World War III Proponent McCain Says It Will Take ‘All-Out World War III’ To Re-Institute A Military Draft (Updated)
World War III Proponent McCain Says It Will Take ‘All-Out World War III’ To Re-Institute A Military Draft (Updated)
During a “tele-townhall meeting” last evening, John McCain was asked by a mother of two sons if he believes the nation will one day re-institute the military draft. It would take an “all-out World War III” to make that happen, McCain responded.
Indeed, if that’s true, then a military draft may indeed be a possibility. McCain himself has suggested we are in a “World War III” confrontation with Iran.
In July 2006, McCain appeared on CNN’s Larry King Live, where he was asked to respond to this quote from Newt Gingrich: “We’re in the early stages of what I would describe as the Third World War and, frankly, our bureaucracies aren’t responding fast enough. … You’d have to say to yourself this is in fact World War III. ” Here’s how McCain reacted to that quote:
KING: Senator McCain, do you agree?
MCCAIN: I do to some extent. I think it’s important to recognize that we have terrorist organizations which — who are dangerous by themselves, are now being supported by radical Islamic governments, i.e., the Iranians, which makes them incredibly more dangerous because they are trained, equipped, motivated and assisted in every way by the Iranians.
Last October, President Bush himself warned of a coming “World War III” with Iran. “I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III,” said the President. “It seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.”
UPDATE: Asked about the military draft during a September 29, 2007 townhall in Epping, New Hampshire, McCain said, “I might consider it, I don’t think it’s necessary, but I might consider it if you could design a draft where everybody equally could serve.” Watch it:
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
And the drum continues to beat for the GOPig party of war, death, and murder.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:39 amWill the Moussad & the Israeli warhawks goad Bush into bombing Iran? It sure looks like that’s what’s unfolding in front of our very eyes.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:49 amCorporate & military interests have a strong incentive for this to occur. A ‘new’ war always brings lucrative contracts and windfall profits to these entities. Their interests are not ours. Deaths among those sent to fight for corporate interests are negligible to corporate bottom lines.
Why is the USA Israel’s ‘nanny’?
It’s time to call a spade a spade here. Israel’s warhawks should not determine US foreign policy.
John McCain III
World War III
Coincidence?
June 25th, 2008 at 9:49 amHow many times does it have to repeat before people get the blatant fact that:
Republican ALWAYS bring war and economic problems, ALWAYS.
Especially now that the party has been taken over by far-right-wing radical fascists.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:50 amThat young mother of “Alex” is right to start worrying.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:53 amThe warmongers are feeling an increased blood lust.
And this is exactly why I’m raising my son as a Quaker. No, GOP, you won’t get him for your deadly game of “Risk”.
PEACE
June 25th, 2008 at 9:53 ami have just one problem with this story: when we quote the president saying it, we all know he’s saying “nucular,” so why not spell it that way?
June 25th, 2008 at 9:57 amhaha, bacrackerocarter trying to scare US!
hahahahahaha
That’s hilarious, being that you are one of the biggest chickenhawk sissies to ever post here
Bush called, said his balls are getting cold, wants you to climb back under his cheerleading skirt and keep them warm with your chin
You are such a pathetic little coward, you do not belong in the land of the free and home of the brave.
just another Typical Republican Coward
June 25th, 2008 at 9:58 amJohn McCain is NO Hero. He violated the military Code of Conduct and willfully collaborated with the Vietnamese, Soviets, and Cubans.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:58 am“World War III proponent McCain says it will take ‘all-out World War III’ to re-institute a military draft”
________________________________________________________
And McBomb is doing everything he can to make that happen, apparently…
I weep for this country if he is elected.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:58 amI really hope Dodd & Feingold filibuster.
Since the ‘Newt revolution’ in the early 90’s, all we’ve heard from Repukes is threats on filibuster, regardless of the issue.
Those two filibustering in the Senate would gain the Planet’s attention. The Telcom fiasco would be in every newscast, & Bushits are running out of excuses.
Illegal spying on American citizens is treasonous behavior, plain & simple, no matter how you package it.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:00 amNice move guys. Warn the public that we may be experiencing World War III and if so, we will re institute the draft and take your children. That’s going to play well in Peoria….NOT.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:00 amOur pet troll fails to realize that, in view of what the GOP has “accomplished” over the last 7+ years, it’s perfectly reasonable to be “afraid” of McCain and all things Republican. In fact, I’m bloody terrified of four more years of GOP rule.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:01 amJOHN MCCAIN AS POW IN VIETNAM: HERO OR ZERO?
