Should The US Reinstate The Draft or Some Other Mandatory Service?

[Vast LWC]

Which is why the draft age limit would need to be raised to at least 65.

A high age draft limit would restore the constitution's provision that congress must declare war for the US to engage in combat?

I'll takes bets against that.

Since most of the Congressmen would then be eligible for the draft? Yeah, you can bet on it.

And, in response to the Cheney, Limbaugh, etc post, removing the upper age limit would take care of that too.

I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's "Anal blisters" have cleared up by now.

 

[Article 15]

deferments when there is a draft are cute too! - Cheney got 5, Rush got one for the boil on his fat ass and Ted Nuggent shit and pissed himself to get one......and what do they all have in common? - thay all love war.

Ironic, no?

They're chickenhawks, pretty simple.

But ya gotta admit Nugent is pretty hard core taking that path.

 

[Jay Canuck]

more like sickening.

 

[Xenophon]

Which is why the draft age limit would need to be raised to at least 65.

A high age draft limit would restore the constitution's provision that congress must declare war for the US to engage in combat?

I'll takes bets against that.

Since most of the Congressmen would then be eligible for the draft? Yeah, you can bet on it.

And, in response to the Cheney, Limbaugh, etc post, removing the upper age limit would take care of that too.

I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's "Anal blisters" have cleared up by now.

I'll take that bet.

BTW, I find it interesting that so many of you feel THE STATE has the right to take years of your lives, and that you believe it will avoid wars.

Not big on that whole 'american' concept, are you guys.

And a lot of you need some serious history lessons.

'The rich' USED to ALWAYS send their kids to war, it was a common prcatise right up till the end of WWI, where conscripted armies killed off huge portions of the adult populations.

If any of you believe 'drafts' will prevent wars you are not dealing with full decks.

 

[rightwinger]

I would favor enhanced inducements to volunteer. Many students today are graduating with massive college debt and no job prospects. A volunteer program where graduates could either serve in the Military or do domestic volunteer work in exchange for payment of their college debt would be worthwhile

 

[ba1614]

No, the last thing they need is people who don't want to be there.
But we need to be smarter about what we do abroad as well.

 

[Mr Natural]

A high age draft limit would restore the constitution's provision that congress must declare war for the US to engage in combat?

I'll takes bets against that.

Since most of the Congressmen would then be eligible for the draft? Yeah, you can bet on it.

And, in response to the Cheney, Limbaugh, etc post, removing the upper age limit would take care of that too.

I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's "Anal blisters" have cleared up by now.

I'll take that bet.

BTW, I find it interesting that so many of you feel THE STATE has the right to take years of your lives, and that you believe it will avoid wars.

Not big on that whole 'american' concept, are you guys.

And a lot of you need some serious history lessons.

'The rich' USED to ALWAYS send their kids to war, it was a common prcatise right up till the end of WWI, where conscripted armies killed off huge portions of the adult populations.

If any of you believe 'drafts' will prevent wars you are not dealing with full decks.

A draft would most definitely put an end to wars of choice.

WWII HAD to be fought. The others didn't including the latest fiascos we've gotten ourselves into.

 

[Ringel05]

Here's a link that contains general statistics concerning The Vietnam War. Included are the statistics concerning draftees and post war attitudes of those involved.

Vietnam Statistics: Vietnam War Statistics

Unfortunately what I didn't find (yet) was a synopsis I read awhile back showing the numbers of crimes committed by military personnel in war zones in relation to volunteers as opposed to draftees (WWII, Korea and Vietnam). The sysopsis showed the majority of crimes were committed by draftees.

I think it's a rather good argument why not to have a military draft. Add to that the military personnel's general education/skill levels today are much better than in previous times. Does anyone really want to dumb that down, I know the military doesn't.

 

[Article 15]

Since most of the Congressmen would then be eligible for the draft? Yeah, you can bet on it.

And, in response to the Cheney, Limbaugh, etc post, removing the upper age limit would take care of that too.

