Deconstructing my thoughts.
I was reading another blog today that presented arguments for why the military should bring back the draft. As evidence to support the position the blogger cited the military's failure to meet its recruiting objectives. See the post here.
Regardless of the need for troops in peace time or in war time, I agree with the blogger and think there should be a collective responsibility to defend this country. The military should be mostly composed of draftees. Perhaps I don't really understand the practical implications of such a drastic shift. I acknowledge the point that a military probably operates more effectively if the members choose to be there. I'm not old enought to remember any of the problems with a draftee military fighting wars, so my position here does not benefit from that perspective. But to me it is a very compelling argument that the sacrifices should be borne by all segments of society (rich, poor, middle-class, well-connected, "nobodies", famous, everyone). It's also compelling to me the arguments that such a military would help social cohesion, help break down class and race barriers, and inject the leadership of this country with a true sense of the cost and consequences of sending the military to fight wars. If more leaders in congress, the cabinet, the white house, etc... had sons and daughters in the line of fire I can't help but think that their decision making process would be radically altered. Too many segments of American society, including the civilian government leaders, are insulated form the sacrifices and the cost. The war doesn't affect the majority of us all that much. We fund it through our tax dollars, although with such huge deficits we aren't really funding it, it's the kids in diapers and the yet-to-be-born that will pay for it. We see plenty of media coverage on the war. We hear plenty of debate, and we all [should] have an opinion on whether we support or oppose the war. But if random young americans, from all segments of society, were being called on to serve in the military I think we'd all have a real sense that this directly impacts our lives. I think we'd all be strongly for or against certain military actions and it wouldn't be based on partisanship or ideology, it would be based on very real and difficult choices.
Regardless of the need for troops in peace time or in war time, I agree with the blogger and think there should be a collective responsibility to defend this country. The military should be mostly composed of draftees. Perhaps I don't really understand the practical implications of such a drastic shift. I acknowledge the point that a military probably operates more effectively if the members choose to be there. I'm not old enought to remember any of the problems with a draftee military fighting wars, so my position here does not benefit from that perspective. But to me it is a very compelling argument that the sacrifices should be borne by all segments of society (rich, poor, middle-class, well-connected, "nobodies", famous, everyone). It's also compelling to me the arguments that such a military would help social cohesion, help break down class and race barriers, and inject the leadership of this country with a true sense of the cost and consequences of sending the military to fight wars. If more leaders in congress, the cabinet, the white house, etc... had sons and daughters in the line of fire I can't help but think that their decision making process would be radically altered. Too many segments of American society, including the civilian government leaders, are insulated form the sacrifices and the cost. The war doesn't affect the majority of us all that much. We fund it through our tax dollars, although with such huge deficits we aren't really funding it, it's the kids in diapers and the yet-to-be-born that will pay for it. We see plenty of media coverage on the war. We hear plenty of debate, and we all [should] have an opinion on whether we support or oppose the war. But if random young americans, from all segments of society, were being called on to serve in the military I think we'd all have a real sense that this directly impacts our lives. I think we'd all be strongly for or against certain military actions and it wouldn't be based on partisanship or ideology, it would be based on very real and difficult choices.
6 Responses to “The draft”
Leave a Reply
About me
- I'm Gabriel
- From
- My profile
ATOM 0.3
Previous posts
Links
Serious Blogs
Humor Blogs
Useful Blogs
Ahh... you say that having never been in the military, right? Troops who are miserable are bad troops. One cannot do a good job in misery, which is what the military is. I am lucky enough to not have been in any war, which is far worse than the regular misery.
The solution to low recruitment is simple: don't invade other countries. We didn't, no, correction, some people didn't learn from Vietnam, so we find ourselves in the same predicament. When the Army's stated mission is to protect and defend the country, meaning DEFENDING the country, you will get a lot more people to enlist. It's why I enlisted. I thought the purpose of our forces was to protect our country.
We need to close all overseas military bases, too. Why is it that Japan or Germany don't have military bases within US borders? We are the only nation on Earth that has military bases in foreign countries. (Unless the French still have them- I'm not sure about that.) What we need to do is build up diplomatic relationships with countries so that in times of crisis, we would be allowed to use their bases.
A draft would never equalize our society, because even if the Bush twins were drafted, they would never be assigned a job on the front lines. They'd have some cushy little job somewhere CONUS, and the only bullets they'd ever hear would be those on the firing range.
p.s. Love the fact that you'd dedicated a whole blog to taking on Scarborough's outrageous blabbering!
I like your blog! I was in the military, and I agree with your post. I think every American citizen, who is young enough should have to spend a couple of years in the military. Let all of America's citizens bear the burden of this countrys choices and freedom.
The draft is slavery, pure and simple. It's actually even worse since its slaves being used as cannon fodder rather than just cotton pickers.
And the rich are bearing their fair share of the costs of war.
http://tapscottscopydesk.blogspot.com/2005/10/data-shows-military-recruits-highly.html
Very interesting comments. Thank you all. I have a lot to learn about this subject and plan to look further into some of the points made above. I would point out that many other western countries have some type of compulsory service. Of course most of those countries will likely only use their military for "peace keeping" and disaster relief. I have heard of the idea of a "hybrid" military. Perhaps it would be possible to have compulsory service for strictly homeland based operations (i.e., disaster relief, search and rescue, civil unrest, etc...) and a volunteer branch for national security and combat. I'm not sure how feasible that would be, but clearly given the current political climate and public opinion there's no way a draft will happen. As far as public opinion, I find it a bit sad that there isn't more action behind all the patriotic talk in this country. And I'm not by any means saying that enlisting or fighting in Iraq is the ultimate expression of love of country. For some people it is, and I admire that very much. For others, I think there are plenty of other ways to contribute to this country. As another example, I look at the voter turnout numbers and find it depressing that most of the people in this country are so disengaged.
One quick comment--some of the other comments said they didn't agree with the idea of a draft, because "trrops who are miserable are bad troops". I agree to a certain extent, but I would like to point out that we played a large hand in winning two world wars with a draftee military.