On Reinstating The Draft

[Modbert]

regardless of when it was implemented, it is still ominous.

Don't get me wrong, it quite is.

Reminds me of Rex 84.

 

[michiganFats]

Rich kids aren't going to serve unless they want to, no matter what you do. Anyone who's served in Korea knows about the KATUSA's, we'd just have our American version. If we ever do require some sort of service, I'd rather see that service completed in the Guard, not in the Active Forces.

You may want to read this first: I been trying to note what was talked about yesterday as Rod reflects the meeting. Both this guy that spoke and his brother have served in the Guard.

Another issue that was brought up at the meeting yesterday was the status of our military.

A young man there speaking on behalf of his brother who is serving in Afghanistan on a third term of service through the Guard. In service to our country they have lost homes, farms, property, wives, family, children, buddies and friends.

"He gets home he thinks he is all done with his service after three stints only to find out he's been transferred out of state for service in the Guard to another state where he will be rotated back overseas".

Home family job security. Everybody else wants this and our military wants the same. They serve and others benefit. Yet on some of these sites schmucks want to take away more from our military. This should be stopped immediately by both parties on both sides of the aisle.

If we can't support our military, then don't expect them to support us.

The Guard from one state transferred to another state for more service overseas.

I didn't mean to suggest that Guard service would somehow keep people from being deployed. All I meant to say was that my personal preference is for a larger Guard component and a much smaller active Army component.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Much has been made by the new administration of the idea of national service and volunteerism. While service to one’s community is certainly admirable, it is not the federal government’s place to “encourage” or promote volunteerism. Moreover, there are troubling signs that national service could transition from voluntary to mandatory, or de facto mandatory, such as the requirement of service in order to be granted a diploma, or something along those lines.

Involuntary servitude was supposed to be abolished by the 13th Amendment, but things like Selective Service and the income tax make me wonder how serious we really are in defending just basic freedom. The income tax enslaves workers for nearly 4 months out of a year by garnishing what amounts to all their wages in that period of time. A military draft could demand your very life, without your consent. This should be unthinkable in a free society.

Congressman Ron Paul - On Reinstating the Draft - Texas Straight Talk

Nonsense. The country has EVERY right to raise an armed force by whatever means needed. We have had a draft throughout most of modern history (since the Civil War). Only our bad taste from Vietnam turned us away from it.

So far we haven't really needed it, however, had that idiot Rumsfeld figured out we did not have a force nearly adequate enough the secure Iraq (needed roughly 750,000-800,000 or so) to get that job done, to do it right would have required a draft.

There was a time when every young man's right of passage into adulthood included a two year stint in the Armed forces. Right now fewer than 4% of the population has served. It used to run in the 20's. About 40% of all males. Meaning almost half of America's young men served in the armed forces. Time to bring those times back as far as I'm concerned. All we have today is a pack of 20-something spoiled brats who feel entitled to a comfortable life in America. I'd make every last one of you serve for two years or face 20 years in prison.

 

[Zoomie1980]

By gather you mean force people to join or face jail time if not worse?

I agree with Charles, a volunteer Professional army is the best army.

Slavery - work done under harsh conditions for little or no pay. Never mind many people would be FORCED into doing this.

So yes, by definition it is slavery.

they weren't discussing what was "best". They were purporting to assert what was legal.

I personally think there should ONLY be a volunteer army for many reasons.

But that wasn't the conversation.

slavery...work for no pay, with no time limit.

there has never been a government in history that didn't reserve the right to draft people.

I agree it is not slavery, but it is certainly a form of indentured servitude. The pay sucks, and you can't quit.

I'd make some kind of national service COMPULSORY to retain citizenship. IF not military service then some kind of mandatory, selfless, national service in order to EARN your stripes as a citizen. Gov't has every right to draft you any time it needs to and you should go HAPPILY, embracing the opportunity to defend your way of life. And if you don't like it, we'd send you to N. Korea to enjoy life in the last remaining workers paradise.....