JOHN MCCAIN’S EXPERIENCE AS A POW
The other day, a Vietnamese friend of mine told me that a person she knew in Hanoi who had been a translator at the infamous “Hanoi Hilton” was present at interrogations with John McCain. She said she was told that he was very cooperative, hardly the image that has been cultivated over the years. She asked if I thought she should say anything and I counseled her not to since the person was unlikely to go on the record, and the discussion can’t be confirmed, and besides, I don’t like the politics of character assassination.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:01 ambacrackerocarter doesn’t realize that terrorism only works on the terrified.
take it home, chickenhawk, we’re not the types to respond to empty threats like you right-wing sissies do (here’s a hint: we think rather than react)
June 25th, 2008 at 10:03 amZimzone Says:
Why is the USA Israel’s ‘nanny’?
That is a question I have been asking for a very long time now and have never received an answer. Israel is perfectly capable of defending themselves. They have an Army and they have nuclear weapons. If Iran were to attack Israel, unprovoked, I would support our country going to their aid. Otherwise, I say stay out of it and let them fight their own battles. If they want to start a fight, then let them fight it out. We should not go to defend them if they are the aggressors.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:03 amHey John, just exactly who will be starting this WWIII that you speak of??
June 25th, 2008 at 10:03 amMarie Says:
That young mother of “Alex” is right to start worrying.
The warmongers are feeling an increased blood lust.
Have you seen the right wing’s reaction to that ad? They are saying it is a bogus ad because “Alex” won’t be old enough to be drafted during Bush’s tenure in office. I guess they are forgetting that Bush wants our presence in Iraq for 100 years.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:04 amThe thing that’s most interesting to me is that John McCain is his own worst enemy - constantly saying things to make the American people want to vote for his opponent.
He knows, because it’s been blatantly obvious for years, that the American people don’t want war, and yet he seems obsessed with waging it, and then talking about his obsession.
John McCain is really helping to defeat John McCain. Cool.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:05 ambarackocarter Says:
“Boo” — are you under your beds yet?
It will have to get out from under it’s bed before any of us could fit under there. But, then, we don’t feel the need to hide under the bed and to turn a blind eye to the problems that are happening in this country.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:06 amBilbo,
The ad is apparently very effective because it has the rightwingers’ knickers in a twist. They really hate it and decry it at every opportunity.
Repugnicans just love war - it is great for the profiteers.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:10 amIf a few young people get killed — oh well, fewer Americans simply means more of America for them.
unbelievable, it is odd isn’t it? I’m begging to think Obama’s best campaign strategy would be to simply keep repeating: “listen to this guy. Do you want someone who says that to be your President?”
Of course, that assumes that McCain can’t find a way to lose his “presumptive nomination”. Wouldn’t it be fun if he costs himself the nomination while running, essentially, unopposed?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:12 amGotta love that photo of John McCain. Looks like he’s playing rock, paper, scissors with himself… And losing.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:12 amThis country is indeed of another reich-wing GOPig president. After 8 years of failures and destruction of herr dubyah, a 23% approval rating, and a complete failed GOPig administration, the reich-wing will be a permanent minority.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:13 amThe double standard of reporting on McCain vs. Obama is becoming more and more apparent.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:13 amObama has to defend his every word clearly and without ambiguity, denounce everyone he ever met - repeatedly - while McCain makes outrageous comments, has lunatics on his campaign staff and that seems to be OK with the press.
After all, he was a POW - he’s just fine. /sarcasm :(
Take a moment to read Dr. Matt’s link in post #10.
It really does describe the McCain we all see in the Senate and now on the campaign trail.
Thanks, Dr. Matt. I was waiting to read the truth about Mr. Flip Flop; know I realize that he’s very similar to W. It also looks like he’s guilty of collusion with the enemy. Some ‘hero’.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:13 amThis country is indeed *fearful* of another reich-wing GOPig president. After 8 years of failures and destruction of herr dubyah, a 23% approval rating, and a complete failed GOPig administration, the reich-wing will be a permanent minority.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:14 amYou smell that? That is crap-o-carter and the smell of republiscum desperation.
