Draft -- Would you go?

Why Bringing Back the Draft Makes No Sense

Source: http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/why-bringing-back-the-draft-makes-no-sense

About the author: Don Gomez is an old enlisted infantryman and a new infantry officer in the US Army. He has an MA in Near and Middle Eastern Studies from the School of Oriental and African Studies

Hear, Hear!

 

Warrant officer I'm guessing.

What did you fly? UH-60?

 

Warrant Officer, yes.

OH-58D's.
Later to be armed as the Kiowa Warrior.
Fun little gunship to operate.

The *new* Army wishes to (*)(*)(*)(*)-can all the Kiowa Warriors and put them into the shredder.

 

Thank you for your service to our country!

 

I've seen lots of those. Based on the Bell Jet ranger. I respect helicopter pilots. Takes real skill to coordinate the collective, cyclic and tail rotor pedals; yet you all make it look smooth as silk.

 

But you don't mind if other people go to war while you sit at home posting nonsense on this forum. How convenient for you.

 

I'll be blunt.
The majority of people supporting a draft would (*)(*)(*)(*) their pants if they got one of these in the mail, or the modern equivalent.



Those who partake in the profession of military arms, need to do so with full acknowledgment and acceptance of the risks...including deployment to conflicts they may or may not personally support. It is not a cafeteria plan...you don't choose a "noble" war over an ignoble one...you go where you are told to go.

The only scenario I can envision wherein a draft would need to be reinstated is one where the nation itself is at risk and the fight is for the very survival of said nation.

This notion of "shared burden"..or punishing a "class" perceived as not doing their fair share...is mythos and fantasy...you don't subject a young person to having to kill for their very survival and placing them in harm's way out of some sort of warped perception of "revenge."

The military prefers it's service members of the highest caliber, it prefers to be choosey...it prefers an all-voluntary system.

 

There are plenty of uses for these people. Clearing minefields, sniper bait, human shields for the enemy to waste ammo on, doing laundry, tripping booby traps, etc. It's just a matter of creativity.

 

He avoided a draft call by going overseas as I recall.

 

No it hasn't stopped them before, but with the true 1% doing all the war fighting while the rest of the country sits around oblivious or worse apathetic,, politicians will war monger unchecked till the cows come home. Vietnam use to be our longest war at seven years, and the draft had allot to do with mounting pressure to end it. In a couple years, we will have been in Afghanistan almost double the years of Vietnam, and as long as kids keep rasing their right hands while the public sits around and doesn't shed a drop of blood or ounce of sweat, we can see forever wars as long as we live..

 

If supporting the draft should one be instituted is what you call supporting slavery then so be it. The chicken livered cowards and traitors who dodge the draft should leave the country and stay gone if that is how they feel.

 

Do you remember LTC Shaffer?

 

I suspect that several on this forum definitely would.

So true.

 

The last thing I would ever want to do would be to go to war with a bunch of draftees.

 

Why? The government shouldn't have the power to send the unwilling to war to begin with. If we can't get enough people to fight a war then clearly we are in the wrong war. It has nothing to do with cowardice; there will always be enough willing to fight if they see the cause as just.

 

How could America have decided to sit out a war when it had been declared against you? You had no choice but to fight.

 

That's stupid. My family knows a few multimillionaires who came from nothing. Entreprenuers, engineers etc. Australia has many rich people and they all descend from people considered worthless by the king of England. Even people who have defined American culture came from poor families, like Elvis Presley, Bill Clinton, Johnny Cash etc. Secondy, most good looking women come from the middle and lower class of whites who will do the fighting. Look at our soldiers, most of them are blonde blue eyed patriotic Aryan boys of good stock.

 

Since when do matters of principle translate into cowardice? Seems to me that fighting and dying for the games politicians play (you don't see them picking up a gun, do you?) among themselves is the height of stupidity. If you want to be a pawn, be my guest.

 

More than one million Canadians and Newfoundlanders ( Newfoundland was a separate British entry) served in the Second World War.

 

I was raised the way Colin Powell was.

When your country call, you do your duty.

In this scenario (and in the last real case), I'd pray that the fools who sent me don't get me killed.

Depending on my exprience, I'd come home and campaign against the war, drawing strength from the fact that I had served.

 

Is it your 'duty' to fight in stupid, pointless and unwinnable wars in countries thousands of miles away, which never threatened or attacked you? That has been the case in every single action America has involved itself in since WW2. I really need to hear the reasoning behind this.
If someone hits me, I hit back. If someone calls me names or has a different ideological point of view I figure it's their problem, not mine, and walk away. How about you?

 

Ignorant bragging based on historical ignorance!! America didn't save anyone. We won the Pacific part of the war, but before we got involved, Japan was more worried about their campaign in Asia than involving themselves in Europe. The European war was a collaborative effort, but if one country "won" the war, it was the Soviet Union and NOT us. During 1944-1945 80% of German troops were committed to the Eastern front. The Soviets had already started driving the Germans back before America even entered the European war. They had the Germans totally on the run before America invaded France. The Russians conquered Berlin, not us. The best you can say is that Soviet military power and American capital won the war in Europe. However, the Germans would have lost eventually without us anyways, it would have just taken more time.

 

The military swears an oath to the Constitution and protects people in this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. One of the most cherished ideals to preserve in protecting this nation is liberty. Is it truly representing liberty to tell people to leave the country?

 

They do not annex territory, which is what I suppose you mean. They ABSOLUTELY do expand though. Call it neo-imperialism if you want then, it makes no difference. The US invades countries as it pleases, has bases across the globe, has naval control of most strategically important waterways, etc. Old school colonialism is no longer politically viable in the world, so instead we allow countries to maintain domestic sovereignty, while they have political systems meant to benefit and be open to American capital and foreign policies wholly dependent on the US. Kuwait hasn't been annexed, but we are act as their de facto military, control their waterways, etc. The same is true of Qatar and most other Gulf countries. Saudi Arabia has huge amounts of money, and a barely functional military. Why? Because we control the entire area militarily. What do you call it when another country controls an area militarily and benefits from their economic actions? Most old school imperialists didn't control directly either. We just have to control even more indirectly than say the British did in the past, but the practical differences aren't all that significant.

 

If they want an overweight 55 year old I am there!!