Another draft bill coming...

[cannon_fodder]

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/rangel-to-reintroduce-military-draft-measure-2009-01-14.html

Some dolt is going to reintroduce his bill for a military draft.  It failed last time by a vote of 402-2.  

The military does not want it.  Draftees simply are not the quality of soldier we want.  Their actions are more likely to cost us political capital around the world also.

The population doesn't want a draft.

And the poor people he is purportedly trying to protect don't want the damn draft.  The ones that choose to join would have less pay (draft = don't need to attract or retain as many real soldiers) and the ones that don't want to join would have to.  Not sure how it comes out as a positive for the poor.  

What a waste of time.  Just publish a statement that says you don't like wars.  That's what you are trying to say.


/full disclosure - past draft age (for first 2 rounds anyway... if we get to round 3 and they are taking 28-35 years olds we are in trouble), probably wouldn't pass the fitness exam married, child, and graduate degree.  The impact on me would be negligible.   So this isn't a don't draft me whine.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/rangel-to-reintroduce-military-draft-measure-2009-01-14.html

Some dolt is going to reintroduce his bill for a military draft.  It failed last time by a vote of 402-2.  

The military does not want it.  Draftees simply are not the quality of soldier we want.  Their actions are more likely to cost us political capital around the world also.

The population doesn't want a draft.

And the poor people he is purportedly trying to protect don't want the damn draft.  The ones that choose to join would have less pay (draft = don't need to attract or retain as many real soldiers) and the ones that don't want to join would have to.  Not sure how it comes out as a positive for the poor.  

What a waste of time.  Just publish a statement that says you don't like wars.  That's what you are trying to say.


/full disclosure - past draft age (for first 2 rounds anyway... if we get to round 3 and they are taking 28-35 years olds we are in trouble), probably wouldn't pass the fitness exam married, child, and graduate degree.  The impact on me would be negligible.   So this isn't a don't draft me whine.

I won 38th place in the first draft lottery in the fall of 1969.  That was a winning ticket for an all expense paid trip to Viet Nam. I was in college in my sophomore year. My age/class year group and older was allowed to complete up to a 4 year program as long as satisfactory progress was made toward a degree. Freshmen and subsequent groups were allowed to finish the semester in which they received their "Greetings" notice. Exemptions for married, children, education level, defense critical jobs, and others were null and void as I remember. That was part of the reason for the lottery.  Exemptions were seen as discrimiation. Remember, this was still the 60s. Minorities were being drafted in numbers disproportional to their percentage of the population.

I graduated in 72 and got drafted in July. The draft ended in August. (Technically, I joined the Navy to avoid forced induction into the branch of the Selective Service's choice. I was lucky in that we pulled out of 'Nam while I was finishing my Navy Electronics school.) I met and worked with many good people in the Navy. A lot were draftees like me. They did their job and stayed out of trouble but had no intention of staying in the service. I also met a few people with a really  bad attitude that were a hazzard to their "shipmates". I believe the services are better off with personnel that want that job.

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/rangel-to-reintroduce-military-draft-measure-2009-01-14.html

Some dolt is going to reintroduce his bill for a military draft.  It failed last time by a vote of 402-2.  

The military does not want it.  Draftees simply are not the quality of soldier we want.  Their actions are more likely to cost us political capital around the world also.

The population doesn't want a draft.

And the poor people he is purportedly trying to protect don't want the damn draft.  The ones that choose to join would have less pay (draft = don't need to attract or retain as many real soldiers) and the ones that don't want to join would have to.  Not sure how it comes out as a positive for the poor.  

What a waste of time.  Just publish a statement that says you don't like wars.  That's what you are trying to say.


/full disclosure - past draft age (for first 2 rounds anyway... if we get to round 3 and they are taking 28-35 years olds we are in trouble), probably wouldn't pass the fitness exam married, child, and graduate degree.  The impact on me would be negligible.   So this isn't a don't draft me whine.

Well someone better tell Hometown to pack his bags for Canada again if this gets through (he's probably too old now).