I wonder what trolls will do after the election?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:15 amWhat McCain is really saying is that it would take an actual threat to reinstate the draft. In the mean time, wars of choice fought by private armies are great for the bottom lines of his supporters.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:15 am5. Barackocarter -
Of course, you are using the distinction that Nam and Korea were not wars. But we drafted then also. It would be more accurate to say that of military actions, the draft has been a WWII and after phenomenon.
If we drafted for Nam and we’re stop lossing in Iraq, just to have folks to man the guns means we’re gonna have to get folks from somewhere.
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran…..
June 25th, 2008 at 10:15 amMy pleasure. Pass the word. Copy and paste over and over.
Here are 42 other issues of which McGrampa has flip-flopped on.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:16 amThe photo says it all - a terrorist fist pump.
Johnny is a terrorist.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:16 ambrackometer says:
McCain’s comments were clear that of all the Wars in which we had a draft, only WWII necessitated a draft.
Exactly how was it clear that we didn’t need a draft in Vietnam? Ya really think we would have gotten all those troops to go there without a draft?
What are you smoking so early in the morning, anyway?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:17 amMy retard translator is broken. Does anyone else have their installed and operating?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:18 ampete Says: Of course, that assumes that McCain can’t find a way to lose his “presumptive nomination”. Wouldn’t it be fun if he costs himself the nomination while running, essentially, unopposed?
That would be hilarious.
Sad that he was their ‘best choice’, and they still aren’t happy with him. I know very few Republicans who are going to vote for him, and I live in Georgia. The ones who are voting for McCain are batsh*t insane like my younger brother who is just like Bill O’Reilly and numerous trolls here.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:18 amMore proof that you are complete and utter piece of sh*t moron. There was a draft in Vietnam, you stupid arsehole.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:20 amWait! Didn’t Newt rename the Cold War to World War III, and the ‘GWOT’ to World War IV? So McCain must be talking about World War V?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:21 amrogerse(rogerdo,rogerdrunk) Says:
A draft would require a wwIII scenarion, one which he has not advocated, and only gave a much less drastic responce when he was suggestively asked if he agreed with the wwIII idea.
Way, way, WAY too early to be hitting the sauce, my friend.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:22 amDr. Hussein Matt Says:
racist_rogerse Says:
My retard translator is broken. Does anyone else have their installed and operating?
He is trying to warm up his cut-and-paste machine. It goes into Sleep mode, just like his addled brain does, overnight.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:22 amracist_rogerse is probably looking for a WWIII quote made by Al Gore in 1988.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:25 amflagged, dumb*ss, when will you learn?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:25 amunbelievable Says:
Gotta love that photo of John McCain. Looks like he’s playing rock, paper, scissors with himself… And losing.
I was going with the mental training of “I think I can be president, I think I can be president”.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:26 amBut, by gawd, he looks like the walking dead in that photo. I dispense med to assisted living residents that look healthier than that!
I need to fill my cupboard with some food but I’m all out of ‘consumer confidence’…I spent it all for gas.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:27 ambarackocarter Says:
MissMolly. Make sure you flag DrMatt for Spam, cut and paste without original commentary. That is your standard, isn’t it? Or is it a double standard?
More American families are stuck eating Spam for breakfast-lunch-dinner, made possible by the neonut economic policies you support, exacerbated by the ongoing invasion in Iraq and the saber-rattling towards Iran.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:27 amWho should we be more afraid of, the “folks over there that hate our freedom” or the guy two years short of wearing Depends with his finger on the button? The only attack on our soil still has not been properly investigated, in the mean time over 4000 of our bravest have lost their lives. You tell me.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:29 amWe’ll know once you start posting a trace of English, rogerse. You’re leaving every linguist in the country baffled.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:31 amBrackometer - But your comment showed you agreed with McDepends on the draft comment, right?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:31 amDRxJ Says: But, by gawd, he looks like the walking dead in that photo. I dispense med to assisted living residents that look healthier than that!
Every President ages significantly after serving a term. Can you imagine what McCain would look/be like after 4 years of that kind of stress?
For his own good, no one should vote for John McCain.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:31 amNo, the point is that you’re an idiot and you proved that to everyone, moron. Only an idiot would post something as obtuse as: only WWII necessitated a draft. It’s PROOF that you are an idiot because you have no grasp of simple facts and reality.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:33 amRogerse thinks he has an ounce of clout around here to report regulars.
