Although there are many differences, it is exactly right to point out the importance of the similarities. And there are even some big ones in the military.
As Rome moved from a very citizen-involved military to an auxiliary-based army and finally to mercenaries, our military is perhaps following an analogous path.
One of the first steps of this was the change in recruiting focus to "money for college"--it's no wonder they didn't receive as many people whose motivation was service if they didn't appeal to that population in ads. Now, the signing bonuses are at record levels--despite our Active Duty military being only 1/25 the size of WWII's...and the population much larger. I don't mean to besmirch those who stay in because of these bonuses, but I do think that there's some analogy to resorting to mercenaries rather than sense of duty. As an aside, I see that others are mentioning this, although with a different spin, perhaps.
And now, the US law has been changed to allow the military to go out and recruit foreigners... Already, about 100 of the deaths of US service personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan have been non-citizens.
Are you suggesting here that the men and women serving in our armed forces are not motivated by a desire to serve?
Now, the signing bonuses are at record levels--despite our Active Duty military being only 1/25 the size of WWII's...
LOL! Interesting that you picked as your comparison the historic period when our military forces were the absolute largest they have ever been by a very wide margin and when they were mostly conscripted.
Not exactly apples to apples with today's all-volunteer force.
How big is our military now compared to its size in 1977?
I don't mean to besmirch those who stay in because of these bonuses, but I do think that there's some analogy to resorting to mercenaries rather than sense of duty.
The fact is that unlike in 1941, we do not have rampant unemployment. Unlike 1941, the average working man's wage is not a survival-level pittance. Unlike 1941, there is a lot more to the average recruit's military training than digging latrines and close-order drill.
In 1941, the average volunteer joined up because the army paid as much as the back-breaking civilian work he would be lucky to get and because he wanted to serve his country. And in 1941 a lot of civilian work - like mining and construction - wasn't much less dangerous than serving in many combat assignments.
In 2007, the average military recruit has other employment options that do not entail heavy or dangerous physical labor, jobs are plentiful compared to 1941, and the skills and discipline the armed forces teach make soldiers and marines very attractive to stateside employers.
Very few software companies were offering jobs with 401(k) plans and health packages to grunts home on leave during WWII.
How many WWII volunteers would have reenlisted if there were plum jobs waiting for them at home?
And now, the US law has been changed to allow the military to go out and recruit foreigners... Already, about 100 of the deaths of US service personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan have been non-citizens.
If the immigration laws in 1861 were as restrictive as the immigration laws in 2007, then the Union army would have been chock full of noncitizen soldiers. Thousands and thousands of Germans, Irish and Central Europeans fresh off the boat were immediately Americanized and sent to the front. At that time native-born citizens who had money could avoid conscription by paying immigrants and poor people hard money to fight in their stead.
Are the tens of thousands of Union dead who fought under such arrangements mercenaries?
If the volunteers US armed forces of 2007 are mercenaries, they are much less so than the volunteers of World War II and the volunteers of the Civil War.
In 2007 residents of this country have many more options than were available to US residents in 1941 or 1861.
The US has never fought a foreign war this long or this intensely with an all-volunteer force in its entire history.
Characterizing this war as a war of mercenaries is not only an insult to our forces in the field, it is a laughable error.
Our war effort in Iraq is the work of citizen soldiers such as this country has never seen.
Almost every single volunteer who has reenlisted in this war could have found a higher-paying and safer job back home, but chose to fight.
In World War II and the Civil War, only a much smaller percentage of volunteers could say the same.