[Hometown]

Quido, Canada is no longer accepting war objectors from the U.S.

I grew up in Lortondale surrounded by houses full of boys my age.  Not one of them served in Vietnam.  Vietnam was a completely discredited war that was fought by working class kids.  Middle and Upper Class men got deferrals or served in the National Guard.  You know, like Cheney and Bush.

In fact there is long history in the U.S. of our wars being fought by the working class with some exceptions like WWI and WWII.

Now, that is exactly why we need to reexamine a draft.  The burden of fighting this war has largely fallen on working class men and women.  And I believe the prospect of a draft would curtail our military operations.

Now, I have done you the courtesy being candid about my lack of military service.  I was up for the lottery in its last two years but was not called.  

When are you going to play fair and tell us what it is you don't want to reveal about your military service?

Meanwhile you need to study what was happening here on the home front during Vietnam because it's obvious you don't have a clue.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Quido, Canada is no longer accepting war objectors from the U.S.

That is because they have determined that people who volunteer to fight for their country should put up and actually fight for their country.  There is no draft to be dodged, hence, no need for consciousness objector or political status in Canada.

quote: Vietnam was a completely discredited war that was fought by working class kids.  Middle and Upper Class men got deferrals or served in the National Guard.  You know, like Cheney and Bush.

Clinton didn't even do that did he?  And that coward McCain didn't sign up for that war.  Pointing fingers in such a way is not productive.

quote:
In fact there is long history in the U.S. of our wars being fought by the working class with some exceptions like WWI and WWII.

1) We have a largely volunteer army.  So it makes sense that the "working" class generally joins the army.  Also worth noting that some 85% of the country are working class, I would expect the majority of soldiers to also be working class.

2) Wars are waged to improve or somehow advantage the nations that is fighting it.  Would it be more advantageous for our nation to send engineers, doctors, industrialists, and intellectuals into combat than "common" workers?  

Einstein, I know you are really bright and are working on the atomic bomb, but grab a rifle and shut up.  Mr. Ford, thanks for the tanks and your production abilities are remarkable, but how about you hop in one of those things and shoot some Germans?

Fair?  Probably not.  But we aren't out to be fair when we are fighting a war, we are out to win.  The purpose of the war is to improve our nation.  Sending the brightest minds our nation has to go die en mass wouldn't help that prospect.

*NOT* saying the Vietnam style draft was fair.  Not saying draftees were all dumb clods.  Just arguing the big picture, which favors a pragmatic instead of individualistic view of the draft.


3) Currently we have no active draft.  No one has to join the military or is coerced into joining.  If they can't find a job and don't want to join... they will be fed, housed, and receive medical attention from government programs just the same.   Rich kids can join the military, poor kids can join the military.  

Not sure I see the inequity in that system.  Is the belief that if we institute a draft of all person we will free up enough white collar jobs that the "working class" without an education will suddenly become doctors, accounts, lawyers, and engineers?  Or are you saying that the working class have too many opportunities in the military and we need to take them away?

Not sure what this would accomplish.

quote:
Now, that is exactly why we need to reexamine a draft.  The burden of fighting this war has largely fallen on working class men and women.  And I believe the prospect of a draft would curtail our military operations.

Again, you want a draft because you do not like war.  You do not want a draft because you think it will benefit the military.  It will not help us win the war.  It will not help the social fabric, the economy, or the well being of the nation.  By weakening the military, putting strain on the fabric of our society, and involuntarily sending young men and women to war you hope to accomplish your goal.

But so long as you get what you want...

- - - -

As for full disclosure?  I have 2 relatives, 3 friends, and 3 other classmates who are currently in some phase of deployment, just got back, or are preparing to go in to Iraq or Afghanistan.   I have a cousin at West Point (who could have gone to ANY college he wanted).  I know people involved with THIS war.  Involved by their own volition.  And none of them want to see a draft.  

Me?  I did ROTC and played soldier for a while.  The military was not the route I choose because I'm too damn sickly, too undisciplined, and too selfish to spend 4 years of my life getting shot at.  So I made a choice to do other things.

Respect the choice I made and the choices other people made.  If we NEED a draft to meet our military requirements as a nation I'll throw my name in the hat (and be rejected).  Until that happens, I'll let the professional soldiers handle it.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

The military was not the route I choose because I'm too damn sickly, too undisciplined, and too selfish to spend 4 years of my life getting shot at.  

The military can teach all but the most unreachable that a minimum level of discipline is easier than remaining undisciplined. You would have survived the military part. Can't speak to the prospect of bullets. I didn't care for that part either.  Someone in a job that doesn't like that job is still a less effective "employee".

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Quido, Canada is no longer accepting war objectors from the U.S.

I grew up in Lortondale surrounded by houses full of boys my age.  Not one of them served in Vietnam.  Vietnam was a completely discredited war that was fought by working class kids.  Middle and Upper Class men got deferrals or served in the National Guard.  You know, like Cheney and Bush.

In fact there is long history in the U.S. of our wars being fought by the working class with some exceptions like WWI and WWII.

Now, that is exactly why we need to reexamine a draft.  The burden of fighting this war has largely fallen on working class men and women.  And I believe the prospect of a draft would curtail our military operations.

Now, I have done you the courtesy being candid about my lack of military service.  I was up for the lottery in its last two years but was not called.  

When are you going to play fair and tell us what it is you don't want to reveal about your military service?

If you have followed my posts, I have already revealed my service. I was a medic and served for nearly 11 years.

As for the excuse for not serving, I have posted and reposted your post about your "walk the earth" during the Vietnam era and your opinion of military service. Here it is:

"Posted - 11/14/2007 :  12:39:32        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was a candidate for the draft back during Vietnam and the lottery. The last year of the lottery my number was close but I lucked out. Before the lottery most of the guys that went were working class. Middle and Upper class kids got out by going to college and that qualified for a deferral before the lottery.

Serving in the military struck me as being a lot like going to prison and if I had been drafted my plan was to go to Canada.

Before the war was over I made one of my famous cross country hitch hiking trips and I made friends with another hitch hiker, a military man who was AWOL. We got stuck in Salt Lake City and stayed there all day and most of a night before we were picked up by some old guys from Arkansas in a truck. The military man was one of those people you feel like you know very well right away. We talked and talked and talked. Before we split up outside of Tulsa, I took his name and number. I wrote him several times over the years and never got a response. I still think about this man and hope that things worked out for him. I've lost his address, can't even remember where he was from."

As for military deferrals, funny that you did not mention our VP-elect Joe Biden, Howard Dean, or Bill Clinton. Oh, and what branch of the military did Obama serve?

With all that said, I agree with you and Red Arrow that the draft is not a solution to our current military situation. I also agree with CF that Rangel is using the draft as a vehicle to push is anti-war position. Rangel should be focusing his attention more on his own tax issues, the cheat.

[cannon_fodder]

Red Arrow:

By undisciplined I mean that I question authority.  I understand my roll as a cog in most instances, but the very nature of that understanding would be harmful in a military roll.  The military wants people that think... but not people that question orders.

Not that I wouldn't be able to put up and shut up, but I wouldn't be a big fan of it.  Hence, I opted to not join the military.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Not that I wouldn't be able to put up and shut up, but I wouldn't be a big fan of it.  Hence, I opted to not join the military.

That was kind of my position except that I didn't have the option of not joining.  I was fortunate in that after boot camp and schools, I ended up in a mostly technical atmosphere. They didn't try to make your life miserable as long as you followed the basic rules. OK for 4 years but I didn't want a career there.  It's great for some, but not me.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Red Arrow:

By undisciplined I mean that I question authority.  I understand my roll as a cog in most instances, but the very nature of that understanding would be harmful in a military roll.  The military wants people that think... but not people that question orders.

Not that I wouldn't be able to put up and shut up, but I wouldn't be a big fan of it.  Hence, I opted to not join the military.

Not sure what put up and shut up means there, or "wants people that think... but not people that question orders."


I found the army experience I had to be fantastic in most respects when it comes to authority and such. No matter what your rank, if you spot someone doing something wrong, no matter what their rank, it was your duty to point that out and correct them. There was many a time when I looked a superior in the eye and said no, and told them what they were doing wrong. And they have no choice but to do the right thing because all the other people above them and below them would expect that everyone has to follow the right rules. The only catch may be that if you were a slacker and not perfect,,, then the person above you would find your mistakes and could make your life miserable lol. I just kept everything ship shape, followed the rules, dont act up or do stupid things, and did my job perfectly. Nobody could touch me.  I wish the rest of the world were that way lol. Where you run into problems is the screwups cant do or say anything because they would get it back. Plus you would be amazed at the number of people in the military who do stand by afraid to say anything. They can go out an kill people or be in harms way, but get them in a room with a bunch of their buddies and officers and they turn ito cowering lemmings afraid to speak up against another person or the group. And as those of you who know me would guess,,, I spoke up plenty lol. Sir! Permission to speak sir! (oooh nooo its that Franklin again) lol []

[cannon_fodder]

Let me simplify it for you Artist... have you ever known me to withhold an opinion even if stating it might be detrimental to my well being? The answer is no.  That doesn't go over well in the military, at least not from my experience.

I harbor no delusions about the military being a draconian sub culture or anything, it just wasn't for me.  I had enough contact to figure that out.  Add to it the fact that I had a kid at 19 and a host of other reason and it wasn't for me.  So I passed.

I did qualify as an expert marksmen my first time on base though (my ROTC did a week at Fort McCoy).  Man did that piss off a lot of the real infantrymen that some college boy on base playing army out shot them.  They showed me up by calling in artillery strikes later in the day (they don't let pretend army guys do that).  Good times, good times.

Anyway, anyone who chooses joins gains a notch of respect in my book.

[Hometown]

You know Cannon, I thought about what you said over the weekend.  Your post sort of slipped by me when I first saw it, but what you have said is quite remarkable.

"2) Wars are waged to improve or somehow advantage the nations that are fighting it. Would it be more advantageous for our nation to send engineers, doctors, industrialists, and intellectuals into combat than "common" workers?"

You are saying that the lives of common workers have less value to the nation that the lives of professionals.

Cannon, you are one cold piece of ice.  And you are wrong.  And your values are all messed up.  God may have to send you back to the bottom of the heap for a while so that you can find your heart.

All work has value.  Every life has value.  

I can't believe you actually said what you said.

[Gaspar]

Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grand-children are once more slaves. –  D. H. Lawrence (1885-1938), 1915

[cannon_fodder]

I was waiting for you to catch that.  I really hope this isn't the first time you have had to think this through.  From the Revolutionary War on (ever wonder why Franklin was in France for most of the war?  Or why most of the Founding Fathers didn't pick up a rifle?), to the Civil War (Welcome to the USA, here's your rifle / my slaves make the economy work, you go fight the war), to WWII (industrialists, engineers, etc.) to the extrapolation in Vietnam... America has always followed the guidelines I've laid out and the practice is not unique to the USA.

I am not saying a white collar life is more valuable than a blue collar life in a moral sense.  Really, it isn't even a blue collar/white collar thing.  It is a distinction of value to the nation - economically, socially, and militarily.

A man that puts lug nuts on cars for GM, an attorney who does business formation in Tulsa, or a graphics designer who makes web pages is not that vital to a nation.  An engineer, a physicist, a chemist, a business man who can run a factory, or a tool and die maker have far more value.  Some white collar jobs that seem odd are more valuable than you first think:  Attorneys are trained to draft, interpret and apply rules - the bureaucracy of the military needs many.  Accountants are needed to keep track of industry of war.  

Anyways, these are the basis for exemptions from the draft in WWII - things that are in short supply and necessary for the war effort.

