Military Draft

mike3

Master Poster
M
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
2,466
Hi.

I've noticed that some advocates on the left wing advocate having military conscription (draft) in America, so as to make it harder to support wars (if you or someone close to you has to fight in the war, then maybe it'll make you reconsider it). Do you think this'd really accomplish that goal, esp. with the current culture? Or could it embolden corrupt "leaders" to launch even bigger and grander wars due to the surplus of manpower that would be provided? Would it kill the economy (more than it's already been "killed")?
 
Rightwingers are basicly cowards. I doubt they would be so eager to beat the war drum if they thought they might have to march to it as well.

It might be a deterrent to domestic terrorism if everyone learned to fight and was available to put down an insurrection.

I would, however, only endorse the idea if there were an alternative similar to the German Ersatzdienst.

Might actually help cure some of the divisions in our culture.
 
mike3 said:
Hi.

I've noticed that some advocates on the left wing advocate having military conscription (draft) in America, so as to make it harder to support wars (if you or someone close to you has to fight in the war, then maybe it'll make you reconsider it).
Click to expand...

Citations, sources? Reasons given for labels used?

Who, what and where?
 
mike3 said:
Hi.

I've noticed that some advocates on the left wing advocate having military conscription (draft) in America, so as to make it harder to support wars (if you or someone close to you has to fight in the war, then maybe it'll make you reconsider it). Do you think this'd really accomplish that goal, esp. with the current culture? Or could it embolden corrupt "leaders" to launch even bigger and grander wars due to the surplus of manpower that would be provided? Would it kill the economy (more than it's already been "killed")?
Click to expand...

The original founding fathers didn't even want a standing army to begin with, to avoid "misadventures".

On the other hand, most of Europe has mandatory conscription for everybody, and they haven't been too adventurous lately. On the gripping hand, a 60-year data point is hardly statistical evidence given the previous 1500 years, especially since the horrors of WWII are still a living memory.

Two things will tell:

1. Time -- future generations which don't remember things directly, or even remember people who remember it, will soften the all-too human tendencies.

2. Solidification of the European Union into a superpower-class entity. With the US to shoulder a lot of the burden, individual nations just couldn't, and didn't have to, compete. But'n if'n they could, as a group...

Hint to Europe: The US federal government was never intended to be a monolithic entity, either, with each state reserving tremendous, sovereign power unto itself. It was an economic union of free trade and a defensive union, and not much else. It grew because it could, as an additional vector to power for the power hungry.

Do not introduce such a new vector over Europe as a whole. Sadly, the deed is done, and in 50 or 100 years, you can expect more of a European super-state brushing aside local nations' desires with a pat on the head, oh how quaint.
 
Last edited:
mike3 said:
Hi.

I've noticed that some advocates on the left wing advocate having military conscription (draft) in America, so as to make it harder to support wars (if you or someone close to you has to fight in the war, then maybe it'll make you reconsider it).
Click to expand...
Is this a popular position of the left? If you believe so can you provide supporting evidence to that? I am a leftist but am against the military draft in general.
Do you think this'd really accomplish that goal, esp. with the current culture?
Click to expand...
No I do not.
Or could it embolden corrupt "leaders" to launch even bigger and grander wars due to the surplus of manpower that would be provided?
Click to expand...
A plausible situation though I also do not think that our leaders are by inherently or always become corrupted.
Would it kill the economy (more than it's already been "killed")?
Click to expand...
It is possible, but considering that other countries manage universal draft systems and continue to maintain strong economies that such a factor can contribute one direction or another but not so likely be the deciding cause.

leftysergeant said:
Rightwingers are basicly cowards. I doubt they would be so eager to beat the war drum if they thought they might have to march to it as well.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Anecdotally I have noticed quite a few conservatives willing to march to war when it is themselves at risk. I could be wrong but I also thought that in terms of rates a conservative/Republican is more likely to serve in the military than a liberal/Democrat. Even though it appears among high profile politicians more liberals have prior service than conservatives. Since this personal perception and not scientifically based I am willing to examine stronger evidence, but will hold firm in the face of other anecdotal evidences.

It might be a deterrent to domestic terrorism if everyone learned to fight and was available to put down an insurrection.
Click to expand...
I disagree. It appears that countries with universal draft systems still suffer from domestic terrorism and insurrections. Perhaps there is a credible metric on this to sway me towards your opinion?

I would, however, only endorse the idea if there were an alternative similar to the German Ersatzdienst.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a nitpick in presentation but I would be for a mandatory civil service program in which military service is one option, rather than a mandatory draft with a civil service option for conscientious objectors.

Might actually help cure some of the divisions in our culture.
Click to expand...
I would agree with this. Such living experiences can be quite bonding.

GeeMack said:
Or it might give everyone the skills to more effectively mount an insurrection. :D
Click to expand...
Possible but I think it might be balanced by a sense of national pride gained by being more involved in the workings of the nation's armed forces.

