In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options

Wants to bring back the draft

alledanalledan Member Posts: 19,541
edited January 2003 in General Discussion
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Democratic lawmaker said Sunday he will introduce a bill in the next session of Congress to make military service mandatory.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, said such legislation could make members of Congress more reluctant to authorize military action.

"I'm going to introduce legislation to have universal military service to let everyone have an opportunity to defend the Free World against the threats coming to us," Rangel said on CNN's "Late Edition."

"I'm talking about mandatory service."

The Korean War veteran has accused the Bush administration and some fellow lawmakers of being too willing to go to war with Iraq.

In October, he voted against a joint resolution authorizing military action against Iraq. It passed 296-133 in the House and 77-23 in the Senate.

"When you talk about a war, you're talking about ground troops, you're talking about enlisted people, and they don't come from the kids and members of Congress," he said.

"I think, if we went home and found out that there were families concerned about their kids going off to war, there would be more cautiousness and a more willingness to work with the international community than to say, 'Our way or the highway.'"



anim0447.gif
Ageless cosmic rocker!
«1

Comments

  • Options
    RugerNinerRugerNiner Member Posts: 12,637 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Draft ended in 1973. I was 17 and a Senior in High School.
    Although the Draft ended it was still Mandatory to Register for the Draft at the Age of 18.

    Is that still the way it is?

    Remember...Terrorist are attacking Civilians; Not the Government. Protect Yourself!
    Keep your Powder dry and your Musket well oiled.
    NRA Lifetime Benefactor Member.
  • Options
    gmayesgmayes Member Posts: 415 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Yes when a man turns 18 he must register with selective service.

    G. Mayes/// Part Time FFL Dealer/No expert on guns by any means just a Gun Loving Nut
  • Options
    snake-eyessnake-eyes Member Posts: 869
    edited November -1
    Yes everyone must still register. Chances of a draft coming again? Nill. We have to bribe kids to come in with bonuses, re-enlistment bonuses and throw E-5 at them but they still keep leaving. The Marines are still under Stop Loss I believe, they can't get out even though their contracts are up.
    Congress has mandated contracting out the military to make it smaller, enforcing a draft will have wasted hundreds of billions of dollars in Defense contracts to make it smaller. Then add a few hundred billion dollars to create more military installations for everyone..it just won't happen. Today's Military to me is a mercinary regime..how is all the money spent on a smaller force that used to run a large force quite comfortably you may ask? The retired E-9's and Officer's are taking advantage of all the contracting going on. Want a 10 Million dollar contract to mow grass on a military installation? They're out there-www.dodbusopps.com

    Here's one for y'all.

    General Information


    Document Type: Presolicitation Notice
    Solicitation Number: DABK09-03-R-0002
    Posted Date: Oct 28, 2002
    Original Response Date: Dec 13, 2002
    Original Archive Date: Feb 11, 2003
    Current Archive Date:
    Classification Code: S -- Utilities and housekeeping services
    Set Aside: Total HUB-Zone

    Contracting Office Address
    ACA, Fort Campbell, Directorate of Contracting, Building 2174, 13 ? & Indiana Streets, Fort Campbell, KY 42223-1100
    Description
    NA Resulting solicitation will request offerors to submit a Request for Proposal to provide Ground Maintenance Services, Post wide, Fort Campbell, Kentucky. Successful contractor will be responsible for all plant, labor, equipment/tools, and necessary materi als to provide Grounds Maintenance. Work shall include mowing, edging, trimming, removal of debris, etc. Resulting contract will be a combination of a firm fixed & a requirements type contract; a base year & three option periods is contemplated to incl ude 3 award term options, for a total of 7 years. Period of performance for base year and option/award term periods will be 12-month periods. NAICS is 561730/$6 Million. This acquisition is 100% set aside for Hub zone Business Concerns. Solicitation pa ckages may be downloaded from the Directorate of Contracting's home page utilizing the Adobe Portable Format (PDF). You may obtain a free copy of the Adobe Acrobat Reader to print and view the solicitation at www.adobe.com/proindex/acrobat/readstep.html. The solicitation will be available on or about 12 November 2002 on the Directorate of Contracting Home Page www.campbell-doc.army.mil. For further information on obtaining the solicitation contact Angela Jacobs, (270) 798-0380. All responsible sources m ay submit an offer, which will be considered.
    Original Point of Contact
    Lilia Bennett, 270-798-6068
    Email your questions to ACA, Fort Campbell at woodl@campbell.army.mil
    Place of Performance
    Address: ACA, Fort Campbell Directorate of Contracting, Building 2174, 13 ? & Indiana Streets Fort Campbell KY
    Postal Code: 42223-1100
    Country: US



