Check out the TB2K CHATROOM, open 24/7               Configuring Your Preferences for OPTIMAL Viewing
  To access our Email server, CLICK HERE

  If you are unfamiliar with the Guidelines for Posting on TB2K please read them.      ** LINKS PAGE **



*** Help Support TB2K ***
via mail, at TB2K Fund, P.O. Box 24, Coupland, TX, 78615
or


OP-ED Time - Why Bringing Back the Draft Could Stop America’s Forever Wars
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,546

    3 Time - Why Bringing Back the Draft Could Stop America’s Forever Wars

    Hummm....WTF brought this on?

    For links see article source.....
    Posted for fair use....
    https://time.com/5696950/bring-back-the-draft/

    Why Bringing Back the Draft Could Stop America’s Forever Wars

    By Elliot Ackerman
    October 10, 2019
    IDEAS
    Ackerman is the author of the memoir Places and Names: On War, Revolution, and Returning and three novels, including Waiting for Eden. He served five tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, received the Silver Star, the Bronze Star for Valor, and the Purple Heart.

    Around Memorial Day each year, I take my children to Arlington National Cemetery.

    I’ve got friends buried there, and I think the best way to tend to their memory is to tell my kids stories about them. Who knows, maybe when my kids are grown up, they’ll pass some of those stories down to their own kids. I try not to take them on Memorial Day itself, as it is packed, so usually we wind up there after school the week before. Two years ago on our visit, a detachment from the Old Guard–the ceremonial troops who work at Arlington–was lined up in formation behind a riderless horse and caisson. My kids asked me what was going on, and I explained that the soldiers were preparing for a funeral.

    As I told this to my daughter, I caught myself staring across the Potomac, toward downtown Washington. Observing the indifferent afternoon hustle, a sadness came over me. But I was with my kids, so I shook it off. We visited a few more graves, I told a few more stories. Then we left.

    On the drive home my daughter asked if someday she would have to fight in a war.
    The Brief Newsletter
    Sign up to receive the top stories you need to know right now. View Sample
    Sign Up Now

    “Only if you want to, kiddo,” I answered, but could feel my response stick in my throat.

    I then glanced into the rearview mirror, at that little sliver of her face that was just her eyes, and I watched as she tried to understand the difference.

    2019 marks the first year someone born after 9/11 will be eligible to enlist in the armed forces to potentially serve in Afghanistan or another theater in the global war on terror. Never before in our history has an American been able to fight in a war that is older than they are. Currently our civil-military divide is arguably as wide as it has ever been. The burden of nearly two decades of war–nearly 7,000 dead and more than 50,000 wounded–has been largely sustained by 1% of our population. From Somalia to Syria, American forces are engaged in combat. With recent military posturing against Iran, against North Korea, it is also easy to imagine our country sleepwalking into another major theater war. To avoid those outcomes–a major theater war, the continuance of our “terror wars,” the attendant loss of life–we must move the issues of war and peace from the periphery of our national discourse to its center. And the only way to do that, I increasingly believe, is to reconsider the draft.

    Congress has also taken a renewed interest in the draft, having created in 2016 a bipartisan National Commission on Military, National and Public Service charged with two missions. The first is to determine “whether the Selective Service registration requirement should be extended to include women”–this in light of the 2015 reforms that allow women unrestricted military service. The second is to “explor[e] whether the government should require all Americans to serve in some capacity as part of their civic duty and the duration of that service.” The commission is slated to submit these recommendations to Congress and the President in March 2020. This past January, while it continues to hold hearings in communities across the country, it released its first interim report.

    The report found that Selective Service is “a mystery to most Americans,” who were not aware that all men ages 18 to 25 have a legal obligation to register in case of a draft. Although the draft was abolished in 1973, the Selective Service registration requirement was resumed in 1980, when after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, a capability to conscript was again deemed critical to the national defense. The system for registering for Selective Service is passive: it occurs when you apply for your driver’s license or federal student aid. Most American males aren’t even aware that they’re registered for the draft. Furthermore, the commission’s interim report deals explicitly with the numbers we’d be talking about if a draft ever again occurred. Under the military’s current standards, 71% of Americans ages 17 to 24 do not meet the physical or mental qualifications for military service. People often assume the draft was compulsory for an entire generation, but this was never the case. Of those killed in Vietnam, the war most inextricably linked to the draft, 69.3% were volunteers.



    To wage war, America has always had to create a social construct to sustain it, from the colonial militias and French aid in the Revolution, to the introduction of the draft and the first-ever income tax to fund the Civil War, to the war bonds and industrial mobilization of World War II. In the past, a blend of taxation and conscription meant it was difficult for us to sustain a war beyond several years. Neither citizens nor citizen soldiers had much patience for commanders, or Commanders in Chief, who muddled along. Take, for example, Washington reading Thomas Paine’s The American Crisis as a plea to his disbanding army before it famously crossed the Delaware (“These are the times that try men’s souls …”) or Lincoln, whose perceived mismanagement of the Civil War made his defeat in the 1864 presidential election a foregone conclusion (until Atlanta fell to the Union two months before the vote). The history of American warfare–even the “good” wars–is a history of our leaders desperately trying to preserve the requisite national will because Americans would not abide a costly, protracted war. This is no longer true.

    Today the way we wage war is ahistorical–and seemingly without end. Never before has America engaged in a protracted conflict with an all-volunteer military that was funded primarily through deficit spending. Of our current $22 trillion national debt, approximately $6 trillion is a bill for the post-9/11 wars. These have become America’s longest, surpassing Vietnam by 12 years. And it’s been by design. In the aftermath of 9/11, there was virtually no serious public debate about a war tax or a draft. Our leaders responded to those attacks by mobilizing our government and military, but when it came to citizens, President George W. Bush said, “I have urged our fellow Americans to go about their lives.” And so, the war effort moved to the shopping mall.

    In fairness to Bush, when read as a response to a terrorist attack designed to disrupt American life, his remarks are understandable. However, when read in the context of what would become a two-decade military quagmire, those same remarks seem negligent, even calculated. This is particularly true for a generation of leaders (both Republican and Democrat) who came of age in Vietnam, when indignation at the draft mobilized the boomer generation to end the war, one that otherwise might have festered on like the wars today.

    If after 9/11 we had implemented a draft and a war tax, it seems doubtful that the millennial generation would’ve abided 18 successive years of their draft numbers being called, or that their boomer parents would’ve abided a higher tax rate to, say, ensure that the Afghan National Army could rely on U.S. troops for one last fighting season in the Hindu Kush. Instead, deficit spending along with an all-volunteer military has given three successive administrations a blank check with which to wage war.



    And wage war they have. Without congressional approval. Without updating the current Authorization for Use of Military Force, which was passed by Congress one week after 9/11. Currently we live in a highly militarized society but one which most of us largely perceive to be “at peace.” This is one of the great counterintuitive realities of the draft. A draft doesn’t increase our militarization. It decreases it.

    A draft places militarism on a leash.

    In the run-up to the 2018 midterm elections, 42% of Americans didn’t know whether we were still at war in Afghanistan. There are few debates in public life that should merit greater attention from its citizens than whether or not to commit their sons and daughters to fight and possibly to die. Imagine the debate surrounding troop levels in Afghanistan, or Iraq, or Syria, if some of those troops were draftees, or if your own child were eligible for the draft. Imagine if we lived in a society where the commitment of 18- and 19-year-olds to a combat zone generated the same breathless attention as a college-admissions scandal. Imagine Twitter with a draft going on; snowplow parents along with millennial cancel culture could save us by canceling the next unnecessary war.

    By the end of Vietnam, after President Nixon eliminated the draft, the U.S. military was in shambles. It had morale problems. Drug problems. Racial problems. It had lost America’s first war, and with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and our failed bid to rescue our hostages from Tehran on the horizon, it seemed poised to lose the next one. From the detritus of the post-Vietnam military, a generation of officers–Colin Powell, Norman Schwarzkopf, Anthony Zinni, to name a few–began the decades-long work of thoroughly rebuilding and professionalizing its ranks. The most visible result of their toil played out in 1991, with scenes of ultra-sleek U.S. battle tanks trouncing the Iraqi military (the world’s fifth largest at the time) in a whopping hundred-hour-long ground war. More recently, we’ve seen the high-tech efficiency and lethality of our military in its rapid ouster of the Taliban from Afghanistan and in the rush to Baghdad in 2003.

    Today, among many officers, particularly those senior officers who shepherded in that change, the idea of returning draftees to the military seems entirely regressive. Why would you degrade the finest fighting machine the world has ever known? It’s not a logic without merit, but professionalization has had its own drawbacks, ones that are perhaps more insidious to the fabric of a democracy than a draft would be.

    Not long ago, I was speaking on a panel about the integration of women into frontline combat units. The Department of Defense had recently approved its new policy, and I argued that it was the military’s job–particularly that of my own service branch, the Marine Corps, which began implementation at a stubborn pace–to execute and support that policy, regardless of reservations. A retired Marine colonel in the audience became incensed. He stood, prodding: on average, women weren’t as strong as men. Could I deny this? No. Men and women were often sexually attracted to one another. Could I deny this? Also no. Then how could I argue for integration when it would so clearly degrade our ability to fight and win wars?

    I replied that our military didn’t exist solely to fight and win our wars. Our military was also a representation of us.

    The colonel then turned to the crowd and, as if to prove his point, announced that if we took all the women in the room and pitted them against all the men in a “fight to the death,” everyone knew who would win.

    The idea that the military exists solely to fight and win our nation’s wars is as juvenile as the colonel challenging the audience to throw down. Might makes right is not the policy of the U.S. government, or at least shouldn’t be. If our military doesn’t represent our values, it can threaten to undermine them. The Founding Fathers understood this. Their revolution relied on citizen soldiers, and they were suspicious of standing armies. It’s a suspicion we’ve since shrugged off.



    The concern about degrading our military’s capabilities through a draft is legitimate. Conscription has only ever been used in this country to augment a core force of volunteers, and often to great effect. Our World War II military was 61.2% conscripted. In Vietnam, it was 25%. The question then becomes: Could you introduce a certain number of conscripts into the all-volunteer military at a lower rate without a meaningful degradation in its capability? And what would that rate be? Ten percent (130,000 people), 5% (65,000 people), 1% (13,000 people)–and would those numbers be meaningful?

    What would be most meaningful might not actually be the number of individuals drafted, but the specter of the draft itself. The idea that citizenship has a cost, that you owe something to society. Which leads to the question of who owes what?

    One of the central criticisms of the Vietnam-era draft was that it drew disproportionately from those of low socioeconomic backgrounds, while the children of the wealthy and influential were able to finagle exceptions. Under rules promoted by Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, draft boards across the country were required to call up men with IQ scores below the military’s minimum standards to offset the recruitment deficit caused by college student deferments. Take for instance Harvard College, in which 19 alumni were killed in Vietnam, compared with Thomas Alva Edison High School, in lower-income northern Philadelphia. Despite being approximately one-quarter the size of Harvard, Edison high school suffered 64 alumni killed in action. Of the Harvard alumni killed, only one was a draftee.

    Who gets drafted has always been just as important as whether or not there is a draft. In conflicts like Vietnam and the Civil War, the draft exacerbated social inequalities by providing exemptions for the wealthy and influential. A certain type of draft could, however, become a tool to promote greater equality. It could create greater social cohesion. And, lastly, it could create greater accountability between our policies and our population. In the era of the 1%, of hyperpartisanship, of identity politics and divisiveness, a reverse-engineered draft could prove a powerful tool to counteract these corrosive forces.



    Here’s what a reverse-engineered draft could look like:

    The Department of Defense would annually set a certain number of draftees for induction into the armed forces for two-year enlistments, which is half the typical enlistment of a volunteer. This number would be kept small as a percentage of the overall active-duty force, let’s say 5%, or 65,000 people, which is roughly the size of the Coast Guard. By keeping the number small, we would retain the culture of professionalism born after the troubles of the post-Vietnam military. Upon induction, new service members are typically assigned military occupational specialties, like medic, truck driver or radio operator. However, in the past, another way people gamed the draft was to gain cushy assignments through influence within the military. In a reverse-engineered draft, inductees would only be eligible for military occupational specialties within the combat arms–infantry, tanks, artillery and the like. And with the recent integration of women, the gender divide would no longer be an issue as women would also be eligible not only for the draft but also for frontline service.

    And no one could skip this draft, unlike previous drafts, where through the practice of hiring substitutes during the Civil War, or the hiring of certain podiatrists during the Vietnam War, the well-off adeptly avoided conscription. This placed the burden of national defense on those with the least resources. And when those wars turned to quagmires, elites in this country–whose children did not often fill the ranks–were less invested in the outcome.

    Which comes to a final, essential aspect of the reverse-engineered draft: those whose families fall into the top income tax bracket would be the only ones eligible. These are the children of the most influential in our country, those whose financial success in business, or tech, or entertainment have placed them in a position to bundle political contributions among their friends, or have a call returned by a Senator or member of the House. If the college-admissions scandal surrounding William Singer’s company the Key is any indication, it shows that this is a demographic that does not sit idly by with regard to their children’s well-being.

    The military does–as the agitated colonel pointed out–exist to fight and win our nation’s wars. But it is also one of our great engines of societal mobility. Those who enlist are taught a trade, and if they earn an honorable discharge they’re granted tuition for college under the GI Bill. From the greatest generation to my own millennial generation, the social result has been transformative. And the military will continue to attract the professionals who wish to serve out a 40-year career, as well as the ambitious citizens who wish to pull themselves up by their bootstraps with a four-year enlistment and the GI Bill. Our military continues to be an engine of societal mobility, but it also needs to return to being what it once was, a societal leveler, in which men and women of diverse backgrounds, at an impressionable age, were forced together in the pursuit of a mission larger than themselves.

    Why send our sons and daughters to fight and die in the name of unity? Couldn’t they sign up for Habitat for Humanity? Yes, they could, and opportunities to serve outside the military would still be important. However, an argument for mandatory national public service that excludes military service forgets perhaps the most important consequence of a draft, which is that with a draft the barrier to entering new wars would be significantly higher.

    We were more than 10 years into the wars before I ever heard anyone talk about the draft. It was the summer of 2012, a weekday afternoon in August, and I was in a motorcade escorting the body of Gunnery Sergeant Jonathan W. Gifford, who had been killed in Afghanistan a couple of weeks before, to Arlington National Cemetery. His coffin was loaded on a caisson, a riderless horse trailing behind, just like that day with my daughter. I was sitting shotgun while my friend T– drove. I’d known Gifford awhile, the two of us having served in the same special-operations unit, but Gifford and T– had been closer friends. As T– stared across the Potomac, to the lunchtime hustle of downtown Washington, he was angry, “Not a single person out there cares that Giff’s dead. They don’t even know.”

    “Is what it is,” I said, affecting the doomy pragmatism fashionable among professional soldiers of that time.

    T–, however, was less sanguine. “F-ck it, man. I’m for a draft,” he said while gazing past the river, as if with those words alone he might condemn all those oblivious civilians to a yearlong tour in Helmand province.

    T– was the consummate professional. He’d deployed as a special operator in Afghanistan, Iraq and several other war zones. If anyone believed in the sanctity of the all-volunteer military, it should have been him. So he couldn’t be serious. Could he imagine how we’d perform with our ranks filled with draftees. “We’d suck at fighting,” I said.

    And he answered, “I’m not sure we need to be as good at this as we are.”

    At the time it surprised me to hear the most seasoned military professional I knew call for a draft. But it shouldn’t have. That day we’d been fighting for more than a decade and were poised to fight on for at least another. The professionals across the river rushing to lunches while we buried Giff infuriated T–. Their indifference fueled these wars. As a soldier with three kids, too close to retirement to start a new career, he could say their indifference was, literally, killing his friends. And, with each successive deployment, also threatening to kill him. But could we blame civilians for their apathy? No one asked them to care about the wars. How to make them care? His answer was the draft. It’s become mine too.

    Ackerman is the author of three novels and the memoir Places and Names: On War, Revolution, and Returning. He fought in Iraq and Afghanistan as a Marine

    Contact us at editors@time.com.

