USA gearing up for the draft!

[Abdul Alhazred]

Hold down Alt while on the Number pad type 0134, then release Alt

Or you could just copy and paste.

Interesting. Isn't the old printers' jargon name for that character the "dagger"?

 

[†= Crap!]

Yep

 

[Skeptic]

1.) Male US citizens who are 18 years old have been required to register for the draft since the 70’s. I even had to register when I was discharged from the army.

Great. You now went and broke Jon's "evil America gearing up to scarifice its unwilling young innocents" story by posting stupid FACTS.

That's no fair, using FACTS arguing with a leftist...

 

[Giz]

Thats not likely to ever happen. If a government does a decent job then it shouldn't have any problem finding enough people to defend it. If the government is so incompetent or oppressive that it cant muster its own people to defend it, then that government doesn't deserve to exist (Iraq is a perfect example)

But the draft was necessary in WW2. Dont you think that was morally OK?

So it can be a good thing, yeah?

 

[Tmy]

Did the US use the draft in WW2?? I didnt think they had too.

 

[Giz]

Did the US use the draft in WW2?? I didnt think they had too.

I believe both the USA and the UK used the draft in boith World Wars.

 

[†= Crap!]

But the draft was necessary in WW2. Dont you think that was morally OK?

So it can be a good thing, yeah?

I'm not sure the draft was necessarily necessary in WWII. I think most people understood that Americas interest were just as much at stake as England or France. The Japanese did attack us. Do think there would have been a problem with people just saying 'You know, maybe living under Japanese imperialism won't be so bad'

 

[Skeptic]

Did the US use the draft in WW2?? I didnt think they had too.

The draft was necessary just about in ANY country fighting a war, EVER. Yes, the US, the UK, and everybody else had a draft in all their wars. It is not necessary because people don't think their country is worth defending, but because (of course) it is one thing to think your country is worth defending and quite another to disturb your entire life, say goodbye to your loved ones, and go risk your life for years on a daily basis in order to defend it.

If "Crap's" plan would be put into effect, then every single war between a democracy and a dictatorship would have been lost by the democracy, for the simple reason that the dictatorship would use the draft and the democracy would have to use persuasion. Frankly, the idea that a draft somehow "proves" a country is "wrong" in its war is beyond absurd. It doesn't even pass the giggle test.

 

[†= Crap!]

To Skeptic

What more can I say other than I disagree with you?

I believe when people see that there lives and livelihoods are endanger they will fight for them, and there is no need to to subjugate people who dissent.

 

[dissonance]

Saw this article in the newspaper yesterday....

Will the US bring back the draft?

There doesn't seem to be any indication of just when exactly this supposed call for draft board members was actually made, though.

 

[Luke T.]

Re: To Skeptic

What more can I say other than I disagree with you?

I believe when people see that there lives and livelihoods are endanger they will fight for them, and there is no need to to subjugate people who dissent.

Well, first, right up until Pearl Harbor was attacked, there was a large isolationist movement in America. One of the leading figures in that movement was Charles Lindbergh of translantic flight fame. So a lot of people felt there was no threat to the U.S.

Secondly, Hawaii wasn't even a State. So an attack on a mere "territory" may not even have been persuasive enough for some.

Thirdly, I think the fact the U.S. had to resort to the draft is a self-evident indication that not enough people felt the desire to defend their country and enlist in sufficient numbers.

Fourth, people may not enlist into the various services in the necessary proportions. If all the volunteers decided to join the Navy, just as an example, the Army and the Marines would be short-handed. With the draft, you can disseminate people where they are needed.

An all volunteer force is much more preferable to one in which you draft a lot of people who don't want to be there. But sometimes there is no choice.

 

[Skeptic]

Re: To Skeptic

What more can I say other than I disagree with you?

I believe when people see that there lives and livelihoods are endanger they will fight for them, and there is no need to to subjugate people who dissent.

(sigh) If only you were right!

We all wish it was so, but all of history, human nature, and experience is against your claim. It SHOULD be that way, but it isn't. Amazingly enough, almost everywere and at any time, people had to be FORCED to fight for their lives with coersive measures like the draft, censorship, etc., even if it was @#$#!! obvious what not fighting would being.