    Let's change the laws and quit bickering about them. One man CAN change the status quo.
  • Options
    pikeal1pikeal1 Member Posts: 2,707
    edited November -1
    I just saw this big bag of wind on cnn.com. I don't know why this guy wastes his time opening his mouth. nothing but garbage comes out of it.

    I hope everyone sees what he is saying and votes his sorry butt out of office for good.

    Alex

    "The only way American citizens can adequately be protected from terror and violence is when" those in authority protect us from those who would harm us, instead of protecting us from ourselves.
  • Options
    offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    If we get in deep enough, in enough places in the world, I could see a very limited conscription taking place, but that's all. Very limited. And it might include intelligence services as well as the armed forces. If not draft, then high pressure sales techniques -- benefits, etc. But the military runs on technology now, so fewer men can accomplish a lot more than even the VietNam era. The idea of a widespread draft, while still necessary for conventional wars in places like Iraq, are no longer necessary here, as far as I can see. But if people won't enlist, you can bet they'll get the people one way or another, even if it means a limited draft. What they should do is extend the eligibility age for jobs that only require sitting in front of computers -- not everybody needs basic physical training to get a job done in this man's army anymore -- even I could probably handle something -- as long as the reflexes didn't have to be quite up to par -- [:D]


    Life NRA Member

    T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
  • Options
    old single shotsold single shots Member Posts: 3,594
    edited November -1
    I know i will hear it for this but--I say draft them.I think every able bodied US male (not gay) should serve his country for a min. 2 years.Won't kill em.Or at least not too many of them.I served,and YES i have a son who is at that age and would be affected.Weed out the ones who won't conform and give them the black mark for life that they deserve.If they run to Canada,LEAVE THEM THERE.
  • Options
    timberbeasttimberbeast Member Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Number one: Will government employees be exempt like they are from every other law that they pass?
    Number two: God Bless all who have served, past and present, volunteers or drafted. BUT, involuntary servitude is strictly forbidden by the United States Constitution. Barring a constitutional amendment, anyone who votes for mandatory service, or anyone who has authorized it in the past, are treasonous. We can't pick one part of the constitution that we like, and defend it, and then pick another part and ignore it. Hell, at least I can't.
  • Options
    spinyspiny Member Posts: 3,117
    edited November -1
    There are a lot of pros and cons to that approach.
    Not many soldiers want their back covered by a guy who was 'dragged into it kicking and screaming'.
    Also, there are always MANY exemptions, so the Senator waves good-bye to his sons classmates and never his son! Send the kid to college, get him married, etc... His own never see active duty.
    JMHO
    OOOPS!
    I posted this reply on the WRONG thread.
  • Options
    old single shotsold single shots Member Posts: 3,594
    edited November -1
    I do agree there are too many exemptions.When i said All,thats what i meant.Including senators sons.I also know that it would Never be that way.
  • Options
    v35v35 Member Posts: 12,710 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I vote for two years of military service at age 18 1/2 with no exemptions except for legal disability. There's plenty of room for non
    combatants in all services. Compulsory national service might even be considered for females.
    College as well as any unfinished high school would be deferred. There's nothing in the life of an 18 year old that can't be put off for two years.
    Involuntary servitude is unpaid slavery. The Army pays you so conscription is exempt and has been legal since the Civil War despite the Irish draft riots in N.Y..
    Draftee armies of most nations gave a good account of themselves in
    past wars of this century.
    I did my thing like many thousands of others and wished my boys had also. They would have been better off for it.
  • Options
    old single shotsold single shots Member Posts: 3,594
    edited November -1
    v35--WELL SAID!!
  • Options
    LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    I don't get what Rangell is trying to do. He's against war so he's going to introduce a bill to bring back the draft? Somebody please explain the logic to me.

    Lord Lowrider the LoquaciousMember:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets She was only a fisherman's daughter,But when she saw my rod she reeled.
  • Options
    maggiethecatmaggiethecat Member Posts: 2,381 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    i'm all for a mandatory service requirement. give them easy jobe, cook, admin, jobs with short schools, no need to spend a bunch of money on a 6 month school if they'll leave after about 15 months service. and thats all you'd get after basic, and such, before mos school. and no, they may NOT all join the air force or coast guard.

    SGT RRG

    The greatest happiness is to see your enemy scattered before you, to see his village in ashes, and to gather to your bed his wives and daughters.-Genghis Khan 1226
  • Options
    dheffleydheffley Member Posts: 25,000
    edited November -1
    I think every man should serve two years in the armed services of his country. That being said, it should only be manditory in times of need. This is still a free country, and in times of peace, you should have a choice. Besides, there are some we don't want in the service.

    The NRA is on our side!
  • Options
    outdoortexasoutdoortexas Member Posts: 4,780
    edited November -1
    Lowrider,
    This guy is just doing the political game, trying to make Bush look bad.

    As for mandatory service, In mho, it would benefit our country AND the kids. Learning discipline, etc. would be good for those that did or didn't get it at home/school etc. Then they could go to school, get a job, whatever and have a better outlook on life when they got out.

    Whether they enjoyed time in the military or not, everyone who has served-GREW UP, at least a little more than they would have at home with family and friends.

    Experiences in life are not the same when you are away from home.
  • Options
    airborneairborne Member Posts: 1,728 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I am all for bringing back the draft and a two year mandatory tour of active military. In my day it was just part of growing up, and finishing school before entering civilian life. If you so desired you could enlist for four years.

    Agree with 'old single shots' those that choose to avoid the draft, or refuse to conform should be black marked for life.



    B - BreatheR - RelaxA - AimS - SightS - Squeeze
  • Options
    daddodaddo Member Posts: 3,408
    edited November -1
    A mandatory system wouldn't work. How many 18 year olds are there every year? Lets just say 2 million. 2 million every year into the military? The second year we'd have 4 million. Some would stay, some would go. Who's gonna pay for this? Tax payers!
    quote:I did my thing like many thousands of others and wished my boys had also. They would have been better off for it. "v35".
    v35; You came back, how would they be better if they did'nt. Why didn't you make it manditory for them when you had the chance?
    _____________________________________________________________________
    With power, it is a responsibility to prevent war. There is no beauty or glory in it if it begans by ruffling your feathers just because you can! We have'nt the recrutes today because our young see how the goverment treat the service men after a war- remember agent orange, and the return of the nam vets?
    There will many vollenteers when it comes time to protect our country and need not worry about that.
    If you look around, you'll see that our young are patriots to this country, but not so much to the government. They are less likely to support there government, but are well willing to defend their country.
    I agree with the intent of this bill, not the false sense of "solution" it represents.
    I once thought of a manditory draft- but that was much later than when I was 18. I was getting ready for vietnam when the war ended just before my birthday- a lot of my freinds who didn't return, weren't so lucky.
    This is my opinion on this matter and I don't expect all of you to agree.
  • Options
    outdoortexasoutdoortexas Member Posts: 4,780
    edited November -1
    Daddo,
    I really do understand what you're saying, and don't want you to think I'm just being hard headed.

    Many come home from foreign places wounded, if not physically, then mentally to some degree. That's war, that's why it is never good even when you win. We sill have to face the fact that it has been, and will continue to be part of life on this earth as we know it.

    Mandatory service in time of peace as well as war would be good training for lifes experiences. Tax $ would at least be better spent than paying non-workers to do nothing. Population numbers non-withstanding, it could be put in place. They sure do it in other countries.

