Today's "utes" don't have a clue how great this country really is, so a further requirement would be to serve at least six months in a foreign country - preferably, third world.
Posted on 06/02/2008 7:53:38 AM PDT by Doctor13
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill, English economist & philosopher (1806-1873)
The War, a documentary directed and produced by Ken Burns and Lynn Novich is the story of the Second World War through the personal accounts of a handful of men and women from four American towns. The war touched the lives of every family on every street in every town of America.
The scenes brought back the misery, the suffering, the cold, the mud, the rain, the sicknesses and the agony endured by our GIs. America faced an enemy that had attacked our country on 7 December 1941 plummeting us into a war that we did not want nor had we started; nor did we know when or how it was going to end. It was a war where every American felt there was a part for them to play - out of patriotism, and it was a war where the women of our country (exemplified by Rosie the Riveter) hung up their aprons and went to work in the factories making the much needed supplies for the war effort and where they waited for their loves one to safely return home.
Today, we have an all-volunteer military in which less than 1 percent of the population serve in the military. GIs have returned to the war zone, some as many as three, four and even five times and this is where I have the problem. I hear people say, "Well, after all, they volunteered!" Just because we have an all-volunteer military, does it mean that they are to be sent back into battle time and time again until they are either maimed or killed? Does it mean we should use our brightest and best as cannon fodder because they "volunteered" to serve their country? US suicide rates among US soldiers are heading for a record high, according to army data. According to other statistics, 120 War Vets commit suicide each week. It is just plain unfair. It should be the willing patriotic duty of every red blooded American to take up arms against an enemy, an enemy far more evil than we faced in World War II.
Never in my wildest dreams would I have imagined that I would agree with someone as politically liberal as Congressman Charlie Rangel, but I did when he said that if he were elected president he would bring back the draft. As they say, "Politics makes strange bedfellows." Rangel is right, the draft should be reinstated, but in a way that corrects the inequities, problems and manipulations of the old draft system. Names of all eligible draftees should be placed in a lottery. If your name is drawn - you go. If your name is not drawn - you don't. Although it's not quite that simple, this time, there should be no exemptions for college. Other exemptions, such as those for "critical personnel" should be rare and closely evaluated. There should also be consideration for families who already sacrificed one member defending our country. Lacking a draft, we have "A few good men" (and they are the best) are protecting the sorry behinds of those who do not wish to serve, many of whom heap insults, criticisms and yes, even lies, against those who do.
Just as America was attacked on 7 December 1941, America was also attacked on 11 September 2001 by an enemy more dangerous and evil than we could ever have anticipated, and still there are Americans who point their fingers and claim that it is we Americans who are to blame. "If only we understood them...," or, "If only we tried to reason with them..." just as Chamberlain had tried to reason with Adolph Hitler.
If we had fought World War II the way we are fighting the war in Iraq and Afghanistan today, our official language would be German. Instead of the kid-glove restrictions imposed on how we treat the Islamo-fascists who have vowed to kill the infidel (that's you and I, my friend, in case you haven't guessed), and the lawyer-imposed rules of engagement (ROEs) that are costing the lives of our warriors, the only concern, as one Marine put it, should be how to "facilitate their desire to go to Allah for a martyr's reward of being greeted by 72 virgins" but do it before they kill or injure an American GI or blow to pieces innocent civilian men, women and children?
As my Vietnam fighter-pilot husband once said, "If you're in a street fight and you fight by Marquis of Queensbury Rules and the other guy fights dirty, you're gonna lose!"
To put things into perspective:
As tragic as are the deaths of our GIs in the current war, approximately 5000 after almost five years of fighting, in less than the same length of time in World War Two, 400,000 were killed. Consider that The Battle of the Bulge lasted from December 16, 1944 to January 25, 1945 and was the largest battle of World War II in which the United States participated, 600,000 Americans (more than fought at Gettysburg ) fought for their lives. Although many dreamed of the day they could return to their families, too many of them did not make it home. At the conclusion of the battle there were 81,000 American casualties including 23,554 captured and 19,000 killed.
The battle for Iwo Jima was another costly campaign. What started as a quick, violent attack on February 19, 1945, turned into 36 days of some of the fiercest and bloodiest fighting the Marines had encountered. The first day saw 2,400 American casualties. By the end of the campaign 71,245 Marines had been put ashore; of these, 5,931 were killed in action, and 17,372 wounded and, in all, Allied forces suffered 27,909 casualties, with 6,825 killed in action. Those are the brutal consequences of war.
What is the difference today? The answer is that we are a much different country from the America I grew up in during World War II. We expect war without casualties. Politicians subordinate the war effort and the lives of our military to their political ambitions. The media sensationalizes every enemy attack and questions every action of our military, causing many to question, is it worth it?
But then, the media was on our side in World War II. And, as one Marine is quoted as saying , "America is not at war. The Marines are at war; America is at the mall."
That's the job they signed up for. Why do the same to someone who did NOT sign up for that job? especially when there ARE enough people signed/ing up for the job?
Like most such "bring back the draft" articles, the point isn't to make our fighting force more effective, it's to spread the pain until the general population says "STOP!".
An under-reported fact is that the "elite" (high politicians, etc.) have disproportionately more offspring in combat, ergo the "the powerful don't feel it" argument is wrong.
No, no, a thousand times no!
Start sending in conscripts, and collateral damage becomes a minor issue. These lefties know not what they ask.
Not until a democrat is POTUS, then we can bleame everything on them.
> The Draft wouldn’t work in todays America
The State of Israel has Compulsory Military Service, as did South Africa and Rhodesia (prior to being de-colonized) and New Zealand (just after WW-II until a decade-or-so later).