Beerina said:
Facts and opinions
Click to expand...
While generally true the Founding Fathers of the United States were not of one mind on every aspect of the early United States. The major political division arose up between support and opposition to Federalism. In the end the US resulted in a system more hybrid of either side's intentions even as the Federalists lost demographic support and maintained influence after the Federalist Era by way of the SCOTUS. The points of Free Trade and Defensive Coalition were definitely the common denominator of the Founding Fathers' agreements, but some certainly intended and put into effect when possible a more Federalist view. I think overall I sympathize with the Federalist view but considering the context and culture of the time I would have been more likely to match up as a Democratic-Republican in a northern state.

The movement to centralize European powers and the issues of mandatory service will be an interesting interplay to see.
 
It appears that the mandatory draft helped make opposition to the Vietnam War more virulent, while having no such effect on WWII. If we grant that WWII was a "just" war and Vietnam "injust," our experience would be consistent with the idea that mandatory conscription makes foreign policy more democratic.

But there are a lot of assumptions in there which could unravel pretty easily. For one, the Vietnam war lasted over 10 years - shorter than US involvement in WWII. So, if the draft helped end the Vietnam War, it certainly didn't do it very efficiently.
 
mike3 said:
Rangel comes to mind first of all.
Click to expand...

Rangel does the draft bill as a political stunt, not out of a serious desire to actually institute a draft. I thought that was common knowledge. :confused:

Left wing because he's a Democrat.
Click to expand...

And I won't even go into the craptacular logic of that statement...
 
MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan, May 13:

"It means that the fewest number of Americans are truly feeling the brunt of our wars. Meanwhile, those who are feeling it, feel it harder than any troops in American history. I think we have to raise the stakes on this to decide whether we get out or keep going. And the only way I can see to do that is to return the draft. Maybe if the sons and daughters of more Americans families, like those of our politicians, were either being killed in combat or facing the stresses of endless repeat deployment, our policymakers would start questioning why we're still there and come up with a different way to deal with insurgent warfare in the 21st century."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-d...dont-give-damn-about-iraq-and-afghan-wars-cal
 
Beerina said:
The original founding fathers didn't even want a standing army to begin with, to avoid "misadventures".

On the other hand, most of Europe has mandatory conscription for everybody, and they haven't been too adventurous lately.
Click to expand...

Most of western europe doesn't.

However the only contries without conscription and with worthwhile force projection abillities are France and britian. Both of whom have had quite an adventurous last 60 years even if suez showed that there were limits to what was possible.


Hint to Europe: The US federal government was never intended to be a monolithic entity, either, with each state reserving tremendous, sovereign power unto itself. It was an economic union of free trade and a defensive union, and not much else. It grew because it could, as an additional vector to power for the power hungry.

Do not introduce such a new vector over Europe as a whole. Sadly, the deed is done, and in 50 or 100 years, you can expect more of a European super-state brushing aside local nations' desires with a pat on the head, oh how quaint.
Click to expand...

We know. Heck this is a declaired aim of a fair number of groups with EU involvement.

They do face a number of barries though:

For some reason eastern europe is distrustful of superstates.
Germany is too productive
Significant chunk of the UK just hates everything south of Dover.
The level of corruption and incompetence is high enough that even those in favor of the idea are having a hard time supporting it.
 
This was 2008, but here's Bill Maher:

"In the 2004 presidential race Karl Rove mobilized Republican voters by getting initiatives banning gay marriage on the ballots in 11 states. If the Democrats really want to mobilize their base they must push for swing state ballot initiatives that call for reinstating the draft. Even if it's a local draft, calling up young men and women to serve in their state's depleted National Guard units. That would really get the Democratic base to turn out en mass: young people, reasonable mothers and fathers, the anti-war crowd -- America's true silent majority."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/rove-reversal_b_69876.html
 
Rather than go from scratch I'll just copy the post on another forum re: Rangel wanting to reinstate the draft:


From another perspective ol' Rangel seems to want to take away one valuable escape route from poverty. Poor people don't join the army. Poor people with drive and ambition join the army to have a chance to better themselves and their lot in life, just like notsopoor people. They can choose not to.

Rangel can go **** himself. If there was a draft the rich kids would find a way around it, or at least avoid combat duty by connecting into less dangerous work and such while the poor would have less of a chance to enter technical fields and would lose the bargaining position that has driven up bonuses.
 
Unless you want a standing army of 15 million or so we can't draft evey able-bodied 18 year old kid.

If you have a smaller army you have to fill it up entirely with draftees who probably don't want to be there, while the people who do want to be there can't join. Not a smart way to construct your army.

IMHO, the armed forces should be built according to military needs, not political ones.
 
the draft make take care of a quantity problem, when it comes to our soldiers.

but what about the quality? I figure our soldiers are better now than during the draft, as they CHOSE to be there and re-enlist, as opposed to being forced under punishment of prison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom