I always thought that drafting soldiers was a monstrous idea! I understand, and even approve of, countries like Sweden requiring a tour of military service from every able male, but forcing people to go to war is an outrage! I think that if a nation has run out of volunteers to fight a war, they should LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE and call it lost. People will always fight for a cause they believe in. In World War II, there was no shortage of volunteers. In fact, they had to assign peripheral jobs to many of them because there wasn't enough room on the battlefields for everyone who wanted to kick Hitler's butt. In Vietnam, public opionion was that we shouldn't be over there, so our army was thinned pretty fast. Instead of walking away from the conflict, arrogant leaders threatened prison to men who didn't want to fight when they were told to. I would really like to hear from someone who can give me an example of how the draft could benefit society.
2007-01-30
12:30:04
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Scheming Angel
3
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
I also think that the exemption for college students is a blatant favoritism of the wealthy. I can't help but think that if the draft were reinstated today, tuition prices would skyrocket tomorrow. Basically, the government has found a way to force the poor to be pawns for the games of rich old men.
2007-01-30
12:32:06 ·
update #1
We don't want a draft. The quality of soldiers will decrease dramatically. Why should someone work at a job if they don't want to do it. I have served 20 years in the Army and everyone I worked with volunteered. They weren't forced into it.
Plus, combat is a different story. How is someone going to act if they really don't want to be in the Army in the first place?
Screw the draft!
2007-01-30 12:37:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by mnid007 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
You're just dead wrong about WW II. There were a lot of volunteers, but it was basically a conscript army. Of note is that as many as a third of those drafted were subsequently rejected as unfit for duty. And the "peripheral jobs" you mention are the huge logistic tail that still makes our armed forces different from many. We use technology instead of manpower whenever we have a chance, be it 1943 or 2007. In contrast, a surprising number of those who served in Vietnam were volunteers, and many of those who had served their tour volunteered for another. And by the third year of WW II many in the US were war-weary, and after 3 years in Vietnam many still supported the war. That just seems to be at the edge of the American attention span.
I personally think a draft would eventually be a good idea. In WW II we had a Department of War and a Department of the Navy. I think we could bring them back, but not as a devolution of the DOD. We need a small professional service as we have now for the small, long, dirty wars that are how all our wars will be for the forseeable future, though it needs to be larger than now. But that still leaves us thin considering the worldwide commitments and unforseen possibilities. Our society has become urban and urbane. We no longer have Alvin York or Audie Murphy growing up in a situation in which they can't afford to miss the rabbit they're shooting at. So a big militia for a partly trained manpower pool would be a decent, if expensive, insurance policy. I simply don't think the Total Force concept relying on the Reserve and Guard is the correct way to do business.
2007-01-30 15:11:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would love to see the reaction of some of these mouthy young people if they did reinstate the draft. While our military establishment will say no, right now I am for it. Maybe some of these people would have more respect for those that have actually volunteered. The way it should be instituted though is with no exemptions, no deferments. The only exemption that should be allowed is for a disabilty, then it would depend on the disabilty. Some people with disabilities could perform support roles. I think if you are 18-42 male or female you should be registered.
2007-01-30 12:49:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In a case where the war means something other than stupidity(=spreading democracy) then the draft is necessary. However as you said in every War the U.S has fought in there was really no reason for them to join in except to blatantly annoy the rest of the world. 1917 that was the END of WWI geniuses it started in 1914. it has been like that since the u.S came to power so if they feel they need the draft for stupidity well what are you really going to do about it?
However Isreal made the mistake of underestimating Consript forces as they can be better than the volentteer forces. So long as the government does not theow them into previously defined stupid wars.
2007-01-30 12:37:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by angothoron 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
The military and the Bush administration DO NOT want a draft. It would hurt, not help, our military.
My job would be harder if my co-workers were forced to be there. So would the military's.
I agree that to the extent we ever needed a draft I would hope that there would be sufficient volunteers to exceed the requirements.
I don't know for sure about WWII. I'm sure there were people who did not want to go, and who were ordered to kill, and die, but the country was different then.
Society would not stand for draft dodgers then, as it has since.
Is it that the war is different, or the country is different, or both?
That's the hard question.
Like a lot of things, what people were once ashamed to admit to (like not wanting to go to war) they will happily acknowledge, in public, now.
Benefits of the draft? We had one in WWII, and we won.
2007-01-30 12:39:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
What about the rich those who said lets go to Iraq but there son's and daughters don't go! that is bulls*** because we as the poor have to fight for a cause we don't believe in! So have a draft and get some of the rich people to fight. But if your a citizen and you don't serve your country that's just wrong i mean just serve for a year and Quit.
2007-01-30 13:25:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by john 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Every able bodied American citizen between the ages of 18 and 35 should have to put in a mandatory tour in the military. This tour must be served honorably or no job, loans, college, etc. This can't be anything but a plus for the individual and society as a whole.
2007-01-30 12:38:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Civil War--without draft, there would be two Americas, one with slavery. The college exemption was on purpose--to encourage military-related research (not an argument in its favor, but an explanation).
2007-01-30 12:37:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by mistrhistre 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
There is hardly any agreement on wars any more. Some people hate it, some people like it. My opinion: we should finish the job in Iraq (not cut out early).
What we SHOULD have done is irradiated terrorist operations, and then let IRAQ make their own government. If they make the same mistake again, putting terrorist leaders in power, we come in and wipe them out again in 5 years or so. They would have eventually have gotten the point!
2007-01-30 12:37:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by Captain Obvious 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I plan to enlist after high school so I say go ahead. Why not draft women also. What makes them so special they cannot carry a ruck on their back like guys. They want equal rights everywhere else. They can be blown up by IED's just like the guys can.
2007-01-30 12:48:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by xian w 2
·
1⤊
0⤋