Replies

"Senior Defense Officer: No one foresees a need that would require us to go back to the draft, period. I'm merely pointing out why historically, given the manpower practice of the time, which is everybody served only two years, or, not everybody, but most served only two years, so you ran a lot more people through the military, and the birth count was very small, where -- while we got the conscription for historical reasons, you can see it's an almost economic matter that you are -- you are going to have to use some degree of coercion to get that high a fraction of birth cohort to serve. We are not now, nor does anyone foresee even the most dire circumstances we are going to be in a position where that many have to serve. "

What arrogance. This man is a fool if he thinks he can foresee the future of warfare. It has been the grunts who pay the heaviest price when arrogant fools presume too much and go into a world brimming with overconfidence, believing their armadas and armies could conquer anything. America was confident it had North Korea - until the Chinese hordes started pouring across the Yalu. For once there was a moment of clarity: we need more infantrymen, and we need a HELLUVA lot more. Too bad our leadership seems to be bent on repeating mistakes of the past.

What's the matter? Did the DU web site go down? Get lost, moron.

I think your point is "we must fight in the stupid, moronic human-wave attritional warfare style of our foes, simply because I'm unable to think beyond that idea."