This was already true in biblical times, it was true during the Persian/Greek wars (the Greeks nearly lost the war after, out of spite, they almost started a civil war among themselves over some stupid point of honor as Darius was invading) and it was true for, just about, any war since, to this very day. Yes, including WWII. If there are exceptions to this rule, they are just that--exceptions.

Don't ask me to explain WHY. It doesn't make any sense to me, either. But it's true.

 

[Skeptic]

Re: Re: To Skeptic

Fourth, (volunteers) may not enlist into the various services in the necessary proportions.

...or in the right numbers, or with the right skills, or at the right time, or to the right jobs within the services, or at the right place, or... etc., etc., etc. Nobody ever volunteers two years in advance of a crisis in order to be a cook; everybody wants to volunteer when the crisis is upon us... and then they all want to be officers and fighter pilots.

 

[†= Crap!]

Luke T.,

I'll only address one point here

Secondly, Hawaii wasn't even a State. So an attack on a mere "territory" may not even have been persuasive enough for some.

Its wasn't just an attack on a mere "territory". it was an attack on the US military that killed US citizens. So it was very much an attack on us

As for the rest of your points, as well as Skeptics.....,

You're causing me to shift my position(Damn you!) . If a draft was required to win a war comparable to WWII, which I'm not entirely convinced it would, there would be justification for it. But that doesn't make it right.

I simply don't believe in the subjugation of the individual to the masses, and I don't believe in the initiation of force.(Damn you!)

 

[shecky]

I served my 4 years kicking the snot out of 3rd world dirt bags. If Uncle Sam calls, I'll do it again.

You spent 4 years kicking the snot out of 3rd world dirt bags to support different 3rd world dirt bags, for the sake of a shortsighted Uncle Sam.

Sure it's a liberal claptrap, shared by that great liberal, your great prez, Dubya

"Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe because in the long run stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty," Bush said.

 

[a_unique_person]

1.) Male US citizens who are 18 years old have been required to register for the draft since the 70’s. I even had to register when I was discharged from the army.

Great. You now went and broke Jon's "evil America gearing up to scarifice its unwilling young innocents" story by posting stupid FACTS.

That's no fair, using FACTS arguing with a leftist...

You will find that most peaceful Western countries do not even require a registration for a draft that does not exist. Requiring a registration is still an important step in getting a draft happening. If we were required to register in Australia, there would be a massive protest vote against such a policy.

 

[Jon_in_london]

The draft was necessary just about in ANY country fighting a war, EVER. Yes, the US, the UK, and everybody else had a draft in all their wars.

BTW- The British didnt introduce conscription until 1916.

The army that marched into the holocaust of the somme was made up entirely of volunteers.

 

[a_unique_person]

BTW- The British didnt introduce conscription until 1916.

The army that marched into the holocaust of the somme was made up entirely of volunteers.

Ditto the Australian Army in WWI. For some reason, there were plenty of volunteers to die for a war that made no sense at all from Australia. I must apologise, I thought that the English were conscripts for the duration of the war.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Ditto the Australian Army in WWI. For some reason, there were plenty of volunteers to die for a war that made no sense at all from Australia. I must apologise, I thought that the English were conscripts for the duration of the war.

AUP- The Aussies of the time thought of themselves as being British. Australia being a part of the British Empire, remember. (you still are btw, you are just a bit more uppity these days )

Edit: AUP, the British army that went to france in 1914 was enirely made up of proffesional soldiers. They were without a doubt the finest army of their time. The Kaiser referred to them as "A contemptible little army" after which they refered to themselves as the "Old Contemptables". Had there been a million of them instead of 100,000, the war might just have been over 'by christmas'.

 

[Tmy]

You will find that most peaceful Western countries do not even require a registration for a draft that does not exist. Requiring a registration is still an important step in getting a draft happening. If we were required to register in Australia, there would be a massive protest vote against such a policy.

Registering for selective service is really no big deal here in the states.. Of course when most of us did it there was no real expectation that it would be used. Its like IF there was a war bad enough to require the drafte they would have the list of men available.

When the space aliens attack were gonna need to put together a figting force really quick.