    Cure-all? I doubt it, but we would have more mature youngsters. Even a bad DI teaches good things.
  • Options
    drobsdrobs Member Posts: 22,549 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    IMHO- our all volunteer military is doing just fine! The military from what I hear, doesn't want every moron 18yr old to join. I believe you need at least a GED to join the reserves. Remember, it's not like it used to be (pre 1985 I think) drill sargeants can no longer kick the crap out of privates. People that join the military now, want to be there.
    I myself served 8yrs Army Reserves, I enjoyed my time in service and feel I became a better person because of it.

    Oldsingleshot, if you believe in making it mandatory for everyone, why exclude gays? In Isreal, where military service is mandatory and dangerous, gays are not excluded.

    Regards,
    ************************
    Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some aquatic ceremony. You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart throws a sword at you!
  • Options
    daddodaddo Member Posts: 3,408
    edited November -1
    drobs- Ditto!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Options
    LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    Let's get some of these 20 year-olds with green hair out of the mall and into uniform.

    If they want to bring back the draft I'd like to also see them bring back some of the better benefits the military used to offer. Like the GI Bill for college. What a rip-off these days with the matching money deal. One of the good reasons to join-up back in the old days was the promise of free college when you got out. I'd like to see that offered again.

    Lord Lowrider the LoquaciousMember:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets She was only a fisherman's daughter,But when she saw my rod she reeled.
  • Options
    old single shotsold single shots Member Posts: 3,594
    edited November -1
    drobs--Okay,you have convinced me.Gays too.Use them for live fire practice.I was in-I know.Guys in the Service don't want them and don't need them living amongst them.Now i am REALLY going to hear it.I am not a gay basher.I say live and let live.They just do not fit in the military way of life.GO AHEAD--GIVE IT TO ME.I have once again opened my big mouth and asked for it.
  • Options
    drobsdrobs Member Posts: 22,549 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:
    drobs--Okay,you have convinced me.Gays too.Use them for live fire practice.


    Not worth commenting on. [:o)]

    quote:
    I was in-I know.Guys in the Service don't want them and don't need them living amongst them.


    We'd really hate to hurt those guy's feelings. But as the old saying goes, "we are everywhere, get used to it." They are there now just as they've always been.

    quote:
    Now i am REALLY going to hear it.I am not a gay basher.I say live and let live.They just do not fit in the military way of life.GO AHEAD--GIVE IT TO ME.I have once again opened my big mouth and asked for it.


    Doesn't make sense to me to protect our gay americans from military service. If you're gonna make it mandatory, make it mandatory for everyone. When the bullets start flying, I don't think anyone here would care about the sexual preference of our buddy in the foxhole as long as he is killing the enemy.

    Regards,
    ************************
    Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some aquatic ceremony. You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart throws a sword at you!
  • Options
    beantolebeantole Member Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I served in Vietnam. Bush and his kind got deferments or got connections to get into the Air Guard or Reserves. I don't believe Iraq threatens the security of the USA. I say if Bush believes that then his two daughters ought to be the first ground troops sent into combat.

    Bruce
  • Options
    old single shotsold single shots Member Posts: 3,594
    edited November -1
    Drobs--I can't help but get the feeling that you don't TOTALLY agree with me.The remark about live fire practice was only meant to be a joke.In very poor taste perhaps,but was not intended to harm anyones feelings.For that statement, I Apologize. The rest,i stand behind.
  • Options
    drobsdrobs Member Posts: 22,549 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    No problem old single shots, it's ok to disagree. I did not take offense at the live fire statement. I can recognize a pot stir when I see one. [8D]

    Regards,
    ************************
    Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some aquatic ceremony. You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart throws a sword at you!
  • Options
    spinyspiny Member Posts: 3,117
    edited November -1
    If it gets done, it should apply to ALL. Purple hair, gay, female. None are an excuse. Two years for all. No deferments, no nothing. Send your kid out of the country and loose YOUR citizenship. All means All!
    Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
    spiny
  • Options
    old single shotsold single shots Member Posts: 3,594
    edited November -1
    You will have to excuse me for a minute.Have gone to find my pipe.
  • Options
    robsgunsrobsguns Member Posts: 4,581 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I like the idea of every male AND female having to serve, whats good for one is good for the other. Thats not saying I'm for females in the military, but then there is the issue of gays also, and I say screw it, make everyone serve. I also believe that any illegal aliens should be forced to serve, or leave. I'll be damned if anyone is gonna tell me that they have the right to social security when they havent served in the military, AND arent citizens of this country, as the latest news issue has been told. That isnt a well thought out opinion, but it sure sounds good right now. I have a lot of problems with the requirements of 18 year olds serving, but dont have a solution. What I mean is, is that I dont think 18 year olds are mature enough for the military, just as they arent mature enough to drink, and only just became old enough to vote and smoke, and obviously arent handling that choice too well either. I think there are a lot of issues with the military that will never be solved. Making it madatory to serve isnt the solution, to any problem, but it might be a start, just what age to make it mandatory is the question for me.