The trolls look so manly when they use the ‘bold’ feature.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:33 amTry to keep up, moran [sic], Rangel isn’t running for president. You’re really having a tough morning keeping up.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:35 ambarackocarter Says:
The point was not that there “was a draft in Vietnam” moron. The point was that McCain did not believe that the draft was “necessary” for Vietnam.Please try to keep up.
Okay, you lost me. Inform us how the draft was NOT necessary during the Vietnam war. I believe there are families of thousand upon thousands of names on a black wall that may not agree with you.
OH, and please try to keep me up!
June 25th, 2008 at 10:35 amNot according to you. According to you, “only WWII necessitated a draft.”
June 25th, 2008 at 10:36 ambarackocarter Says
June 25th, 2008 at 9:52 am
McCain’s comments were clear that of all the Wars in which we had a draft, only WWII necessitated a draft. […] McCain is not in favor of a draft.
___________________________________________________
I suspect that if McCain wasn’t a warmonger, his comments would probably have been taken at face value by everyone. The idea of WWIII would be preposterous, so therefore, no draft. It would be as if he had said something along the lines of “it would take pigs to fly to reinstate the draft.”
However, because McCain has been pretty clear about his wishes to remain in Iraq long-term, invade Iran, and even invade Syria or any other ME country that Israel wants us to, it doesn’t take a genius to see that his comments about requiring “a World War III” could be prophetic. With this scenario, thinking people won’t necessarily assume McCain means “no draft” — he could just as easily mean “I’ll reinstate the draft once I get WWIII rolling.”
Oh, and just FYI — when you cite sources like the Weekly Standard to bolster your arguments, you aren’t swaying the opinions of many here. Try some MSM sources instead of always using wingnut blogs.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:37 ambarackocarter Says:
Oh, and by the way:
The draft in WWII was under a Democratic President.
The draft in Korea was under a Democratic President.
The draft in VietNam was under a Democratic Presdient.
Pattern?
You forgot this one:
And the Stop Loss draft in Iraq was under a Republican President
June 25th, 2008 at 10:37 amBHB: Israel is perfectly capable of defending themselves.
In part because the US has been subisidizing them all along.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:40 ambarackocarter Says:
RANGEL REINTRODUCES DRAFT BILL
And if/when the president signs, the basement populations across the country would see a decline, as would Cheetos sales, and greyhound bus ticket sales would go through the ROOF!
June 25th, 2008 at 10:40 amAre you saying that the draft in WWII wasn’t necessary?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:41 amVietnam draft was under Nixon. Facts and reality continue to evade you.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:44 amUhh Ohh,
Maybe that potential draft idea has brackometer checking his bus schedules for that big move out of mom’s basement and off to Parts Unknown.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:44 amHmmm…it appears the troll cleanup crew is alert this morning. Barackocarter has been purged.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:45 ammisshusseinmolly Says:
Hmmm…it appears the troll cleanup crew is alert this morning. Barackocarter has been purged.
Oh well, brackometer and roger2 weren’t even up to their usual low standards this morning.
Seems like they are just mailing ‘em in now. Gotta be hard to be a 23%er at this point in time.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:48 amDr. Hussein Matt Says:
racist_rogerse Says:
A draft would require a wwIII scenarion, one which he has not advocated, and only gave a much less drastic responce when he was suggestively asked if he agreed with the wwIII idea.
My retard translator is broken. Does anyone else have their installed and operating?
I think roger uses an early model of the translator (thus, roger_roger) and, unfortunately, I think his is broken also. This seems to be a direct feed from roger’s brain, untranslated.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:51 amIf this were freeperville they would have been banned and IP blocked after their first post.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:53 amIt would take an “all-out World War III” to make that happen, McCain responded.
Why? If the wars we fight are indeed just, why shouldn’t all segments of the population support them.
The answer of course is they aren’t just and by having them fought by poor working class men and women who have few opportunities other than the military, the warmongers have little fear that the rest of us will complain.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
June 25th, 2008 at 11:00 ampete Says:
Of course, that assumes that McCain can’t find a way to lose his “presumptive nomination”. Wouldn’t it be fun if he costs himself the nomination while running, essentially, unopposed?
