The jackass brays back: Rangel wrangles with National Youth Slavery

presenceofmind.net ^ | December 31, 2002 | Greg Swann

[silverdog]

Take a look at the novel "In The Wet" by Nevil Shute.

[society-by-contract]

Maybe. Speaking as someone who served both during the draft era and in VOLAR (The Volunteer Army for the acronym challenged) I can state unequivocally that the draft produced a superior force, at least in the case of the US Army. during the early VOLAR years the discipline, and with it the effectiveness, of the Army deteriorated so badly that professional NCOs and officers were leaving in droves. I was one of them. With fifteen years of service I decided to call it quits in 1980.
Thanks for your thoughts. It is always interesting to hear what has already occured and try to learn somthing.
Perhaps renumeration in the military is insufficient to attract the more capable individuals who have other industries they might pursue. For the right price I might even take up arms, but from what I understand those folks at the bottom have trouble getting by.

[Chuckster]

In 1975, a PFC (E-3)the with-dependents pay, including housing allowance was about $650 a month IIRC. At that time it was enough for a young couple providing they had no kids. I do remember that when I enlisted in 1966, a recruit got $75 a month. It doesn't sound like much but it's funny, I always seemed to have enough. As an NCO, SSG and SFC (E-6 and 7) after 1969, I always felt pretty comfortable with my paychecks. I think when I got out in 1980 I was making under a thousand a month but we lived pretty good. I was able to afford a nice pickup and a new Harley in '77 and '78 and by then I had a wife (Who did not work). We lived in gov't quarters on-post that were pretty nice, a two bedroom townhouse type arrangement with a small fenced yard for the ground floor units.

I think the ones who get in $ trouble are likely the ones who aren't married so they do not qualify for the higher with-dependents pay or the quarters allowance. As far as I know, the military does not yet subsidize the popular civilian practice of shacking up and raising kids without getting married. So younger soldiers who refuse the free barracks housing and free meals at the mess hall (They call them "Dining facilities" now I believe) will naturally have a tougher time making it.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the profession of arms has never been about making money and does not easily lend itself to the lifestyle of the popular culture. It is about service to one's country. Since soldiering is a life and death profession requiring real commitment (How popular is that nowadays?) there are always gong to be relatively few who are willing to embrace it.

As a former Non Commissioned Officer my opinion is that a young soldier should be single and live in the barracks. This promotes bonding and unit cohesion which is necessary for combat effectiveness. I was a 25 year old Staff Sergeant when I got married and moved out of the barracks. At that time, getting married required the permission of my commanding officer. I see nothing wrong with that, given the mission of the armed forces.

My comments are necessarily limited to the Army experience but I believe they apply equally to the Marine Corps and, to a lesser extent, the Navy. The Air Force is not really a military arm d;^)

[E Rocc]

Someone send this moron a copy of "Starship Troopers..."

The "moron" is Rangel, right? There's no doubt what Robert Heinlein would have thought of this proposal.

No state has an inherent right to survive through conscript troops and, in the long run, no state ever has.

the draft is involuntary servitude, immoral, and unconstitutional no matter what the Supreme Court says

A nation that cannot find enough volunteers to defend itself will not survive — and does not deserve to.

-Eric

[ZULU]

That idiot Rangel could only get elected in a district like Harlem where the mass of the voters are poor, ignorant, and suffer from congenital DemocRATism.

[Political Junkie Too]

"I believe that if those calling for war knew that their children were likely to be required to serve--and to be placed in harm's way--there would be more caution and a greater willingness to work with the international community in dealing with Iraq."

I think that this is Rangel's main goal: he wants to reinstitute the draft in order to influence the vote of his colleagues in Congress. It's really a Congressional power-play, using the youth of America as pawns.

-PJ