I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's "Anal blisters" have cleared up by now.

I'll take that bet.

BTW, I find it interesting that so many of you feel THE STATE has the right to take years of your lives, and that you believe it will avoid wars.

Not big on that whole 'american' concept, are you guys.

And a lot of you need some serious history lessons.

'The rich' USED to ALWAYS send their kids to war, it was a common prcatise right up till the end of WWI, where conscripted armies killed off huge portions of the adult populations.

If any of you believe 'drafts' will prevent wars you are not dealing with full decks.

A draft would most definitely put an end to wars of choice.

WWII HAD to be fought. The others didn't including the latest fiascos we've gotten ourselves into.

And yet we had a draft during Vietnam and Korea.

You keep blurring over this point.

Are you saying that those wars HAD to be fought?

 

[Xenophon]

A draft would most definitely put an end to wars of choice.

WWII HAD to be fought. The others didn't including the latest fiascos we've gotten ourselves into.

Bullshit, ANOTHER one that doesn't know his history.

WWII was a war of choice friend.

Tell us how the British & French were 'good guys' while they pissed all over Asia & Africa, and the russians killed millions of their own, that compelled 'us' to enter the war.

Could it have been FDR sending money and arms to China and Europe in DEFIANCE of our own neutrality laws?
Could Japan have been just a tad pissed off that the uSA embargoed it for a war in China, when WHITES from England, France and Russia had neer been 'embargoed' for their colonial wars?

We entered that 'war of choice' because FDR wanted to enter it.

And guess what we had BEFORE the war?
















A DRAFT.

 

[Jay Canuck]

'The rich' USED to ALWAYS send their kids to war, it was a common prcatise right up till the end of WWI, where conscripted armies killed off huge portions of the adult populations.




they sure did but then again the rich could send their kids to military schools where you get trained to hand out the orders as an officer to the poor kids who happened to be the grunts.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The draft wouldn't put an end to anything. It would simply make it easier for politicians to get us into wars because they'd be able to fight more at a time. I see no reason to incentivize them any further. The government also has no right to make slaves of the American citizens by forcing us to fight in their wars. And don't make the mistake of thinking that any politicians or their families would get drafted either, because it wouldn't happen. It would simply be forcing 18 - 30 year olds to waste their lives fighting what would likely amount to an unjust war for some supposed debt they owe the government. No thanks. We need to abolish selective service immediately.

 

[Mr Natural]

I'll take that bet.

BTW, I find it interesting that so many of you feel THE STATE has the right to take years of your lives, and that you believe it will avoid wars.

Not big on that whole 'american' concept, are you guys.

And a lot of you need some serious history lessons.

'The rich' USED to ALWAYS send their kids to war, it was a common prcatise right up till the end of WWI, where conscripted armies killed off huge portions of the adult populations.

If any of you believe 'drafts' will prevent wars you are not dealing with full decks.

A draft would most definitely put an end to wars of choice.

WWII HAD to be fought. The others didn't including the latest fiascos we've gotten ourselves into.

And yet we had a draft during Vietnam and Korea.

You keep blurring over this point.

Are you saying that those wars HAD to be fought?

No, both were wars of choice.

And the '60s generation put an end to both the Viet Nam war and the draft.

 

[Xenophon]

they sure did but then again the rich could send their kids to military schools where you get trained to hand out the orders as an officer to the poor kids who happened to be the grunts.

Nope.

You have to lead from the front, what you are discribing is only seen at the most senior level of modern armies.

You know where a VMI graduate was in WWI?

In FRONT of his troops, not hiding in a bunker.

You guys should do a little studying before you all talk about how drafts will win wars, and 'the rich' avoid them.

The truth is cowards avoid the fighting, not neccesarily the rich.

 

[Mr Natural]

they sure did but then again the rich could send their kids to military schools where you get trained to hand out the orders as an officer to the poor kids who happened to be the grunts.

Nope.

You have to lead from the front, what you are discribing is only seen at the most senior level of modern armies.

You know where a VMI graduate was in WWI?

In FRONT of his troops, not hiding in a bunker.

You guys should do a little studying before you all talk about how drafts will win wars, and 'the rich' avoid them.

The truth is cowards avoid the fighting, not neccesarily the rich.

Back in the days of WWI, war was still considered a glorious adventure.

 

[Newby]

No thanks.

Reservists and Guardsmen are bad enough (sorry guys) I can't imagine what a guy who REALLY didn't want to be in a war zone would be like.

I can, since we had that in every war before now.

The kiddies here fail to realize that Vietnam, Korea, WWII, WWI, and even the Civil war had lots of drafties and it didn't stop the fighting at all.

Using Europe as an example of not fighting is rather amusing in that Europe has depended on Uncle Sam to be imperial policeman since WWII ended.

Which is why the draft age limit would need to be raised to at least 65.

This is an excellent example of how those on the left use people and groups of people to manipulate the masses into doing what they want. When we wanted to revamp social security, they sure made a huge deal out of how all of the poor senior citizens were going to be screwed out of their SS checks. Now, in order to try to enforce some bizarre sense of 'peace on earth' you're going to send them off to war? Amazing.

 

[Jay Canuck]

Xenophon, are you trying to tell me that throughout the history of warfare that the wealthy have not used their power and influence to secure positions in war that are either desirable or safe?

 

[Article 15]

A draft would most definitely put an end to wars of choice.

WWII HAD to be fought. The others didn't including the latest fiascos we've gotten ourselves into.

And yet we had a draft during Vietnam and Korea.

You keep blurring over this point.

Are you saying that those wars HAD to be fought?

No, both were wars of choice.

And the '60s generation put an end to both the Viet Nam war and the draft.

Ok ... now I'm confused.

Wouldn't we end up fighting the same battle internally all over again? And to what avail? Draft or none, it has been demonstrated that this nation will go to war regardless.

 

[Vast LWC]

A high age draft limit would restore the constitution's provision that congress must declare war for the US to engage in combat?

I'll takes bets against that.

Since most of the Congressmen would then be eligible for the draft? Yeah, you can bet on it.

And, in response to the Cheney, Limbaugh, etc post, removing the upper age limit would take care of that too.

I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's "Anal blisters" have cleared up by now.

I'll take that bet.

BTW, I find it interesting that so many of you feel THE STATE has the right to take years of your lives, and that you believe it will avoid wars.

Not big on that whole 'american' concept, are you guys.

And a lot of you need some serious history lessons.

'The rich' USED to ALWAYS send their kids to war, it was a common prcatise right up till the end of WWI, where conscripted armies killed off huge portions of the adult populations.

If any of you believe 'drafts' will prevent wars you are not dealing with full decks.

Since "the State" is starting the wars in the first place, mainly due to the support of older voters, then those older voters should have to have a stake in the fight.

In the last war, there were a whole bunch of people, mostly older voters, who felt that they wanted to fight a war, but they didn't want to pay for it through higher taxes.

Hell, we're still fighting those two wars, and people on the right are STILL complaining about their taxes!

 

[Xenophon]

they sure did but then again the rich could send their kids to military schools where you get trained to hand out the orders as an officer to the poor kids who happened to be the grunts.

Nope.

You have to lead from the front, what you are discribing is only seen at the most senior level of modern armies.

You know where a VMI graduate was in WWI?

In FRONT of his troops, not hiding in a bunker.

You guys should do a little studying before you all talk about how drafts will win wars, and 'the rich' avoid them.

The truth is cowards avoid the fighting, not neccesarily the rich.

Back in the days of WWI, war was still considered a glorious adventure.

I'm trying to get you and the others to understand there are no 'good' or 'just' wars, that is just something said to make people go and fight.

You keep saying 'war of choice' but the fact is they are ALL wars of choice.

As long as you preserve the fiction of 'the good war' you allow some moron to use that for some fool's errand such as Iraq and Afghanistan.