    This appears in the October 21, 2019 issue of TIME.

  2. I agree.
    When people are seeing their own sons going to get killed they will question this.
    And when young people are being forced to fight unjust wars and kill indigenous peoples that did nothing to them, it will start to create resistance.

    Worked for Viet Nam.

    The voluntary army has allowed us to reek havoc across the world for globalist wars for profit

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Border Collie Dad View Post
    I agree.
    When people are seeing their own sons going to get killed they will question this.
    And when young people are being forced to fight unjust wars and kill indigenous peoples that did nothing to them, it will start to create resistance.

    Worked for Viet Nam.

    The voluntary army has allowed us to reek havoc across the world for globalist wars for profit
    And done so in a haphazardly and incompetent manner at that if you really look at it....

  4. #4
    Not bad until he got to this point.

    "Which comes to a final, essential aspect of the reverse-engineered draft: those whose families fall into the top income tax bracket would be the only ones eligible. These are the children of the most influential in our country, those whose financial success in business, or tech, or entertainment have placed them in a position to bundle political contributions among their friends, or have a call returned by a Senator or member of the House. If the college-admissions scandal surrounding William Singer’s company the Key is any indication, it shows that this is a demographic that does not sit idly by with regard to their children’s well-being."



    Never happen. And if it did, money laundering and off-shore accounts would go through the roof.


    His points are valid in every other way but that one paragraph needs some rethinking.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Sand Mountain Alabama
    Posts
    1,009
    You institute a draft and you're gonna find yourself in a war on the home front like we've never seen.
    Hwæt! Wé Gárdena in géardagum þéodcyninga þrym gefrúnon· hú ðá æþelingas ellen fremedon. - Listen! We of the Spear-Danes in the days of yore, of those clan-kings heard of their glory. How the worthy princes performed courageous deeds!

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Plain Jane View Post
    Not bad until he got to this point.

    "Which comes to a final, essential aspect of the reverse-engineered draft: those whose families fall into the top income tax bracket would be the only ones eligible. These are the children of the most influential in our country, those whose financial success in business, or tech, or entertainment have placed them in a position to bundle political contributions among their friends, or have a call returned by a Senator or member of the House. If the college-admissions scandal surrounding William Singer’s company the Key is any indication, it shows that this is a demographic that does not sit idly by with regard to their children’s well-being."



    Never happen. And if it did, money laundering and off-shore accounts would go through the roof.


    His points are valid in every other way but that one paragraph needs some rethinking.
    Somebody worked out the #'s and I am guessing. Princeton, MIT and Harvard graduated about 27000 men during 1962-72. Twenty were killed in VN. Grab a county in Appalchia given the same #'s of the correct age group and the number killed runs over 150.

    It was a Joe Sixpack war and after tremendous sacrifice deliberately lost by the Demo Congress in 1975.
    "The misfortune of many is the consolation of fools" Ancient proverb

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Troke View Post
    Somebody worked out the #'s and I am guessing. Princeton, MIT and Harvard graduated about 27000 men during 1962-72. Twenty were killed in VN. Grab a county in Appalchia given the same #'s of the correct age group and the number killed runs over 150.

    It was a Joe Sixpack war and after tremendous sacrifice deliberately lost by the Demo Congress in 1975.
    I wasn't very clear. I understand full well that the wealthy routinely find ways out of serving. What I meant was that a draft limited t.o a certain wealth category would never happen.

    This has got me thinking. Take the situation in Syria right now. Suppose President Trump were to look at those who are critical of his pulling our troops out of Turkey's way and say, " If you want to support the Kurds, take vote on it, like it says to in the Constitution. " There are certainly fewer dubious grounds to go in than into Iraq in the first place.

    That would require as much moral courage as reinstating the draft.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    South of Valhalla
    Posts
    24,631
    Quote Originally Posted by Border Collie Dad View Post
    When people are seeing their own sons going to get killed they will question this.
    Unless, you are rich enough or have the connections to dodge the draft.

    Quote Originally Posted by Border Collie Dad View Post
    Worked for Viet Nam.
    Did it?

    I don't know... I'm mixed on the draft.