No, it wouldn’t be fun. That would mean the Republicans bringing out a fresh candidate two months before the election. I’m rather suspicious that has been their intention all along. Either that or they don’t want to win because they don’t want to have to clean up the mess they made.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:03 amNow that the trolls are gone, perhaps I can put forth my thoughts on the draft and McCain.
Even McCain has grasped the concept that any advocating of a draft is political suicide. And especially so for someone who is actively pushing for war. Therefore, I would interpret ANYTHING McCain says on the subject to mean that he doesn’t support re-instating the draft.
Yet, while politicians treat the draft like toxic waste, I have to ask what’s wrong with requiring Americans to give some service to their country? Is it because it’s a lot easier to vote to invade someplace if you know that your own children and grandchildren aren’t going to be affected? Is it because it’s a lot easier to dismiss the troops as cannon fodder when you can say “after all, they volunteered”? Is it because people tend to be a lot more complacent about war when they know they’re not going to be asked to fight it?
We call on our citizenry to serve on juries, instead of relying on an all-volunteer force for that service. This is part of the price we pay for being a citizen.
Likewise, I support a draft. There are a variety of reasons for this, but here are three of them:
1. Every citizen has a stake in the security and defense of the United States. Responsibility for this should be shared.
2. With a draft that could possibly affect anybody’s loved ones, our politicians might not be so cavalier with our defense forces — keeping them readily available for genuinely needed defense, instead of invading the whole world.
3. With a draft, immoral wars would be protested immediately. People at risk of being drafted would get off their couches, leave their video games, and let our government know they will not support criminal wars.
Granted, it wouldn’t work perfectly. McCain has had sons in the military and that hasn’t stopped him from warmongering.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:10 amThe McChurian candidate exposed.
What’s his ‘real’ agenda?
June 25th, 2008 at 11:19 ammisshusseinmolly Says:
We call on our citizenry to serve on juries, instead of relying on an all-volunteer force for that service. This is part of the price we pay for being a citizen.
Honestly, missmolly? I look at some of the decisions made by juries in the last decade or so and wonder at times if a professional jurist position would not be a good idea.
As for your support of the draft, your top reasons
1. Every citizen has a stake in the security and defense of the United States. Responsibility for this should be shared.
2. With a draft that could possibly affect anybody’s loved ones, our politicians might not be so cavalier with our defense forces — keeping them readily available for genuinely needed defense, instead of invading the whole world.
3. With a draft, immoral wars would be protested immediately. People at risk of being drafted would get off their couches, leave their video games, and let our government know they will not support criminal wars.
These reasons seem to me to be primarily politically or socially motivated and do not take into account the military aspect, which is, IMHO, the paramount concern regarding the use of the draft.
The Industrial Revolution style of warfare typical of WWII and Korea is a thing of the past. The last war draftees fought in was Vietnam, and we know how that turned out. The use of technology in war is so critical now that you need highly motivated professionals who serve willingly more than you need masses of conscripts who don’t want to be there.
In Desert Storm, 500,000 coalition troops mopped the deck with around five times their number of Iraqi troops. In OIF, around 70,000 coalition troops went through a similar ratio of admittably demoralized Iraqis like a hot knife through butter. So in actual war fighting, all volunteer forces are elite enough to not need conscripts.
Likewise, if you are talking garrison troops or occupation troops, call it what you like, draftees who don’t want to be there are far more likely to commit atrocities against the local population and/or make the situation worse than people who volunteered to go.
But at any rate, you don’t want occupation troops because you are against occupation - so why provide the government the tool it needs to occupy? So as to bring about the fall of that government? I think that is the true reason, but I do not think the military should be used in this way.
I know of few if any military strategists who think a draft would be beneficial from a purely military standpoint. In such matters, pure military efficiency should trump all other concerns.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:43 amBe afraid. Very afraid.
McCain is Greg Stillson.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:49 amBring on the draft!
Let all the piss-soaked, still living at home, idiotic trolls become directly involved in the killing they so admire.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:53 amI look at some of the decisions made by juries in the last decade or so and wonder at times if a professional jurist position would not be a good idea.
The Plame grand jury did ok.
The use of technology in war is so critical now that you need highly motivated professionals who serve willingly more than you need masses of conscripts who don’t want to be there.
