2006-08-14 09:51:23 · 15 answers · asked by Quest 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
A war with Iran, Syria, and/or North Korea could prompt the government to reinstate a draft. As one of the previous answers noted; what else would be the purpose of "Selective Service". It's a "Last Resort" but that doesn't make the very idea as far fetched as many would have you believe.
We can't possibly expect our overstretched and exhausted volunteers to have to endure extended tours and additional wars much longer. Talk about rioting. We keep misusing the trust and loyalty of our bravest, and we'll have chaos for sure.
As for "rockandroll's" comment about mandatory service for ALL males. I say "f**k you". That would be an infringement of my First Amendment right to practice my religious beliefs freely. I have a strong belief against killing anyone, period. To force me to serve someone and possibly go to war for that person is unconscionable.
Speaking on behalf of anyone and everyone that has strong beliefs against warfare; I object to that insane proposal. Of course, such a proposal belongs in a Fascist Dictatorship, not a Democracy, where people have INALIENABLE RIGHTS.
2006-08-14 10:18:09 · answer #1 · answered by Daniel C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we get into another major conflict while still in Iraq I can't see any way around reinstating the draft. That's an option the government has kept in its back pocket for 30 years, ever since selective service registration began in the late 70's.
2006-08-14 17:08:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well lets see... They are now allowing 42 year olds to enlist, they are lowering the standards they use when enlisting people,so it kinda looks like the Third Reich at the end of WWII scraping the bottom of the barrel, so once the election is complete and the get the stranglehold on the house that the republicans need and crave, the draft will be considered more than likely.
2006-08-14 16:59:28 · answer #3 · answered by Chuck P 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
A return to the draft is unlikely. 1) The military services prefer an all-volunteer force that doesn't saddle them with conscripts who don't want to be there. 2) The civilian leadership knows that support for the war would nose-dive if there were a draft; note the heavy use of reservists and the extensions of tours of duty. These actions are taken to avoid a draft. Probably for the best; let the flag-waving, Bible-thumping, more-patriotic-than-thou crowd who elected Bush send their sons off to die in his war and leave the rest of us alone.
2006-08-14 17:05:44 · answer #4 · answered by x 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We might not have a choice. If we have a prolonged war without light at the end of the tunnel (or a reasonable chance of winning), we might have to start drafting. The career soldier will go away in favor of the drafted type.
2006-08-14 16:58:46 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. PhD 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
NO!!! We should make it mandatory for all males between the age of 17 to 35 years of age to have the minimum of 6 months to 4 years of compulsory military service in the US Armed Forces or similar service if you are disabled.
2006-08-14 17:13:02 · answer #6 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the army doesn't want people in it who don't want to be there, because they will cause chaos and confusion on the battlefield, and get themselves and others killed.
that doesn't even take into account the anarchy back home from people rioting about the draft.
but its true, our army is too overextended to engage in another war, one that it seems we're getting nearer too.
2006-08-14 17:06:34 · answer #7 · answered by badgerlicious03 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No they dont have too.Plenty of young Patriots are volunteering on their own because the believe in the cause
2006-08-14 16:55:56 · answer #8 · answered by itsallover 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
no the military does not want the draft.
2006-08-14 16:55:36 · answer #9 · answered by mahs89 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I certainly hope not, but creating more war and conflicts does need to stop.
2006-08-14 17:02:55 · answer #10 · answered by Cub6265 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