    Now as for a draft, in time of war, like right now, when we might need it, no. Why?, cause we DONT really need it. Thats what we have all these reserves for. I say use them. I also believe that the inactive reserve time for a member of the armed forces that has been honorably discharged should be a mandatory 8 years, after discharge, as opposed to the 4 we currently have, after a 4 year hitch. That would make them eligible for use right up till they're 30 at the current eligible age of 18, add to it the 12 years-4 active-8 inactive, comes up to 30. Anyone healthy after 4 should still be healthy at 30 years of age, and should be made to stay that way by training twice a year. If they dont stay healthy, and in conformance with military standards, fine, bring them back on active duty and get them that way. Sounds ridiculous, buy thats my opinion. It might hurt enlistment percentages, but so what, with that many eligible reservists, we could easily fill any shortfalls when ever required by activating the reservists. Half of these kids dont even begin thinking like an adult till their 4 years are over, maybe even after that. I'd like to have some of them back after they grow up. For some, its just too early for many of them. Think about how successful their career could have been had they been a little more mature before coming in. Ah well, let us see what these kids have in a few weeks, maybe they'll surprise me. They're starting to come around, now that they're realizing this is no longer a joke for them.

    SSgt Ryan E. Roberts, USMC
  • Options
    mrmike08075mrmike08075 Member Posts: 10,998 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    the draft is not gone, or over. it is just inactive. my father is one of your "friends and neighbors" and serves on the regional draft board. its part of selective service. these guys get together several times a year to practice re-starting the draft. the work through many scenarios( who gets an exemption, prosacuting draft dodger, interviewing draftees, reviewing records, learning from and reviewing the history of selective service and the draft).

    the draft is different then it was in the past. if the armed forces needs 5,000 doctors and EMT`s they can now conscript them. if the armed forces needs 100 spelunkers they can concscipt them. there is a rating system that covers everthing. example: you served two years in the army reserve(10 pts), you are an EMT(3 PTS), you have a bachalors degree(3 pts) you are registered with the CMP and have recieved a CMP firearm(4 pts)etc...

    you still need an act of congress to reactivate the draft, but do not believe its gone. all men upon reaching the age of 18 still register with selective service by law. the draft boards still exist, and practice the skills nessesary to concript able bodied men if there is a need.

    just a thought for you to consider.

    What other dungeon is so dark as ones own heart, what jailer so inexorable as ones own mind.
  • Options
    Big Sky RedneckBig Sky Redneck Member Posts: 19,752 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Y'all know what has me pi$$ed off with all branches of the service? I'll tell you.
    #1, all they want is college material KIDS and a few outstanding performers in the adult class.
    #2 I want to join but NO, they won't take me!
    Know why?? because I never finished friggin high school!
    I don't want to go to get free college, I want to fight, plain and simple. If I could choose what I was to do in the military it would have something to do with driving but I would take a backpack and a rifle right now, we are going to war and I want to go, NOW! But nooo they say, I'm a 32 year old high school dropout, they don't want me. Nevermind that I WANT to fight, they don't want me. I saw a couple shows on tv showing these kids in the Army crying because they might have to do the job they signed up for, there are alot of them in it for the money only, not fighting. Heck I'll do it for free, give me a gun and let me go.

    Wanna bring back the draft? Do it and let me in.

    Man I'm so ticked thinking about this I'm about to break this danged keyboard I'm hittin the keys so hard.[:(!][:(!][:(!][:(!][:(!][:(!]




    If you need a gun larger than a .243 to kill a deer, you need to give up
    redneck1314@pennswoods.net
  • Options
    timberbeasttimberbeast Member Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    "What's good for one is good for the other," is straight out of the Communist Manifesto, congratulations, you've been brainwashed!!
    And, by the way, "involuntary servitude" means being forced to do something against one's will, whether paid or not, and was expressly meant by the Founders to prohibit military conscription, please read both the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers.
    What part of "involuntary" don't you understand??
    The same as the gun-grabbers not understanding "shall not be infringed?"
    If you're going to defend the Constitution, and I will repeat once again, either you do or you don't.
    "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms" doesn't mean: "Unless they have green hair or disagree with me politically", and just because you had to unconstitutionally serve involuntarily does not mean that it is right for you to violate the rights of others as some kind of "payback." I appreciate what ALL who have served have done, honorably, for my country. But you can slice the cake anyway that you want to, the right to bear arms still exists constitutionally and so does the right to be free of involuntary servitude. LOTS of hypocrisy and ignorance floating around right now.
  • Options
    sundownersundowner Member Posts: 1,198 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Right on, timberbeast!
  • Options
    Jim RauJim Rau Member Posts: 3,550
    edited November -1
    The two things that hurt this country the most were[:(!]:
    1. Urbanization
    2. Doing away with the draft

    J. Rau
  • Options
    chunkstylechunkstyle Member Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Absolutely. A military analyst of the last century, Stanislav Andreski, identified 6 types of "military participation" a society may have. Roughly, these can be listed as 1)Warrior, 2)Slave, 3)Regular, 4)Mercenary, 5)Militia, and 6)Conscript. Warrior cultures are those like the Samurai or medieval European knights, usually hereditary military elites. Slave armies are mostly Muslim historically, like the Mamelukes or Janissaries, but aspects of Czarist conscription could be said to be a form of slavery. Mercenaries are foriegners who fight for pay, pretty simple, but that pay can include grants of land or citizenship. Regulars are mercenaries who already enjoy citizenship, but choose service as a means of subsistence, and in the most affluent cultures, takes on the form of a profession. Regulars often evolve from the bodyguards of the rulers of the state. The militia principle lays the duty of service on all fit male citizens, failure or refusal results in social sanction. For this reason, militias are a marker of republics, with the denial of citizenship the sanction for lack of service. Conscription is actually a tax paid by all male residents, whether citizens or not, but often represented as a civic duty. The point of conscription is to make a larger pool of men available to serve. One of its greatest advantages accrues to unfree cultures, as political rights need not be accorded to those who have served. This system, when practiced selectively for long periods of service to unrepresentative governments, becomes the slave system, like noted above in the Czarist state.

    The United States is supposed to be a democratic republic, and therefore well suited to the militia system. Complicating this is our federal system, with the states enjoying partial soveriegnity as well as the national government. Switzerland and Israel also use the militia system, with considerable success. Our military needs also require at this time in our history a force of professional soldiers, some as elite intervention forces, and others as an officer corps. All of these are possible in our current system. I therefore offer these modest proposals:

    1)4 months of active duty for training, a reasonable duration. During this time, advertizing for regular service can be used to persuade men to continue into more useful forces. This need not be done at 18, studies have shown that men of 20 are easier to train.

    2)Part-time service after, for several years. I recall this was considered during the Eisenhower years, and the time desired was 8 years. The current National Guard structure would be ideal for this, allowing participation by state governments and utilization of units for civic duties. A much larger structure would be needed, of course.

    3)More elite regular-type units to carry out most foreign interventions. All the Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps would be in this category, and recruits for these services would be exempt from other service. Also certain Army formations would be categorized here. Airbornes, Rangers, Special Forces, and Mountain troops come first to mind, but there would be a large requirement for more heavily-armed formations as well, perhaps as much as several armored divisions.

    This would provide what the nation needs, and get more of the people involved in the business of the nation. Our Republic would be healthier, and the added strength would command respect again around the world.