The State of Israel seems to work great with CMS, and their armed forces are every bit as complex as the United States (thanks, of course, to the US).
So why would Compulsory Military Service not be a better alternative to the Draft in the US? It would most certainly work just fine.
Unless you can afford a nice deferment...
Yes, it would be hard to understand if you came from a culture that considered combat and death in combat to be a virtuous honor.
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.” John Stuart Mill, English economist & philosopher (1806-1873
One of my all time favorite qoutes.
However it speaks to a moral and patriotic feeling which is something you either have or you do not have. Being drafted is not going to make you patriotic or improve your moral compass per se.
I served during the Vietnam War which had a draft. Though I was not in combat I was stationed with many people who did not want to be in the military and was thankful I was not in a combat area. I can not imagine having to watch out for the enemy in front of you and in back of you.
Since th dawn of time they have been those that are willing to fight for themselves and others and those that would not fight for thier own children if the need arose. Nothing will ever change that.
Great quote! I think I’ll send to the liberal preacher at our church. Fits him to a T!
If we had fought World War II the way we are fighting the war in Iraq and Afghanistan today, our official language would be German. Instead of the kid-glove restrictions imposed on how we treat the Islamo-fascists
Conventional War against a conventional nation state is vastly and totally different then Counter Insurgents against a terrorist movement. It utterly absurd to argue that we need to adopt the tactics of the first in order to fight that latter.
You miss the BIG Picture. The tatics of the first (WW2) was to WIN period.. The tatics nowadays is, what can we do that will not offend someone or cost a vote.......
The problem with the draft is that today’s army requires highly-skilled professionals. They also need to be highly motivated.
Ever since the late 1970s, volunteer armies made up of highly-skilled, and highly-motivated professionals have cleaned the clocks of conscript armies and irregulars. Examples include the Falklands War, the Gulf War, and our current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Conscript armies — including that of Israel — have not done as well, even against other armies of conscripts and irregulars. The Arab-Israeli War of 1973 was the last hurrah for the conscript army of a democratic nation, in the sense that it was the last unambiguous triumph of that type of army.
To train soldiers to the effectiveness of the current US military require lots of time — really a recruit is in training for most of the first year they are in the service. Conscripts traditionally serve for two years or the duration of the emergency. That means you will be discharging them almost as soon as they are effective.
It also means you need a lot more NCOs in order to churn recruits through training, since you need to be training a LOT more recruits than with the current all-volunteer army to maintain the combat troops at the same numbers at the same level of effectiveness. If you can get the same level of effectiveness with many soldiers leaving a unit (through discharge) at the end of only a year.
To maintain as many soldiers in combat units as in today’s all-volunteer army you would need an army three to four times larger, due to the increased training requirements. You don’t get the type of small unit leaders that we have (fire team, squad, and platoon) until a soldier has two or three years experience under their belts.
The net result is that we would have as many volunteers as we currently have (to provide training and leadership), with a whole bunch of conscripts added on, churning through the system weakening unit cohesion in the process. We would get a lot more army for a lot more expense with a lot less effectiveness.
Which is the real objective of many of those advocating a return to conscription.
Reinstate the Draft?
Only once the enemy has initiated operations on OUR soil..
THEN, draft all the Leftist Professors, politicians, teachers, Hollywood “artists”, America haters, multiculturalists, KOS kooks, Diversity worshipers, the Boobs not Bombs babes and the bleeding heart “Make Love not War” naive fools — and throw them into the fight....
Throw them right into the teeth of the enemy’s strongest points.
NO, you miss the total picture.
Counter Insurgencies are vastly different missions then Conventional Wars. They are as much about endurance and patients then they are about military victories EVERY time a nation has tired to fight a asymmetrical war with convention style strategy and tactics they lose.
Iraq is the most successful Counter Insurgency mission in history. Afghanistan well on it way to be the 2nd. Both will be studied by military professionals for decades as the proper way to fight a Counter Insurgency mission.
Too bad most Americans, on both the Left and the Right, are to busy shouting their slogans as dictated them by their political talking heads on TV to actually learn a single blessed thing about Iraq.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!
That said, I believe that our spoiled rotten, unsupervised, disrespectful, non-responsible kids could use 13 weeks of basic training, plus some advanced training, before they are set loose in the adult world.
Then again, having served, we’d have to have special units for them to serve in, since no volunteer active duty soldier in their right mind should ever have to serve with the draftees.
We are winning fighting our way. The way you scorn. What do you suppose the difference is?
Give you a hint “Set the tribes to fight the tribes”.
The Lebanese-Council Coordination Council? What, pray tell, is that?
The strongest assets in our military are the cohesive units of well-trained, well-motivated individuals who share a strong commitment to their responsibility, their shared values and to each other. These assets are just as powerful as our military’s advanced equipment. Conscription would severaly undeermine that strength.
There was a gigantic lesson to be learned from VietNam and the US military learned it but, somehow or other, it has never been publically stated or written down or codified. The lesson is that there needs to be an absolute minimal set of circumstances in place before you ever use draftees in combat and that should include a full declaration of war by the US congress and a full committment to utterly destroy and defeat a recognizable adversary. Anything less than that is a geopolitical game of some sort and there are geopolitical games which need to be played, but you cannot play them with draftees or with gigantic sums of treasure; you play games with professional soldiers and/or soldiers of fortune and petty cash. You cannot tell the boy next door that it is his patriotic duty to go into harms way for any sort of a cause or any sort of a game. That doesn’t compute. In the case of Nam, we sent an army of American slaves to fight for somebody else’s freedom; it clearly did not work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.