Except, when the “highly motivated professionals” are treated as conscripts. That does more severe damage, by showing soldiers that all the “support the troops” rhetoric is just that, and nothing else.
In Desert Storm, 500,000 coalition troops mopped the deck with around five times their number of Iraqi troops. In OIF, around 70,000 coalition troops went through a similar ratio of admittably demoralized Iraqis like a hot knife through butter. So in actual war fighting, all volunteer forces are elite enough to not need conscripts.
Except these elite soldiers need to constantly be resupplied - and when private contractors fill that need, it isn’t done, or in some cases done poorly. Without a rear echelon contingent, these elite soldiers are soon high and dry. No one can credibly argue that the armed services couldn’t have performed these tasks, if we hadn’t downsized, and at much less cost. So, it’s clear we need a larger service, who takes over the re-supply functions, because thwey have no financial incentive to deliver shoddy product.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:59 ambarfly Says:
Except these elite soldiers need to constantly be resupplied - and when private contractors fill that need, it isn’t done, or in some cases done poorly. Without a rear echelon contingent, these elite soldiers are soon high and dry. No one can credibly argue that the armed services couldn’t have performed these tasks, if we hadn’t downsized, and at much less cost. So, it’s clear we need a larger service, who takes over the re-supply functions, because thwey have no financial incentive to deliver shoddy product.
While you raise valid points, I think you are nibbling at the margin as far as whether a Draft is really a good idea. Logistical support is as critical as front line war fighting, yes. A larger force would be good, and I believe both candidates have plans to increase the size of the military. But again, the issues you raise are not best served by conscription. I’d like to see soldiers salaries dramatically increased to increase recruitment.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:10 pmKeltoi Says:
misshusseinmolly Says:
You both make good points relative to a re-instituted draft.
But a few points that jump out at me is the fact that we DON’T really have a true Volunteer military today; the extended misuse of National Guard troops and the danger that leaves the individual states in, the stop loss, repeat tours and the use of improperly trained troops doing tasks they did not sign up for or were not trained for all point to the fact the current structure is not only not working but has put at a a very risky position, as to our combat effectiveness.
The other point is best delineated by Bush’s atrocious comment a few years ago about ‘going shopping’ to support our war efforts. The fact that we now have a class distinction in that the elite start the conflicts and the less financially positioned do the majority of the fighting.
These things make for a much more manageable and balanced military.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:27 pmKeltoi Says
June 25th, 2008 at 11:43 am
________________________________________
As usual, you raise intelligent points. And even though I don’t always agree with you, I have to say that you’re like a breath of fresh air after the infestation of trolls this morning.
I admit that my justification for reinstating the draft wasn’t entirely military-motivated. There were definitely political and social factors as well.
But let’s look at this from a military standpoint. Do we want the best qualified, best-trained people defending us? I think we do. So why not just hire a private outfit specializing in these skills and be done with it? Perhaps because we’ve seen that Blackwater has been a PR nightmare. I believe privatization is a poor idea, whether it’s actual combat troops, security forces, or supply and service contractors. Blackwater, KBR, and Halliburton haven’t done us any favors. (And let me acknowledge that you never suggested privatizing the actual military — you didn’t. I’m just pointing that out as a logical “next step” if we “professionalize” our military.)
You’re right that Vietnam was the last conflict where we used conscription. And that didn’t turn out so well. However, that’s not the fault of the troops. The troops were trained for what they had to do and they did what was asked of them — just as our all-volunteer force is doing what is asked of them in the ME today.
The other point I wanted to respond to was about how the use of technology necessitated professional soldiers. Yes, this requires specialized training. But combat infantry also required specialized training. All I see is that training of our soldiers needs to be different in content now than it was 30 years ago, but the principle of training someone for the job they have to do remains the same. And it can be done with draftees as well as volunteers.
Highly-motivated people are more desirable no matter what the job is, or how technical it is. But intelligence is also critical to any operation, particularly a technical one. A draft (with no deferment provisions) would pull in a greater cross-section of society — including many top brains who would otherwise be escaping off to college.
And this might be a good time to point out that not all people in the military are highly motivated. Many are just desperate. The economy back here on the homefront isn’t the best these days.
