughly the same percentage as rich family/poor families living in america.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

How many upper middle class and above kids sign up for voluntary enlisted service?

Raises hand I can count on one hand how many of my guys DON'T have some form of college education and that one guy comes from a very wealthy family. There are more men from middle to upper class families than one would expect in todays Army/Military than at any time in US history. You cannot be a village idiot and make it in todays Military. From a statistical standpoint, I do believe the military still has a broader cross section of all economical/racial classes as any form of employment out there today. The people who are in todays Military regardless of economics and or ethnic background are in the Military or continue to stay in the Military because there is a espirt de corps that can't be found anywhere else. Job satisfaction is what keeps many people in because we all know it's not the wages.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING