Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Oh Baby, It's Drafty Out There

By Frida Berrigan, AlterNet. Posted July 5, 2005.


Some counter-recruitment activists and military observers think a perfect storm of conditions is brewing a return to the draft.
Oh Baby, It's Drafty Out There
Oh Baby, It's Drafty Out There
Advertisement

"Feeling a draft?" asks the Village Voice.

"Talk of a draft is chilling," intones The New York Times.

Even fashion magazines weigh in: "Could Cosmo girl get drafted?"

In city streets, town squares and rural strip malls, military recruiters are beleaguered. The Army is unable to meet recruiting targets even after lowering quotas and standards. At the same time, recruiters are overwhelmed by scandal and scrutiny, and uncomfortable in the face of growing anti-war sentiment.

Though half a world away, the war in Iraq feels close. Mounting U.S. casualties, exhausted soldiers and an intractable civil conflict in which the only thing different factions agree on is that U.S. soldiers are the problem, make military service increasingly unattractive to even the most gung-ho patriot. Meanwhile, Washington is determined to "stay the course" right over the brink.

J.E. McNeil, executive director of the Center on Conscience and War, is preparing for the worst. She sees a "perfect storm" of conditions brewing a return to the draft. So far, more than one million U.S. military personnel have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. An estimated 341,000 soldiers have done double deployments (and many are now entering their third deployment). And they are not just serving, they are dying. More than 1,700 have been killed, and an average of two more soldiers die each day.

Recruiting Nightmares

For more and more young people, joining the military doesn't mean "Be all you can be," it means going to war. And the Army is feeling the chill.

Major General Michael Rochelle, Army Recruiting Commander, worries that the war and other military commitments present the "toughest challenge to the all-volunteer army" since its inception in 1973. Staff Sergeant Spurgeon M. Shelly, a recruiter, complains how tough recruiting is. "I will hear 'No' more times in one day than a child would hear in their entire childhood. If I had hair, I would pull it out."

He signed up four recruits in six months, putting him way below his quota of two recruits per month.

Recruiters are hiding police records, mental illness and physical ailments to make their quotas. An Army investigation into recruitment improprieties found 1,118 incidents involving one in five recruiters. The Army substantiated 320 of these cases in 2004, up from 213 in 2002 and 199 in 1999. Recruiters and some senior army officers admit that for every documented impropriety, there are at least two more that are never discovered. "We have to play fast and loose with the rules just to get by," one recruiter told The New York Times.

Another recruiter laments, "The only people who want to join the Army now have issues; they're troubled, with health, police or drug problems."

After a dismal record of missed quotas each month throughout the spring, the Army stalled on releasing enlistment data for May. Finally in mid-June, the Army reported achieving 75 percent of its monthly recruiting goal of 6,700. But the Army did not attract more recruits; it moved the goal posts, lowering its May target from 8,050 new recruits, asserting it would make up the difference this summer.

Furthest From Our Thoughts?

The Pentagon and the President promise that the draft is a thing of the past. "The D-word is the farthest thing from my thoughts," Francis J. Harvey, Secretary of the Army, told a Washington Post reporter in March, laughing.

The Pentagon's position is that a professional all-volunteer army performs better, has higher morale and is less costly to train. Last October, President Bush was adamant on the question, saying, "I want every American to understand that, as long as I am President, there will be no draft."

The Nixon administration retired the military draft in 1973, but mandatory registration of men at the age of 18 was reinstituted in 1980 under President Carter, and today the Selective Service System has 13.5 million men ages 18-25 registered.

McNeil's perspective that the draft is creeping back is strengthened by recent announcements by Selective Service that it can now register and draft healthcare workers, computer specialists, linguists and other personnel if necessary. In March, the SSS issued a report notifying the President that "it would be ready to implement a draft within 75 days" following Congressional authorization. While spokesman Richard Flahavan says the steps are "strictly in the planning stages," and the report was part of the SSS' annual budget request, these moves agitate fears of a returning draft.

Military expert David Segal believes that a new military conscription policy would galvanize an anti-draft movement that would dwarf that of the 1960s. The expectation that the draft would rouse a complacent populace into a powerful and mainstream anti-war movement fuels the draft-watch fixation of websites like Nodraftnoway.org, Stopthedraft.com and Draftfreedom.org.


Digg!

Frida Berrigan serves on the National Committee of the War Resisters League.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
More aspects
Posted by: dearkitty on Jul 5, 2005 3:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for this interesting article which deals with many aspects in the military recruitment issue.

There are even more: like the specific situations for, eg, African American youth on one hand; children of privileged people on the other hand. See here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Breach of Contract
Posted by: treehuggingliberal on Jul 5, 2005 3:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stop Loss = Back Door Draft. In what other organization can an employee fulfill their obligations under a contract and not be free to move on at the end of the contract? Under a military service contract a service member is under obligation for a total of 8 years (some which may be served under the Ready Reserve). Here are a couple of statements from the “contract”:
“The following statements are not promises or guarantees of any kind…but which Congress can change at any time.”
“In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues until 6 months after the war ends, unless my enlistment is ended sooner by the President of the United States.”
“As a member of the Ready Reserve…In time of national emergency declared by the President of the United States, I may be ordered to active duty…for not more than 24 consecutive months.”
A few points to consider: Are we really at war? Did Congress declare war? Did the President not declare “Mission Accomplished”? There is the “War on Terrorism,” but I believe that is like the “War on Drugs and the War on Crime”; ongoing but never-ending; political rhetoric used during election times. Will any court cases be ruled in favor of the defendants serving involuntarily? I sincerely doubt it, due to the fact that this administration has packed the lower courts with questionable judges.
I had the opportunity to ask D. Rumsfeld when he thought Stop-Loss would end. Of course instead of answering my question, he proceeded to tell me what Stop-Loss was. I know what Stop-Loss is, and I have fulfilled my 8 year contract on active duty and therefore not required to serve in the Ready Reserve. I have effectively been drafted. My deployment/servitude ends in October. Will I be able to take control over my life at that time? Who knows? They keep changing the rules of the game and I have limited alternatives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Breach of Contract Posted by: Longhorn
» RE: Breach of Contract Posted by: treehuggingliberal
It's coming - Get ready
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jul 5, 2005 4:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, let's look at the reality of the situation: Based on past behavior and his history of lying to the American public, when George W. Bush says that as long as he's president, "there will be no draft", you know damn well that there will be one. You could write a book on the lies that have come out of this administration. In fact several good ones have been written (I highly reccommend, The Lies of George W. Bush by David Corn). The draft is on its way. I'll even tell you when it's coming. It'll happen after the next mid term election. Between election day 2006 and New Years Day 2007 they'll make the announcement, you can count on it. Of course they won't call it a draft. The dirty old men who make up the Bush administration have a peculiar fondness for Orwellian Newspeak. They'll probably give it a sweet little name like "Freedom Service" (Remember the "Clear Skies" act?) Prior to his hideous, illegal invasion in 2003, President Bush, in a televised address, said to the youth of Iraq, "Don't give your lives for a dying regime". That's perfect advise to the youth of America. I would add one more: Organize and resist.
Peace!
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Freedom Service Posted by: treehuggingliberal
» RE: Freedom Service Posted by: MausMasher
» RE: It's coming - Get ready Posted by: JLRichardson
» RE: It's coming - Get ready Posted by: Tom Degan
History repeating
Posted by: stevewilkesuk on Jul 5, 2005 5:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We should remember that the Vietnam war was ended partly because the lack of army recruits meant that people in power feared not having enough soldiers to deal with domestic dissent. If recruitment numbers continue to dwindle while the anti-war movement in the States continues to grow, it's only a matter of time before it's all over.

We're not yet at that stage in the UK, but it's been disturbing to see the massive increase in army recuitment TV ads and billboards everywhere over here. We've even had local TV news reports (on the BBC) with reporters abseiling with the Royal Marines - just to show how much fun being the army is. Lucky for us it's not our war so we're not providing enough troops to have to worry about a draft.

These trends also have to be a blow to the Project For a New American Century (ie. the Bush administration)'s plans for "multiple wars fought on multiple fronts" in the future.

The end of these wars is in sight!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: History repeating Posted by: Dutch668
NEXT TIME, ROCK THE VOTE
Posted by: LMNOP on Jul 5, 2005 5:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The Pentagon and the President promise that the draft is a thing of the past....Last October, President Bush was adamant on the question, saying, "I want every American to understand that, as long as I am President, there will be no draft." "

No comment.

Frankly, I thought that the twin issues of an impending draft and a rapidly growing monster of a national debt for posterity to service would galvanize the American youth and lead to a strong outpouring of 18-25 year olds at the ballot boxes. But on Election Day, most of them were nowhere to be found. The numbers for this demographic were particularly appalling. Their votes could have made the difference in what was an extremely close race, but despite the huge stake that they had in its outcome, the young voters were apathetic and complacent. It cost all of us, but it cost them more than most.

Several months ago I posted a similar blurb wherein I concluded that since this group had let others decide their fates for them, they had little ground on which to complain if they didn't like the decisions that were being made on their behalf. Rather than being contrite, young readers were furious with me for not being more supportive and sympathetic. So I will not draw any conclusions here but instead leave the reader to come to his own.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WHY BOTHER? Posted by: susan9390
» I'LL TELL YOU WHY Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: I'LL TELL YOU WHY Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: WHY BOTHER? Posted by: jshubbub
» RE: NEXT TIME, ROCK THE VOTE Posted by: VAGreen
» RE: NEXT TIME, ROCK THE VOTE Posted by: papergirl
» RE: NEXT TIME, ROCK THE VOTE Posted by: Herbert3
Hell, No! We Won't ...
Posted by: Bab5nutz on Jul 5, 2005 6:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Vietnam War was before my time. But, I have read accounts of anti-war protesters marching and shouting "hell, no! We won't go!" [Did they actually say that BTW?]
If the draft is reinstated, I don't know what will happen. But a pretty good guess would be that is that there would be blood in the streets - literally. It could get very nasty, very fast.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, we did say that! Posted by: sausage
» We also said: Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: We also said: Posted by: Halaby
» RE: Hell, No! We Won't ... Posted by: susan9390
» RE: Hell, No! We Won't ... Posted by: kaethy
I'm ALL FOR a Draft...
Posted by: bamage on Jul 5, 2005 6:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's the only way to put the brakes on these chicken-hawk mofos who think wars are just terrific as long as it's somebody ELSE who fights. You can't "Support the Troops/War" unless you're willing to put your own ass (or YOUR child's) on the line. SIGN UP all you Young Republicans, or SHUT UP!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I'm ALL FOR a Draft... Posted by: Longhorn
» RE: I'm ALL FOR a Draft... Posted by: susan9390
» RE: I'm ALL FOR a Draft... Posted by: dandelion
» RE: I'm ALL FOR a Draft... Posted by: sheherezade
» RE: I'm ALL FOR a Draft... Posted by: Kat144
What would these draftees be fighting for???
Posted by: Pepper on Jul 5, 2005 6:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets make a list:

1. Loss of property rights by eminant domain. Their parents homes can now be confiscated.

2. Loss of the Bill of Rights! I could go on adnauseum on this one but you all know which ones have been viciously attacked and rendered moot.

3. Loss of citizenship if your desiignated by the current nazi regime an "enemy combatant". This needs no explanation.

4. The institutionalization of torture in America.

5. Loss of sovereignty as currently passed by the Congress in the CAFTA Bill in which vitamins and minerals will be take away and given to the "baby killing drug companies" THis is a direct assault on Americas right to "Life, liberty and pursuit of Happiness.

6. Total and complete violation of the Posse Comitatus law in which the military now occupies civilian streets as seen during protest demonstations. Gosh, it looked like China, tanks taking on unarmed protestors.

7. National ID card and if you don't carry it, you can be arrested. That is in the new law. Can you believe it? Remember Nazi Germany and the gestapo? "Your papers, please"!

8. Finally, last but not least, the right to work. All high paying jobs have been outsourced to foreign countries, 60% of miliary spending of our tax dollars is contracted out to foreign companies and countries. How did that happen??? OUR TAX DOLLARS USED TO CREATE JOBS FOR SOMEOTHER COUNTRY????

So, that is what we will be asking of our children who will have no jobs to come back to after they are either maimed, wounded or otherwise scared for life. I DON'T THINK SO!

This time, I am telling the kids to resist and go to jail rather than fight this dirty war for oil and military industrial complex profits as we were warned by Gen/Pres Eisenhower in 1961. WE did not listen then, but we are listening now.

NO DRAFT AND NO COOPERATION. PRotect the children and hide them, send them overseas, do not send them to Canada. They are going through the same thing we are and a treaty is now in place to return those who run. SEnd the to Venezuela. LOL They hate the US Gov almost as much as we do right now. hahahahaha Now there is a place we could fight for our freedoms by helping them. P

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Draft resistors bear some responsibility for our current situation
Posted by: sausage on Jul 5, 2005 7:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The current All Volunteer Force, the creation of conservative economist Milton Friedman, is unAmerican and anti-draft organizations bear some of the reponsibility for the now rampant militarism in this country.

Thanks in part to the "let those who want to be there (i.e. the military), be there" position of Vietnam era draft resistance organizations, the United States military is no longer made up of short-term citizen soldiers but a large standing professional army. The lessons of history are clear: large standing professional armies lead to military dictatorships. Moreover, professional militaries tend to foster a sense of separateness and moral superiority toward the majority of the civilian population. The United States Marine Corps is an extreme example of this attitude found among many front-line combat troops. It is also seeping out into the civilian world as returning veterans take positions in law enforcement agencies.

The Reagan administration made it easy for Americans to "support the troops" with little sacrifice. A yard sign now suffices for many.

It is time to return to the concept of "the citizen soldier." Progressives should either support a national service draft, such as the now moribund Hollings-Rangel Bill, or the recommendations of Andrew J. Bacevich.

Perhaps had our military not been full of men and women who are there because they want to be there Bush may have thought twice about committing them to a disastrous foreign misadventure. Perhaps, had there been draftees in the American military on March 20, 2003. soldiers might have taken Prof. Lawrence Mosqueda's advice and refused to obey a mad president's unlawful order.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» MORE SPIN! Posted by: susan9390
Troodos12
Posted by: troodos on Jul 5, 2005 8:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The 18-25 year old young supposed adults of this country are so lazy and so dumb you make my head hurt. You sit at your computers writing cute responses to this article and to other responses but you are too lazy to write to your senators and representatives and TELL THEM how you feel. But I forget that most of you have no idea who your representatives and senators are let alone how to contact them so I'll make it real easy for you.

Go to www.congress.org and if you know what your zip code is, put it in the convenient space provided for it and press "go" and the program will find your senators and represenatives for you. Then you can complain to your hearts content. I know its not as snappy as writing your idiot comments on this blog but it sure will have an effect.

Since you people were too lazy or couldn't take time out from bending your elbow at the bar to vote against the idiot who now resides in the White House thanks to your non-voting propensities, perhaps you can write to your senators and representatives and keep your a-- out of uniform and support the troops by bringing them home.

If you do nothing again, then you deserve what you get AGAIN!!!!

Get smart, get writing where it will do some good.

Remember the sign on the refrigerator door:

" A small town in Texas is missing its idiot."

Perhaps you can do everybody a favor and send the idiot back to Crawford.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» GET REAL... Posted by: susan9390
» RE: GET REAL... Posted by: dandelion
» your comments are degrading Posted by: dai766
» RE: Troodos12 Posted by: faye
» RE: Troodos12 Posted by: jakstrate
» Oh, please Posted by: Kat144
GOVT WATCHER
Posted by: BILL D on Jul 5, 2005 8:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For the bush regime to reconstitute the draft regardless
of the all the spin, an incident must happen. Such incident
would have to have the magnitude or worse than the one
that was devised on 9-11 that entailed extenisve planning.
based on what they pulled off on 9-11 is beyond my
imagination, so a new one would really have to jack up
support of all the sheeple that still have thier heads burried
in the muck of lies and deception.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: GOVT WATCHER Posted by: twotroo2bgood
» RE: GOVT WATCHER Posted by: dandelion
» RE: GOVT WATCHER Posted by: treehuggingliberal
» RE: GOVT WATCHER Posted by: Ratmonster Spook
Draft as anti-war dream?
Posted by: jyoung on Jul 5, 2005 9:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if the idea of a draft is actually desired as a kind line in the sand for domestic tolerance of Bush's "War on Terror" - That perhaps one has a notion that if the line is crossed there will FINALLY be some kind of awakening in a larger number of US citizens to be proactive in questioning (if not resisting) what we are doing.

However, after reading about the money being made (essentially a new kind of war profiteering) in articles and programs like this Frontline episode - "Private Warriors" I don't know why the US would want to reinstate the draft. When so many private US and International corporations are seeing money pour in, and therefore shareholder value increasing, by gaining contracts into facets of military action never before yielded to private sources, it would actually seem to be detrimental to these various economies to reinstate the draft.

Why would those who profit economically and politically from the war choose to divert the current flow of money in order to train unwilling, underpaid, draftees who's parents are back home finally asking tough questions and/or protesting? That's a horrible scenario for this administration.

I tend to agree with it being 'the wrong question'. I feel that the military effort will continue to grow using a mixture of underpaid strictly managed enlisted military working along side overpaid unaccountable private military support service agencies. There's something horribly perverse about private companies being paid billions of tax dollars to feed underpaid troops 3 different kinds of ice cream and pizza before sending them off in ill equipped Humvees to be attacked by insurgents that didn't exist until after we entered the country - but this kind of catastrophe is a lot more subtle than a draft. Which is why a draft won't come until things get way more desperate.

So for now I see the concern over the draft as being a dream of the anti-war movement. It represents that desperate hope that a draft would: awaken the sleeping giant of civil dissent; reveal the truth and lies behind this war; prove the draft nay-sayers wrong. But for the Bush administration, there are still other options to be implemented, and there remains a strong self interest in keeping that giant asleep.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Draft as anti-war dream? Posted by: dandelion
Abstinence Pledge
Posted by: sheherezade on Jul 5, 2005 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why not send every kid who takes seriously an abstinence pledge. With all of those raging hormones they'd make great killers for Jesus H. F*****G Christ, er, I mean Bush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Abstinence Pledge Posted by: Kat144
Veteran Myself
Posted by: luckycef on Jul 5, 2005 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find that the military is rather disturbing at this time for people, Not just the WAR which has a lot to do with it. The big thing is that the smirking Chimp and his organ grinder cheney have pummeled the Military family.

When I was in all medical and dental was covered by the US Govt. for the family. Now they make em pay for a big chunk. The servicemembers are in POVERTY PAY and making ends meet is very hard. They just keep taking away and away, this in turns drives away good people

The Military Exchange and Commissary is a big joke, no sales tax but they get away with a surcharge that accounts for the same thing a Tax in disguise.
There are a few things that do have a reduction but the items most service persons buy are higher or the same. Not much of a bargain and sales on the most bought items.
The fuel prices are good but 40 cents higher than the Govt. contract and the base it on what it would cost at civilian gas stations in the US. This price will fluctuate as the prices change even though they have a set price for year that does not change.
In other words the Military is its own worst enemy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't bring back the draft
Posted by: hotlipsin61 on Jul 5, 2005 11:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As we seen from the article, there are many ways the military can find recruits, and it seems the poverty draft is the best course for them to take.
If you can't afford college, then the military is path to take. Why? Because a college education, like a Lamborghini, is out of their price range, lest their parents cough up the money or having to work two jobs to pay for it.
If you pay attention to the Army's catchy commercials like "An Army of One" or this one from yesteryear-"Be All That You Can Be; Find Your Future in the Army" doesn't register a rush to a recruitment office these days.
I think people expect American military campaigns to be painless and with few deaths as possible. They think our fancy weapons and other gadgets is enough, but you still need someone to operate the guns and man the vehicles.
One last thing; It's good to see people stand up to the militarization of our schools by trying to eliminate ROTC programs. My high school had a NJROTC-Naval Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps and I was amazed that some of my friends joined it.
The army of the future is already here. You won't find rich kids enlisting....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iana
Posted by: iana_gheddis420 on Jul 5, 2005 1:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a load of crap. 'Back door draft'?? Seeing the arrested development generation chimping around doing nothing makes me think that a tour in boot camp would be the best thing that ever happened to these people. But I digress. What prompted me to respond is the fact that DEMOCRATS in congress have actually--and very rcently--drafted legislation calling for the draft, while republicans have maintained pride in the all volunteer force. It is a job, period. You can go wash dishes at some rat infested diner while a real man goes and joins the Marines. That's why you hate the military. I subscribe to AlterNet just to read the retarded tripe that marxists write. I wish you people left when Bush was elected, as you said you would. But then again, you say a lot of things...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Iana Posted by: diamondvajra
» RE: Iana Posted by: Somedaysoon
» RE: Iana Posted by: jakstrate
Draft
Posted by: Schmedlap on Jul 5, 2005 1:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a retired officer who served during the draft, I believe that a draft with near zero exemptions would be in the best interest of potential draftees and the nation-- exemptions for conscientious objectors okay but absolutely no Bush/Cheney/Delay draft dodges.

Potential draftees would benefit is at least two ways:

- First, the sons and daughters of the affluent and influential would have no more opportunity to avoid the draft than the son of the sons and daughters of the guileless pauper.

- Second, the draft pool would be very large thereby decreasing substantially the odds of being caught in the sort of draft contrived for Vietnam, where I served.

The nation would be better off because the Armed Forces would have broader cross-section of talent, some of whom may even speak Arabic or Farsi.

I have seen college graduate, two-year draftee Spec-4s work directly with low IQ, but hard working, twenty years of service Spec-4s. These troops develop a mutual respect which is sadly missing in our now class-conscioius nation. When these people end their military status, they have developed an empathy, not otherwise obtainable, for the other fellow resulting in legislation that would not be as skewed toward the wealthy as it is today.

The nation would also benefit because there would be a much greater reluctance on the part of the government to frivolously initiate a war. Lives valuable to civilian pursuits and to essential military endeavors would not be squandered and billions, if not trillions, more dollars would be available for more worthy domestic and foreign uses.

I served in the volunteer Army for years as well, and while the all volunteeer force does have some benefits, I believe that these do not compare to what we have lost in the Army by eliminating the draft. I'd bet that even the GIs with service in Iraq would agree with that (once they got out of the service, of course).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Draft Posted by: Kajamian
» RE: Draft Posted by: Gene
it's a "good" idea
Posted by: diamondvajra on Jul 5, 2005 1:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah, bring back the draft and see how long mr. bush and co. will be able to hold on to power in these here united states. I say it can't happen too soon...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

where are you from?
Posted by: diamondvajra on Jul 5, 2005 1:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
maybe YOU should leave if you don't like it here....girl friend

