Volunteer military forces have always (as a group, not necessarily individuals) been more effective than conscripts. That's simple historical fact, and it doesn't mean that a draftee is any less of a soldier.
We have sufficient forces for the tasks at hand. I agree, that if we expand our armed conflicts, we may need reserve forces, but I don't believe we've reached a point yet were a draft is required.
I also support some compulsory service (be it military or civil service) to receive any government grants, benefits, etecetera (much like Selective Service enrollment is required before federal tuition assistance is available) of at least two years.
2007-03-07 13:53:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Devil Dog '73 4
·
5⤊
0⤋
The world and the people were A LOT different during WWII, Korea and even Nam. The youth of today have no pride in anything. In WWII and Korea it was an honor to serve and even if a man got drafted he took pride in his responsibilites. Today, even the people that sign up sometimes don't want to be there as soon as boot camp gets a little tough and they have to follow simple rules and regulations. Kids today say all the time how they hate being told what to do. That makes for a very bad a dangerous military person. That attitude gets people killed. I am active duty and I don't want to serve with anyone who doesn't want to be there. We are all taking care of each other. We may be thin in areas, but there are still many thousands of reservist that have never been recalled. These are the people we need to go get onboard. They take the extra pay every time they drill but then ***** that they are going to be asked to do their job. The guard and the reserves is not a summer camp for men and woman who like playing soldier, airman, sailor or coastie. It is something very real and the people that are in these units need to suck up their pissy attitudes when they are recalled. Our military is an all volunteer military and it is just fine the way it is. The others are right, if we really needed to be drafted they would restart the draft. No need to fill the ranks with punky people who don't want to be there. I think everyone should serve some time in the military too, but not if it is going to make us week. It takes a special person to serve and serve well
2007-03-07 15:11:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
great question. I take it you served, so your outlook on the draft is more patriotic than others. I too have served and still do, Every president since the end of the draft has been set by this same question, and you know politicians, they will say whatever to whoever to get the votes that keep themselves in power, reinstating the draft would bring up more issues that i hope our government is at least researching, now we have troops who volunteer for service, for one reason or another, Honor, Pride, Love Of Country, Commitment, Patriotism.
The draft worked before, and many of the draftees served honorably, while some abandoned our country only to be pardoned by the president. So basically we can still have a draft.
This time, no pardons just banishment and citizenship stripped away never to return, and if caught, put in a military prison. Serving ones country, especially a great country like ours is an honor, and a duty that i believe all men should do,
2007-03-07 14:15:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by sofmatty 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
I disagree. That two-year draftees didn't have the experience and training of volunteers with longer commitments is hardly an insult, only math. And the time-line is all wrong. I'd personally be happy with an expansion as has been announced, or a bit more aggressive, which doesn't require conscription. Add on universal service for an extra layer (perhaps to do what the Guard used to do when they weren't being federalized left and right), and you'd hear no gripes from me. I did my time in uniform, and I don't think it would be bad for a lot of kids. But it really isn't needed, if Uncle Sugar can get his act together.
2007-03-07 20:08:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First of all, will you be joining up?
It seems from your answer that you want to, but hesitant about it. You should if you really think that way. Or maybe you already did...
I will. Oo-rah! Semper Fi!
To answer your question, the majority of politicians now in Congress are a bunch of asses (get it?) and they were voted to power through a DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, mainly to pull the troops out of Iraq because the American public does not like to look upon bodybags of their fellow countrymen they never met.
Amercans take great pride in having an all-volunteer force - meaning that everybody who is in the armed forces are there willingly. Those Marines, Sailors, Soldiers, and Airmen are there because they want to be there.Making a draft will prove both demoralizing for our troops, because people don't trust them the job they set out to accomplish and will show how the United States is weak to her enemies.
I suggest you go to your local library or bookstore and research more on the subject. I suggest, if you go to the library, to look at the books in the 970.00s Dewey decimal system. They got some really good books where I live.
2007-03-07 14:46:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The draft, if enacted, would not be effective. 40 years ago, this country saw thousands of its young men fleeing to Canada to avoid participation in that war. Eventually they were forgiven by a peace-loving President. But now the seed of resistance has been planted, there will never be a draft again.
If this nation can not raise enough volunteers to defend itself, then we have absolute proof that our society is too sick to survive. I will fight any and every attempt to start up any new system of conscription.
I do feel that as citizens and voters, we do have the responsibility to elect only those who have served, to national office. Whatever the party, vote for the Veteran first.
http://www.hendrixcampaign.com
2007-03-07 15:19:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by John H 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
We do not have a draft because having a draft would reduce the effectiveness of the military.
If you pay close attention you would notice that the 'lowering' of standards is much exaggerated.
The fact is that the factors limiting a rapid increase in the size of the armed forces have more to do with building new barracks and training areas as well as the time it takes to form and equip new units - than with any supposed recruiting problems.
BTW - if we were to implement a draft then the US military would have to 'dumb down' all of its manuals and references so as to be understandable by your typical 18 year old.
2007-03-07 15:47:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by MikeGolf 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
because if they instated the draft this country would go nuts. there are already so many people against the war, if there was a draft it would cause an even bigger resistance. i find it very sad that we live in a country full of a bunch of chickens who wont stand up for our country, wont risk their lives for our country, they just sit back here in the rear and complain about how things are being done. maybe if they tried serving our country, seeing what it is REALLY like over there, they would change thier mind and stop complaining. our country does not need a draft, it needs more people who are willing to fight for it.
2007-03-07 14:20:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by krystal 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
I partially agree with you and partially disagree. I agree that we're stretched thin for one, and two, I don't think a draft would lower the quality of our Army/armed forces. It's proved effective in the past. However, I disagree that it makes no sense to have one. Most of our politicians are trying to end this war - so it makes sense that they would NOT initiate a draft for fear this would prolong the war, or even make them seem supportive of it, rather than trying to end it. I doubt a draft is in the near future. However, I do know of those in the IRR (Inactive Ready Reserve) that have been called up, even years after their years of active service have gone by.
2007-03-07 13:52:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by artysldr 1
·
1⤊
1⤋
The simple answer is that it would be polically unpopular. As this is generally percieved as a Republican war (and an incresingly unpopular one), it would be disasterous for the Republicans.
Simply put, the only reason this war was even tolerable is because the Americans dying volenteered to go into harm's way. Forcing people to fight a very likely unwinable war would be wrse than even Veitnam.
2007-03-07 14:02:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by adphllps 5
·
1⤊
0⤋