    Yes, if you have a stake in the survival of your country, your country tends to mean more to you ( see Israel ). And, serving in the military MIGHT cut down on the snowflake attitudes. Unless, you target snowflakes to join your military like the U.K. does ( Yes, those recruiting posters are real ):



    On the other hand, there is that whole "indentured servitude" thing and I am not sure that drafted soldiers will be as combat effective and discipline may suffer...

    6 of one...

    Half a dozen of the other.
    Deo adjuvante non timendum - With God Helping, Nothing is to be Feared
    "You are like a pit-bull..." - Dennis Olson
    "No man knows but that the last backward glance over his shoulder may be his last look, forever." - Ernie Pyle Born: 1900 KIA: 1945 Shima, Okinawa

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    just over the next hill
    Posts
    12,570
    NO DRAFT.
    The poor and working class go off to die for the perfumed princes of the ruling class to party and laugh and prepare to run the world.
    NO THANK YOU.
    "You're not living in the story the world tells you you're living in. The story is not about the Clash of Civilizations, the March of Progress, the American Dream, the Rise of Civilization or the Struggle of Race, Class, and Gender. It's about the triumph of Jesus Christ in rescuing us from this passing world and bringing us into eternal ecstasy and perfection."---Mark Shea

  10. #10
    The Vietnam War and its associated draft was more than enough to split and radicalize American youth in the '60s and early '70s. I suspect that our current youth would be even less inclined to serve. It brings to mind the old quote, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?" Professional, volunteer soldiers these days can actually make a pretty darned good living with excellent bennies. The vast majority of them want to be doing what they're doing. This would not be the case with hundreds of thousands of conscripts.

    Best regards
    Doc

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Texas & Florida
    Posts
    12,998

    Related, previously posted...

    On a thread where some third-tier politician once again hauls out the idea of universal national service:

    Let everyone who favors (say) two years of mandatory national service go spend THEIR two years doing it, starting on the first day such a law is to go into effect. I don't care if you're 40 or 50 years old, have kids in your house, have health issues (obesity and reduced aerobic capacity from smoking, like laziness, are choices), or just feel you're too "special". Go spend two years living in accommodations like the Peace Corps gets or the WWII Japanese internees had, for half minimum wage, doing menial labor, and with no access to sex, alcohol, cable TV, air conditioning, heat above 45 F. in winter, cellphones, social media, expensive/restaurant food, or tobacco. Then, you can talk about possibly requiring me, or my children, to go spend two years in a place we don't want to be, doing something we don't wish to do, for wages we don't consider acceptable.
    Proud member Alt-Right group "Scientists For Trump". (Smart Americans know he's right.)
    A man should only take a wife whose Bible includes Genesis, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Colossians, Malachi, Isaiah, Ephesians, Corinthians, Hebrews, Timothy, Titus, Proverbs, Mark, Peter & Revelation. Ecclesiastes 7:28 (NIV) tells him the odds.

  12. #12
    I wouldn't mind a domestic peace corp or national service option opportunity, particularly if it were tied into paying off college educations, and used to provide services and oversight to homeless zoo encampments that thus far only exist in my imagination.

    Might get some real world experiences, and skills, into the kids before they made too many mistakes at the ballot box, based on their expensive, and worthless, educations.

    Bring back the draft? We'll be more automated than ever soon. I bet the automation, drones and whatever other sci fi crap they're poised to introduce will have to take up the slack of warm cannon fodder. Way i understood it, you'll not be wringing many more servicable bodies out of this country with or without one.
    Thoughts are things. Thus I'm careful of the thoughts I think, & the company I keep.
    She couldn't keep her colors inside the lines, so she drew new lines.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    In CLE again
    Posts
    57,023
    Before one initiates a National Service, they need to read Heinlein's Starship Troopers. Probably 3 or 4 times to get past the story-telling to the underpinnings of his structure. Yes it would help this exercise to have his outline but we won't have it, mores the pity.

    Look at his structure for National Service and how one EARNS the Franchise. (for the Common Core among us, that means the Right to Vote) WHAT!!! EARN the RIGHT to VOTE!!??!!?? Why, that's UNAMERICAN!!! YOU need to go back and learn some actual honest, brutally accurate HISTORY of your Country.