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: where are you from? Posted by: iana_gheddis420
» RE: where are you from? Posted by: rubymydear
» :-) Posted by: WhatNow?
» RE: where are you from? Posted by: iana_gheddis420
» RE: where are you from? Posted by: Product of Public Schools
» RE: where are you from? Posted by: Schmedlap
» RE: where are you from? Posted by: iana_gheddis420
» RE: where are you from? Posted by: MausMasher
» Grow up lad Posted by: taxidave
this furthers their eliminationist policy
Posted by: diof09 on Jul 5, 2005 2:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think what lurks just below the surface of the bush regime is likely the same thing Hitler was doing with his undesirables. Kill them off. I think people are right on when they say that Cheney, Bush, et. al are fascists. There certainly is plenty of evidence. Their eliminationist policies are all around us. The possible draft, hacking away at the social safety net, pollution controls, livelihoods, as well as genetically-modifying our very foods! If we ever wondered how the German people let the Nazis get away with what they did, we have our own version.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» and even worse Posted by: WhatNow?
The "Voluntary" draft
Posted by: whitis on Jul 5, 2005 4:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A possible alternative to admitting to a draft is to expand the poverty draft not by adding positive incentives (college, bonuses, etc) but by eliminating alternatives. Currently, for example, you can collect unemployment without being required to work a dangerous job (at least compared to your last one). Watch out for potential new "deficit reduction act" legistlation that requires you to apply to the military and be rejected before receiving benefits or at least requires you to apply to coal mines making the military more appealing. Or requires you to apply to private companies that supply contractors to Iraq. Jobs are moving overseas, bancruptcy is harder to file for. Not only might the standards against criminal history be lowered for admission into the military but it might be an alternative to jail time. Tougher penalties for ficticious crimes like drug possession, for example, but "community" (military) service offered by judges as an alternative. Or how about the "we suspect you are a terrorist sympathiser but if you prove your loyalty by enlisting we won't sent you to gitmo" approach? Naturally, if you were a real security risk they wouldn't actually want you in the military.

Draft legislation goes by names like "bancruptcy bill", "CAFTA", "war on drugs", "patriot act", etc.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh really?
Posted by: Halaby on Jul 5, 2005 5:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We maintained the draft following WW II through 1973, and lo and behold, we had a large standing army! An army we counted upon, and still do , officially, to wage a two front war anyplace in the world. Perhaps if the militarists did not get used to such a large pool of potential cannon fodder, the US might have averted its present destructive move toward global hegemony. I have heard my conservative and constitutionalist friends bemoan the "large standing army deplored by our founding fathers" time and again, yet they refuse to forthrightly oppose the US empire which necessitates its attending militarism. Let them really call for dismantling and defunding our bloated standing military, really rely upon the militia for our defense, and only subject the militia to national service when and only when war is declared by Congress, and I will take them seriously as proponents of US constitutionalism. Until then, strength to all who resist US imperialism, and its mailed fist, the armed services.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh really? Posted by: Halaby
» RE: Oh really? Posted by: Halaby
THIS IS BS
Posted by: fat otter on Jul 5, 2005 6:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I moving my 16 year old kid to Canada if this stuff starts up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here's Where Your fight Should be Joined--Government is the Enemy
Posted by: royrogers on Jul 5, 2005 7:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.information clearinghouse.info/article9374.htm

Close the space between information and clearinghouse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Article is really worth the read.
Posted by: royrogers on Jul 5, 2005 8:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.information clearinghouse.info/article9374.htm

Close the space between information and clearinghouse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Improving the Legality/Truth in Recruiting
Posted by: rad on Jul 5, 2005 11:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A couple of thoughts regarding the legal aspects of military enlistment: First make it a law that the the enlistee must read and understand the contract he signs--there should be a third party witness who signs a statement to the effect that he/she things the enlistee is of sound mind and is a willing victim. Second, allow for a period of say one week where an enlistee can change his mind--like buyer's remorse in real estate purchases. Third, make all represntations in writing--if it's not in writing then it didn't happen--which should be stated in the contract; this includes all of the hyperbole that is presented by the recruiter; I suspect there is a lot of winking and nodding that comes to naught.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Go for the Draft
Posted by: sunny308 on Jul 6, 2005 7:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good things about a return to the draft. (1) When you draft a cross section of America you stabilize the military. You dilute the mercenary mindset that grows with a volunteer military. Remember that the founders feared that a tyrant could turn a standing army against the Citizens. A fresh draft crop every year will remember their civilian roots and would not be easily turned on fellow Citizens. The more you draft mama's little boys the less likely a President can send them off to die in illegal wars without paying too great a political price. (2) We would find out if women really are equal when we start drafting daddy's little girls and sending them off to die.

Look at the long term effects of how a draft would force a president to obey the Constitution. We have not been involved in a constitutional war since WWII. Could you picture the Bush twins patrolling the streets of Takrit?


Citizen (Capital C)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Go for the Draft Posted by: goldenbb
» RE: Go for the Draft Posted by: sunny308
» RE: Go for the Draft Posted by: Kat144
12%