    I have wondered since 9-11 what kind of "war" this is going to be. If this is a real war, where IS the draft? Where are the war taxes? How about rationing, especially of petroleum products, since the supply of them is most at risk in a Middle Eastern conflict? I do wonder what our leaders are thinking. 9-11 was the equal to Pearl Harbor in my mind, look at the USA in 1943, we were doing all kinds of extreme measures to be sure we would beat the Axis, and now, the same time after an attack, you still see fit young men in shopping malls, there are no calls for national sacrifices for victory. Could it be that victory is not what our government is seeking? Do they simply want an open-ended war, justifying unlimited spending on pet projects and any level of suppression upon our liberties? What kind of future does this leave us?

    Iraqi: "Is it true that only 13% of American kids can find Iraq on a map?"
    American reporter: "Yes, but all 13% are Marines"
  • Options
    snake-eyessnake-eyes Member Posts: 869
    edited November -1
    I've got a better idea than a draft....Take everyone on death row in our jails, give them a parachute, backpack full of ammo, and a rifle and drop their behinds into action...Taxpayer dollars is wasted feeding them in prisons-let em do some killing for the good 'ole US of A and tell them the country they get dropped in is their's for the taking.

    Let's change the laws and quit bickering about them. One man CAN change the status quo.
  • Options
    oughtsixoughtsix Member Posts: 1,244 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Chunkstyle, That's a dime sized cloverleaf dead center
    the ten ring!!!! I am genuinely impressed. Workable,
    pragmatic, effective.

    In Robert Heinlein's story, "Starship Troopers," he
    describes a worldwide republic in which the only
    way to become a fully participating, voting citizen
    is through military service. Everyone else has all
    the same rights and are not treated as second class;
    they just can't vote! Veterans are considered to have
    proven their dedication, and to have acquired a maturity
    and a perspective (especially regarding war) that
    civilians cannot know. And DIs can definitely kick the
    c@#p out of recruits! Offered as an interesting point
    for discussion.
  • Options
    beachmaster73beachmaster73 Member Posts: 3,011 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The cost involved in chunkstyles 4 months of basic training with little follow-on service would be prohibitive. The cost of maintaining such a military would dramatically increase.

    Interestingly though I do like the "starship troopers" concept of citizenship and voting rights. The howls of protest for such a system would start in Hollywood and resound in other bastions of anti-American liberalism. As attractive as it might sound it just would never happen. Too bad, it might really improve the performance of Congress. Beach
  • Options
    oughtsixoughtsix Member Posts: 1,244 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Right, Beach. In the story, military service was also required
    to hold elective office, if I recall. Heilein's works are
    just filled with interesting and challenging ideas regarding
    political forms, always supportive of individual Liberty.
    OK, now everyone read "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" by
    Robert Heinlein. It's his best single work on revolution
    and self government, and a hell of a good aventure yarn
    besides. "Revolt In 2100" is another great tale of the struggle against tyrrany. There'll be a quiz next Wednesday!
  • Options
    chunkstylechunkstyle Member Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Cost, in terms of money, yes, it would be high. But consider this. What IS the price on the nation's standing worldwide? What IS the value of having a populace actually capable of bearing arms in defence against tyranny or terror? And the cost might be less that you might think. Most of the money would be spent in local communities, training bases, National Guard armories, and the like. In the economy, what goes around comes around, this spending would equal jobs, which would be taxable, helping to defray costs. This is the kind of economy discovered during the space race. Launching men to the Moon didn't actually cost money; it MADE money, by encouraging people to involve themselves in technological professions, by causing the construction of whole new towns and industries, and by contributing to the breakthroughs in science that had profound economic consequences. The tech boom of the 90's, though now past its first flush, is yet to reach its full blossoming. But it owes its existance to the NASA run of the 60's and early 70's, and more indirectly to the military tech investments of WWII. This internet would have never been born had there been no space race. A broad-population military training scheme might be the spark of the next boom. To say nothing of the effect on mass psychology... young men would feel they mattered, that they were doing the right thing, that they belonged, and that the nation belonged to them.

    What price on that?

    Iraqi: "Is it true that only 13% of American kids can find Iraq on a map?"
    American reporter: "Yes, but all 13% are Marines"
Sign In or Register to comment.