    RAH's suggestion that National Service was NEEDED and should be REQUIRED before having a part of the decisions of State fell on deaf ears when he wrote them. Perhaps another generation will understand more appropriately.
    RULE 1:
    THEY want you DEAD.

    PERSEC OPSEC COMMSEC Live or Die by your Tradecraft.


    Should I vanish, only one person here will know.

    The BEST in Life:
    To CRUSH your enemies.
    To see them driven before you
    To listen to the lamentations of their women

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Anna, Texas
    Posts
    3,447
    That is my line in the sand. No draft,No draft,No draft. You can put all the makeup on a pig you want but it is still a pig.
    "When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law." ~ Frederic Bastiilt

    "Duty is ours; results are God's."

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    1 tank of fuel from potential chaos
    Posts
    3,876
    I would stomach the discussion IF the sausage making was known by everyone upfront. My humble suggestions fully disclosing I'm in the lower economic stratus, have close family thriving due to the all volunteer service, and loved ones that would immediately be affected.

    Two years
    No exemptions. NONE. If your 18 y/o child is mildly functional, other 18 y/o s will provide care.
    Rich kids serve exactly how and where the poor kids do.
    If you test positive for drugs on entry, you spend 10 years in prison, no appeal, no discussion.
    If you get preggers you pull double time for any time you miss.
    If you leave the country to avoid service, you're never allowed back. (New shoot on sight rules) Any family contacts give them the same rules.


    I know this would never materialize.

    Best way I see to fight forever wars, Any diverted or untraceable government money goes back to the military member that reports it. A reverse seizure if you will...
    "You are allowed to be disappointed but not surprised"

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    N. Minnesota
    Posts
    13,991
    Universal service, male and female, would be a good thing. Traditional military service, a CC camp-type program (public works), service positions (teachers/tutors/health care aides/community outreach. Plenty of work to do. Everybody goes through boot camp. Everybody gets a crash course in history, economics, and civics. Give up two years after high school and grow up.

    Luddite's rules above are a darned good start.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    313
    This thread gave me a 'look back' moment. Full disclosure.....I am a draftee. Drafted during the high draft months of early '68. I am the third generation in my Father's lineage to fight in one of this nations wars. My DF was a totally disabled combat veteran of the South Pacific. My Stepfather lost his brother in the Korean War, so when my friends and neighbors selected me for participation I did not burn my draft card, I did not run off to Canada, but saddled up and went. I lived every day with the ramifications of war growing up so I took my training very seriously and when I deployed to RVN I was as prepared as I could be. What I discovered was an Army that many of the middle management officers were incompetent, the division I was assigned to was rife with racism. Black power was the elephant in the room that no white officer would touch. I learned what drugs were for the first time....and on and on.

    I escaped the insanity of the line company I was assigned to by volunteering for and being accepted into the LRRP unit assigned to our division. That experience changed my life, but what it did not do for me was to prepare me for what awaited me when I came home. The pariah that many of us had become through guilt association was extremely difficult to deal with. Why have I mentioned the preceding info? Glad you asked.

    I have now been a part of post VN society for almost 50 years and have filtered much of what I see in today's culture that has changed since coming home. Much I will agree is anecdotal, but as many here refer to life in the FUSA, much learned through life. The rich/semi-connected will ALWAYS find a way to skate. I have known of several who milked education to avoid the draft, and as they matriculated through to their PHDs long enough to ensure not having to serve, then came to the realization they had to earn a living. Some chose to teach, having been long ago indoctrinated into marxist philosophy salving their seared conscience's went on to train others in the same bents. Our school systems have become cesspools because of this, our pulpits have become rife with this ideology, our local, state, and federal governments reflect this as well.

    Well, I will turn my rant off now, but will state in closing, one of the down sides of not having the draft is that many have lost the opportunity to see how good we actually have it here. With all of the things that plague this nation, it is still the greatest nation ever devised by men who were empowered by almighty God. Thanks for listing. RLTW

    11

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,546
    The elephant standing in the middle of this op-ed and barely acknowledged is that, as the author describes it, the "forever war" is what it is due to the powers that be deciding to "manage the threat" instead of deliberately eliminating it, which of course allows for a lot of ineffectual pork barreling which his proposal wouldn't end either.