 

[Modbert]

I'd make some kind of national service COMPULSORY to retain citizenship. IF not military service then some kind of mandatory, selfless, national service in order to EARN your stripes as a citizen. Gov't has every right to draft you any time it needs to and you should go HAPPILY, embracing the opportunity to defend your way of life. And if you don't like it, we'd send you to N. Korea to enjoy life in the last remaining workers paradise.....

No offense Zoomie but you sound like a dictator. So not only do people have to go and risk their lives in wars they may disagree with but happily?

How exactly are we defending our way of life in Iraq? The same thing with Vietnam?

World War II was one thing, as was Korea in the 50's.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

this civilian security force is frightening. It just sounds like the Gestapo.

Won't have to worry about that. We already have a military unit patrolling the U.S. streets. (All of that happened before the election).

Really? Where?

 

[Modbert]

Really? Where?

Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1 - Army News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Army Times

Again, look up Rex 84. We live in interesting times to say the least.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

they weren't discussing what was "best". They were purporting to assert what was legal.

I personally think there should ONLY be a volunteer army for many reasons.

But that wasn't the conversation.

slavery...work for no pay, with no time limit.

there has never been a government in history that didn't reserve the right to draft people.

I agree it is not slavery, but it is certainly a form of indentured servitude. The pay sucks, and you can't quit.

I'd make some kind of national service COMPULSORY to retain citizenship. IF not military service then some kind of mandatory, selfless, national service in order to EARN your stripes as a citizen. Gov't has every right to draft you any time it needs to and you should go HAPPILY, embracing the opportunity to defend your way of life. And if you don't like it, we'd send you to N. Korea to enjoy life in the last remaining workers paradise.....

Once again for the slow, there is no authority for the national Government to draft anyone for anything EXCEPT military service. READ the Constitution.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Really? Where?

Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1 - Army News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Army Times

Again, look up Rex 84. We live in interesting times to say the least.

You may want to actually read that article, they are ON CALL, they are not patrolling anything. They are there in case of National emergency. Another dumb claim by you.

 

[Modbert]

You may want to actually read that article, they are ON CALL, they are not patrolling anything. They are there in case of National emergency. Another dumb claim by you.

So I worded it wrong. My point is, this is a first ever and something is wrong with this picture.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You may want to actually read that article, they are ON CALL, they are not patrolling anything. They are there in case of National emergency. Another dumb claim by you.

So I worded it wrong. My point is, this is a first ever and something is wrong with this picture.

Not at all, the MILITARY is responsible in case of invasion , insurrection or TERROR attacks. As Katrina proved they are also needed for natural disasters. It makes perfect sense to have a unit or more permanently on call if needed.

They are violating no provision of the Constitution or US law. They are not "patrolling" as you claimed, they are ON CALL if needed, training for numerous potential missions, as the military does.

It ensures that if a Katrina happens again a full Brigade is available to help the State or States that need the extra man power. They are available in case a terror attack occurs as well, 9/11 showed us very large attacks can and do happen.

They can only be deployed under specific guidelines and with in the frame work of our laws.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Much has been made by the new administration of the idea of national service and volunteerism. While service to one’s community is certainly admirable, it is not the federal government’s place to “encourage” or promote volunteerism. Moreover, there are troubling signs that national service could transition from voluntary to mandatory, or de facto mandatory, such as the requirement of service in order to be granted a diploma, or something along those lines.

Involuntary servitude was supposed to be abolished by the 13th Amendment, but things like Selective Service and the income tax make me wonder how serious we really are in defending just basic freedom. The income tax enslaves workers for nearly 4 months out of a year by garnishing what amounts to all their wages in that period of time. A military draft could demand your very life, without your consent. This should be unthinkable in a free society.

Congressman Ron Paul - On Reinstating the Draft - Texas Straight Talk

Nonsense. The country has EVERY right to raise an armed force by whatever means needed. We have had a draft throughout most of modern history (since the Civil War). Only our bad taste from Vietnam turned us away from it.

So far we haven't really needed it, however, had that idiot Rumsfeld figured out we did not have a force nearly adequate enough the secure Iraq (needed roughly 750,000-800,000 or so) to get that job done, to do it right would have required a draft.

