In answer to your question: I could probably reiterate this, but you can read it for yourself. But I think the interesting that sole surviving son does not seem to be an automatic exemption, but has to be applied for.
http://www.sss.gov/FSsurviv.htm
CAVEATS:
First: Sgt. Bill was using this to make a political statement.
“Children” and “precious snowflakes” were never drafted. Only able-bodied young men were drafted.
Also, I was subject to the draft. So were my dad and grandfather. I enlisted in the Navy out of college. I was in 25 years. I never considered the draft as “angst.” I think of it as a reminder of one’s duty to one’s country.
And people did resist during Vietnam. They protested. They burned their draft cards. They even set fire to government buildings and burned records. I don’t know if he’d call that “resistance en masse,” but they sure weren’t individual endeavors. Granted, those who fled the country were individuals, but there were enough of them to induce Canada to tighten its admittance criteria.
Finally, if one isn’t willing to commit political suicide for the good of one’s country, that one isn’t worth the hole in the ballot. Heck, soldiers are putting their lives on the line for policy decisions made by elected officials. If the elected official isn’t willing to put his lousy job on the line, what business does he have making policy that affects the lives of the soldier?
Second: I’m not sure if Lisa is or has been in the military, or if she’s seen combat or has fought along side of draftees. But having been there and done that, I’d much rather have served along side those draftees than along side some of the “volunteer” people I see posting here only interested in benefits and perks. Anybody who’s in combat for the first time is likely to be at least a little apprehensive. But, in most cases, when the bullets start flying their training kicks in and they do their jobs. The military’s pretty good in turning raw recruits into people who can and will defend their country and themselves.
Third: I agree with Gunny that tactics have changed in some theaters of operation. But I find myself disagreeing with Gunny too. Sure we have technology. But Patton said that a war may be fought with weapons, but it’s won by men. Tactics have changed. As President Kennedy predicted back in the early ‘60s, we need specially trained surgical strike teams. They can get in and get out and take the terror back to the terrorists. But we still need the muscle of numbers too. We did wonders with Fallujah… with numbers. Fighting a city is either street fighting or it’s siege. Smaller, specially trained units work better in the former. Large units are required for the latter.
It seems that we have in the US a growing number of self-centered, lazy, irresponsible, complacent, spoiled, children… of all ages. These kiddies don’t see the need to pay their share of the price for some of the stuff their country has provided its people. They go to MacDonalds and pay for a soft drink and fries… and you never hear a complaint. But they’re not willing to foot the bill for their freedom. Two things come to mind… is their country of less importance to them than the soft drink and fries? and, one tends to value little that for which one pays little. A draft is merely a reminder that one has to pay one’s bills.
Fourth: You touch on politically sensitive issues, and you get trollers, wannabes, and crackpots.
CAUTION is “two years and counting” in “US Army Intelligence.” He is not.
Nobody in a secure position would post publicly… even with the anonymity of the Internet, US policy… or even his opinion of it. Heck, I’ve been out of the loop for probably longer than he’s been alive… and I still only post my opinions. I used to help set policy in some specific areas. But I never post policy… only my humble opinions.
Besides, his profile says he’s currently a student majoring in psychology (snap major) and criminal justice (at least it’s harder than psych), so, at best, he has two years and is counting until he can apply for Army Intelligence… or he’s not telling the truth in his profile.
He says a draft is illegal. No. A draft is activated and deactivated by congress, but it is not illegal. Yet he says a “fake draft” would be a good idea? If a real one’s illegal… why not a fake one?
2007-12-11 05:11:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by gugliamo00 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
No draft exists and I do not think it will be necessary, required or re-instated anytime in the near future. Maybe if China or Russia gets aggressive and a large military build up is necessary but not for Iraq, Iran or the war on terrorism. Rumors and scare tactics by people/politicians is all it is. The thing you are asking about is the exclusion for sole surviving son-key word surviving. It does not apply to an only child or only son unless you had a brother killed in military service and you are the only remaining son or you are the only son and you father was killed in military service. It does not and never has applied to an only child or son. It does not apply if your brother or father died for any reason (natural causes, car wreck, robbery, ad so on) if they were not in the military. So a son from a single child or single male child family could be and have been drafted right along with everyone else in the unlikely event the draft would ever to restarted.
2007-12-11 02:56:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by GunnyC 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Only son is a mis-nomer of the subject.
It doesn't mean an only child could not be drafted. If you are an only child, but your father has a brother who had a son (your cousin), you could be drafted because the family name is not dead. You have to be the sole surviving male with that family name in your line. So if you have a cousin that has your last name, you do not qualify for this exemption. In fact, if your father has any younger brothers (uncles to you), they could disqualify you as well. WIth today's society, if you aunt decided to keep her maiden name or had an illigitiment son that has your last name, you don't qualify either.
But the draft is not going to happen unless something like both China and Russia decide to declare war on us at the same time.
2007-12-11 04:20:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by mnbvcxz52773 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't live there but it common sense to all outside the US that your economy is surely driven by the continued war effort. It easier for the US to pay its soldiers rather than pay them social security. This way more money gets paid back into your economy creating the cash flow that runs your nation. This is why the politicians continue to stick their nose in other countries affairs and invade other countries. Because the military returns may be slow but the long term benefits to your country come back in the form of natural resources like oil, minerals, food, employment and re building work contracts. All politicians have to do is justify a reason to invade another country or take part as a UN controller because they all know eventually a percentage return will benefit your country in the future. Some pay and some don't which is the risk they run with each deployment. Regarding how your soldiers are gathered by your country is of little consequence because everyone knows it will never stop because if that were to stop the country would go bankrupt and become a third world nation in only a short time. America simply can't afford to stop its continued war effort. The more terrorism it attracts makes for good politics because then they can justify and continue the war indefinitely.
2016-05-23 01:21:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't know what my status is. I never really paid attention since I'll never be drafted (I'm already in).
The draft is currently illegal. Which means that for it to be reinstated, the law would have to be rewritten. All the old ways to slip through the cracks might be sealed this time.
That said, don't sweat it. It's not gonna happen unless things get really bad. We're NOT going to war with Iran. The only way there'll be another draft is if we're suddenly attacked by someone, and the sh-stuff really hits the fan. Heck, a fake draft might actually be good for us - all the whining anti-military and anti-establishment people will get the flip out of the US...
2007-12-11 03:19:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by CAUTION:Truth may hurt! 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Only children COULD be drafted. The exemption was for "sole surviving son," which required the death of another son/daughter in military service.
One-child families weren't exempt from the angst of the day in prior drafts. Their precious snowflakes were just as at risk as those with multiple kids.
Of course, any draft would have to be authorized by Congress and would be complete political suicide. Unlike Vietnam, many of today's people would resist it en masse.
MSgt, USAF (Retired)
2007-12-11 02:11:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
You can get drafted being an only child. You could not get drafted if you had a brother who died in the service making you an only child.
2007-12-11 02:44:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Chris 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I was an only child and back in 1968 I was classified 1-A and drafted. Those were the days that if you had a heartbeat you were qualified for service.
2007-12-11 02:12:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Bob W 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
There will not be a draft...
no offense but I would not really want someone who was drafted and did not want to be in the military fighting with me
2007-12-11 02:32:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The draft went out after Vietnam, hence the Volenteer Army w have today.
2007-12-11 02:12:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