    No one wants to open that box and discuss this in the public square the way it needs to be. Bringing up "the Draft" in isolation to the full package of issues involving national security, foreign policy and domestic politics is a cheap distraction....

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    37,778
    Back in the 1970s they stopped the Vietnam war and ended the draft and the mandatory signing up at age 18 for the selective service along with it and that was was reinstated many years later and anyone one between the time the selective service was stopped and restarted was exempt from it.
    Now when they stopped the Draft they were saying back then it would keep us out of endless wars like we are seeing now.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Publius View Post
    Back in the 1970s they stopped the Vietnam war and ended the draft and the mandatory signing up at age 18 for the selective service along with it and that was was reinstated many years later and anyone one between the time the selective service was stopped and restarted was exempt from it.
    Now when they stopped the Draft they were saying back then it would keep us out of endless wars like we are seeing now.
    Yup.

  21. #21
    Was Vietnam an actual "declared war"? It was always referred to as a "police action". Put Congress's vote on the record. We have these "authorizations " that allows the wars to morph, migrate, turn into what ever a politically connected vendor wants.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Plain Jane View Post
    Was Vietnam an actual "declared war"? It was always referred to as a "police action". Put Congress's vote on the record. We have these "authorizations " that allows the wars to morph, migrate, turn into what ever a politically connected vendor wants.
    Congress hasn't had that kind of "moral clarity" for decades....

  23. #23
    I don't think that any two sided debate is going to reach any real solution, there must be a third option.

    Any draft is going to lead to another Normandy where men were forced to their death by the few who prosper from war.

    A volunteer army goes down the same road but with less push back from the populace.

    Everyone to do some time would be a first step to total socialism.

    We have a system that is intended to separate statute laws from Social problems, and requires an array of stop gaps to end foolish wars if people would do there jobs.

    Wasn't there a day when problems were salved by Judges and not Kings?

  24. #24
    needs to flip the calendar and realize it isn't 1966 and the days of Vietnam are long gone >>> the US military doesn't need a bunch of drafted Gomer numbnutz - needs capable of learning entry level people that can be trained ...

    technology has eliminated the need for a wing of bombers dropping 1,000s of dumb bombs - couple of guys to prep the missile and one guy to push the button
    Illini Warrior

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Texas & Florida
    Posts
    12,998
    Quote Originally Posted by Publius View Post
    Back in the 1970s they stopped the Vietnam war and ended the draft and the mandatory signing up at age 18 for the selective service along with it and that was was reinstated many years later and anyone one between the time the selective service was stopped and restarted was exempt from it.
    Now when they stopped the Draft they were saying back then it would keep us out of endless wars like we are seeing now.
    Actually, there was only about an 8-year gap. Nixon ended the draft about 1972, and registration for it again was mandatory as of about 1980.
    Proud member Alt-Right group "Scientists For Trump". (Smart Americans know he's right.)
    A man should only take a wife whose Bible includes Genesis, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Colossians, Malachi, Isaiah, Ephesians, Corinthians, Hebrews, Timothy, Titus, Proverbs, Mark, Peter & Revelation. Ecclesiastes 7:28 (NIV) tells him the odds.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


NOTICE: Timebomb2000 is an Internet forum for discussion of world events and personal disaster preparation. Membership is by request only. The opinions posted do not necessarily represent those of TB2K Incorporated (the owner of this website), the staff or site host. Responsibility for the content of all posts rests solely with the Member making them. Neither TB2K Inc, the Staff nor the site host shall be liable for any content.

All original member content posted on this forum becomes the property of TB2K Inc. for archival and display purposes on the Timebomb2000 website venue. Said content may be removed or edited at staff discretion. The original authors retain all rights to their material outside of the Timebomb2000.com website venue. Publication of any original material from Timebomb2000.com on other websites or venues without permission from TB2K Inc. or the original author is expressly forbidden.



"Timebomb2000", "TB2K" and "Watching the World Tick Away" are Service Mark℠ TB2K, Inc. All Rights Reserved.