You won’t get an argument from me regarding how well our military performed during Desert Storm. They did an excellent job. However, that operation had a clear objective, and once that objective was achieved, it was ended. That WAS “actual war fighting” (as opposed to what’s going on in Iraq right now — I don’t know WHAT we should call that), and could be done by any well-trained force — volunteer or drafted. We still train our people to be the best in the world, as we always have, no matter how we get them.
You probably have a point that volunteer troops might be less likely to commit atrocities against locals — I honestly don’t know how that would play out. I see that out of the stories of such atrocities that I read about today, some are indeed caused by malcontents, which would support your theory. Others (and probably more) are caused by a general attitude of dehumanization of the indiginous people combined with superiors who look the other way — conditions that can exist no matter how the troops are obtained. Look at Abu Ghraib.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:05 pmThere is little to argue with in your post, missmolly.
One final point against the draft is you would in all likelihood wind up with more soldiers than you would want or could afford. If everyone did two years of mandatory service between ages 18-20, how many people would that be?
If you are generous in your demographics and say America is evenly distributed age-wise between people of 1 to 100 years, at any given time in this country there are 3 million people of any given age. So - that is 6 million draftees under arms at any given time, not including the older, more experienced soldiers who form your seargeants, pilots, medics, officers, etc. That is a monster force - is that really what you want?
Also - are women excused? Haven’t we reached a point in society where if we are going to force people to serve, both genders should do so? They could fill the logistical and medical roles that barfly mentioned.
My main point is you really don’t want WWII style armies anymore - HUGE numbers of men - because there is no enemy out there that fits that bill, saving only Russia or China and then we would need a draft and probably fall out shelters, too.
I googled “generals who support a draft” and a couple variations of that and got almost nothing that really applied. Some Generals have mused about it, none have called for it that I could find.
As far as Blackwater goes, it is obscene that such private armies pay their men 10 times what the nation pays theirs. It is the same tax dollar - why not give it to men who have taken the oath? If starting pay for a infantryman was $100,000, your recruiting problem would disappear overnight.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:30 pmKeltoi Says
June 25th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
_____________________________________________
OMG, no — I couldn’t imagine drafting EVERYONE eligible at any given time. Good heavens, we didn’t even do that during WWII. Having that many people in uniform with nothing to do would create logistical problems (and cost problems) of nightmarish proportions. I would support a return to the draft lottery and only taking as many people as we need. The lottery system would accommodate fluctuating needs. For example, if numbers 1-25 are drafted in any given year because that’s all we need, whoever is holding number 26 should be paying attention, because he will be the next to go if the need increases.
As far as your question regarding drafting women — absolutely! They’re citizens, too. As a woman, I can honestly say that I should get all the perks a man gets in our society, but I believe that I should be saddled with the same responsibilities, too.
And I agree with you completely about Blackwater.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:51 pmOh, Keltoi — I forgot to mention that in my little draft fantasy, EVERYONE within certain age parameters would be subject to the draft — except for people who are physically or mentally handicapped. There’s no free ride for being rich, well-connected, female, or in college. Hardship cases would be subject to review individually.
This way, most of us would potentially have a dog in whatever fight we get into. Even those of us who are too old to serve ourselves (or have already served) are likely to have loved ones who fall in the eligibility field.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:56 pmmisshusseinmolly Says:
——————————————————————————–
Oh, Keltoi — I forgot to mention that in my little draft fantasy, EVERYONE within certain age parameters would be subject to the draft — except for people who are physically or mentally handicapped. There’s no free ride for being rich, well-connected, female, or in college. Hardship cases would be subject to review individually.
This way, most of us would potentially have a dog in whatever fight we get into. Even those of us who are too old to serve ourselves (or have already served) are likely to have loved ones who fall in the eligibility field.
Unfortunately, you and I both know that the very instant you create any kind of loophole to not serve, like a lottery, there will be a mad dash for people to charge through that loophole and escape service, a charge led by the rich and well connected. Universal service is the only antidote to the “full dinner jacket” as opposed to “full metal jacket” syndrome.
An idea that has been floating around a while is mandatory national service but opening it up to non-military service sectors, medical, educational, etc. It would be a huge program, not something I tend to favor, but there is a lot of merit to the concept. Whether the numbers add up is another question.
June 25th, 2008 at 2:04 pmNO!!! KEEP THE DRAFT AWAY!!! The draft keeps people that have a chance of funtioning in normal life from… Err… Living.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:23 am