The model lends itself to extrapolation.  In general blue collar workers are low skill positions that can be replaced relatively quickly.  A punch press operator, a riveter, someone to pour molds at the foundry, or the forklift driver to takes part around the factory can readily be replaced.  The white collar workers require years of schooling and more years of experience before they are capable of great worth.  Thus, the extrapolation to include exemptions for college. (clearly not all blue collar jobs are that way and indeed today many many blue collar jobs are high skill positions - try to train a welder or crane operator in less than a year)

It is an intrinsic value of education to our society and our nation.  An educated citizen is statistically worth more economically and potentially for a war effort.  It isn't a judgment of skill, intelligence, or personal merit - it is a cold, hard national calculation.

From a purely pragmatic perspective, it is more beneficial for a nation to send an unskilled worker off to die than a skilled worker.  It makes more sense to send single men off to die than married men who presumably can be producing the next generation.  Young men are more efficient fighters and present the military with a greater chance of success with a lesser cost (get more for less).  Men are stronger and more aggressive than women.

I'm not making judgments.  I'm saying how it is from a purely pragmatic standpoint (which requires generalizations).  And certainly war is the purvey of pragmatists.  IE. if either Robert Oppenheimer or I had to pick up a rifle in the opening years of WWII - sending Oppenheimer would be a stupid decision for the nation.  Without a way to make that call on an individual basis, generalizations were made en mass.

quote:You are saying that the lives of common workers have less value to the nation that the lives of professionals.

Cannon, you are one cold piece of ice. And you are wrong. And your values are all messed up. God may have to send you back to the bottom of the heap for a while so that you can find your heart.

All work has value. Every life has value.

I can't believe you actually said what you said.

The decision is cold.  Morally it is wrong.  All work has great value and all life has value.

I'm not arguing with you that it is a nice thing to do, I'm not even arguing that it is the correct decision, and I'm certainly not pretending like my life has any more value than anyone else.  I'm merely pointing out the pragmatic decisions that were made and inevitably will be made someday in the future. It makes more sense to send low-skilled people to fight our wars than our most skilled people from a purely pragmatic perspective.  

Please make an argument that makes it better for the nation as a whole to send engineers, chemists, physicists and industrialists to war.  Purge those people and just send everyone in with a rifle and millions more would have died in WWII.  Even from a moral perspective, the number of lives saved by the achievements of the "non-common workers" ultimately saved the lives of more common workers than would have been spared if the intellectuals had picked up a rifle.  

If you are assigning equal value to all life then the ability to save more life is the correct decision... still resulting in disparities.   The "everyone is equal" philosophy on life would have ended with the loss of more equal lives - cold hard fact is some people have the ability to contribute more in ways other than firing a rifle (I do not count myself among them, for the record).

Again, doesn't make the system fair by any means.  Just commenting on the practical merits of the system for the nation.  I'm sure I'm rambling because it is such a callous position to take - which is why I continually emphasize that it is only taken as a matter of national interest (my Orwellian comrades).

quote: God may have to send you back to the bottom of the heap for a while so that you can find your heart.

Come what may.

[shadows]

We love to beat the drums of war but we have been unable to win a war.  In the revolution war England's supply lines were too long so there was no victory only a settlement.  As one is aware the English burned the white house.  Jefferson, who was his stud, breeding his own female slaves, making him one of our largest slave dealers, Under a British death warrant, he fled to France with black Sally to help over throw the house of Bourbon by Napoleon who failed in his conquest of Russia.  The war-between the two nations of the northern and southern united states fought over economy reasons, was the most costly of any war in lives lost. We fought the Spanish mini war (Mexico) loosing it. (remember the Alamo built by the
Spanish)  We invaded Canada and lost. We entered into WW1 then WW11 with a fresh army after Europe had been defeated by Germany,   We lost the war in Korea, Nam, along with Iraq and the mid-east years after we were told we had won.  Now we hear the rumble of a draft after we have dispensed the Nation Guard and are running out of soldiers.

We should find the drawings of the Great Wall Of China and start getting the supplies lined up to build one around this country.

But with Russia having 50 nuclear warheads and programming to build 70 more such rockets, it may be time to build the cities underground.

It is time to cut the heads out of the drums of war and see if we can find a hundred years of peace.