There was a time when every young man's right of passage into adulthood included a two year stint in the Armed forces. Right now fewer than 4% of the population has served. It used to run in the 20's. About 40% of all males. Meaning almost half of America's young men served in the armed forces. Time to bring those times back as far as I'm concerned. All we have today is a pack of 20-something spoiled brats who feel entitled to a comfortable life in America. I'd make every last one of you serve for two years or face 20 years in prison.

No, the government has no right to force anyone to die for their wars. It goes against the very concept of liberty and freedom to force somebody into the military against their will.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Congressman Ron Paul - On Reinstating the Draft - Texas Straight Talk

Nonsense. The country has EVERY right to raise an armed force by whatever means needed. We have had a draft throughout most of modern history (since the Civil War). Only our bad taste from Vietnam turned us away from it.

So far we haven't really needed it, however, had that idiot Rumsfeld figured out we did not have a force nearly adequate enough the secure Iraq (needed roughly 750,000-800,000 or so) to get that job done, to do it right would have required a draft.

There was a time when every young man's right of passage into adulthood included a two year stint in the Armed forces. Right now fewer than 4% of the population has served. It used to run in the 20's. About 40% of all males. Meaning almost half of America's young men served in the armed forces. Time to bring those times back as far as I'm concerned. All we have today is a pack of 20-something spoiled brats who feel entitled to a comfortable life in America. I'd make every last one of you serve for two years or face 20 years in prison.

No, the government has no right to force anyone to die for their wars. It goes against the very concept of liberty and freedom to force somebody into the military against their will.

I suggest you read the Constitution again. The Federal Government can call up the Militia for numerous reasons. Since States no longer maintain militias that means they can conduct a draft of suitably aged persons for military duty. EVERY citizen is subject to be called to duty.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Nonsense. The country has EVERY right to raise an armed force by whatever means needed. We have had a draft throughout most of modern history (since the Civil War). Only our bad taste from Vietnam turned us away from it.

So far we haven't really needed it, however, had that idiot Rumsfeld figured out we did not have a force nearly adequate enough the secure Iraq (needed roughly 750,000-800,000 or so) to get that job done, to do it right would have required a draft.

There was a time when every young man's right of passage into adulthood included a two year stint in the Armed forces. Right now fewer than 4% of the population has served. It used to run in the 20's. About 40% of all males. Meaning almost half of America's young men served in the armed forces. Time to bring those times back as far as I'm concerned. All we have today is a pack of 20-something spoiled brats who feel entitled to a comfortable life in America. I'd make every last one of you serve for two years or face 20 years in prison.

No, the government has no right to force anyone to die for their wars. It goes against the very concept of liberty and freedom to force somebody into the military against their will.

I suggest you read the Constitution again. The Federal Government can call up the Militia for numerous reasons. Since States no longer maintain militias that means they can conduct a draft of suitably aged persons for military duty. EVERY citizen is subject to be called to duty.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that because Congress is authorized to call up the militia that they can draft people because there is no longer a militia. That being said, the Constitution also permitted slavery until the 13th amendment was passed.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." - 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

So, even if what you say is true the 13th amendment would then overrule it, because the draft is nothing short of involuntary servitude. The federal government does not own us, and cannot force us to fight and die on its behalf.

"Conscription rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state. If we buy that assumption then it is for the state — not for parents, the community, the religious institutions or teachers — to decide who shall have what values and who shall do what work, when, where and how in our society. That assumption isn’t a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea. America was founded on the principle of individual liberty — that the government exists to serve, not enslave, the people. Yet conscription is a form of slavery, a horrible and costly exception to America’s founding principle. It is morally repugnant to the ideals of a free society." - President Ronald Reagan

"A compulsory draft is... far more typical of totalitarian nations than of democratic nations. The theory behind it leads directly to totalitarianism. It is absolutely opposed to the ideas of individual liberty which have always been considered a part of American democracy." -Senator Robert A. Taft

 

[RetiredGySgt]

For the truly slow and stupid. The State Militias were EVERY able bodied man over a set age until a set age. EVERY SINGLE one. That was not slavery and still is not. The Federal Government has the authority to call up as much of the ABLE BODIED population as it feels it needs for many reasons. Once again learn to read and comprehend. It is a duty that every able bodied person has a responsibility to preform if called. The only exception is consciences objectors.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

For the truly slow and stupid. The State Militias were EVERY able bodied man over a set age until a set age. EVERY SINGLE one. That was not slavery and still is not. The Federal Government has the authority to call up as much of the ABLE BODIED population as it feels it needs for many reasons. Once again learn to read and comprehend. It is a duty that every able bodied person has a responsibility to preform if called. The only exception is consciences objectors.

Well I don't think this was directed at me, but on the off-chance that it was I'll respond.

I comprehended everything you said. You said the Constitution allowed the federal government to draft people because they were able to call up the militias of old. I said that even if that were true, which is a still a stretch in my opinion, then the 13th amendment changed that. It states quite clearly that involuntary servitude is prohibited. The very point of the draft is because there aren't enough volunteers, therefore it's involuntary servitude. The 13th amendment made it so that the government does not own our lives and is not able to throw them away fighting their wars.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

For the truly slow and stupid. The State Militias were EVERY able bodied man over a set age until a set age. EVERY SINGLE one. That was not slavery and still is not. The Federal Government has the authority to call up as much of the ABLE BODIED population as it feels it needs for many reasons. Once again learn to read and comprehend. It is a duty that every able bodied person has a responsibility to preform if called. The only exception is consciences objectors.

Well I don't think this was directed at me, but on the off-chance that it was I'll respond.

I comprehended everything you said. You said the Constitution allowed the federal government to draft people because they were able to call up the militias of old. I said that even if that were true, which is a still a stretch in my opinion, then the 13th amendment changed that. It states quite clearly that involuntary servitude is prohibited. The very point of the draft is because there aren't enough volunteers, therefore it's involuntary servitude. The 13th amendment made it so that the government does not own our lives and is not able to throw them away fighting their wars.

False assumptions. Being drafted is not indentured servitude.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

For the truly slow and stupid. The State Militias were EVERY able bodied man over a set age until a set age. EVERY SINGLE one. That was not slavery and still is not. The Federal Government has the authority to call up as much of the ABLE BODIED population as it feels it needs for many reasons. Once again learn to read and comprehend. It is a duty that every able bodied person has a responsibility to preform if called. The only exception is consciences objectors.

Well I don't think this was directed at me, but on the off-chance that it was I'll respond.

I comprehended everything you said. You said the Constitution allowed the federal government to draft people because they were able to call up the militias of old. I said that even if that were true, which is a still a stretch in my opinion, then the 13th amendment changed that. It states quite clearly that involuntary servitude is prohibited. The very point of the draft is because there aren't enough volunteers, therefore it's involuntary servitude. The 13th amendment made it so that the government does not own our lives and is not able to throw them away fighting their wars.

False assumptions. Being drafted is not indentured servitude.

Well if the government is forcing me to join the army, and I don't want to, that certainly sounds like I'd be serving involuntarily.

 

[Toome]

First post, folks, so be gentle

I'm a retired Army officer. I don't think a draft is a good idea. The advantage of an all-volunteer military is that they want to be there. Their reasons may vary; their motivations may vary; but the one thing they all have in common is voluntarily joining the military. Morale tends to be higher than with a draft or conscripted force. Just take a look at the old Soviet military: it may have been a massive military force, but morale was poor as proven in Afghanistan during the 80's.

Rather than pouring more manpower into Iraq, Afghanistan or any other place, the Pentagon needs to take a good look at streamlining tactics. This type of warfare isn't won by putting more boots on the ground; it's won by deploying forces at the right place and at the right time for maximum results.

I fear that until senior officers at the Pentagon break the traditional warfare mindset, we're doomed to repeat the same mistakes we made over 30 years ago in a place called Vietnam.