Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Rep. Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft

  1. #21
    Council Member zenpundit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    262

    Default

    "Out of curiosity, what do you think will "make" US public "see the need for draft"? I mean, global conflict of scale, intensity and duration of WW1 & 2 are unlikely and (if I understood your post correctly) you don't think that GWOT needs it."
    Need and political acceptance are two different issues.

    The military's need is for increased manpower in the Army and Marines generally and in critical, highly trained, specialties where there are shortages. Say, for example, certain language skills. Most people across the political spectrum, though not all, agree that such a need exists.

    Filling that need is a question of costs or trade-offs. The draft would entail real costs, not simply provide a ready supply of less expensive manpower so Congress should look at possibly a combination of options, including outside the box ideas, instead of eliminating anything a priori. It may very well be that a new draft isn't the best way to go in terms of utility and I think public support would be lacking right now.

    Speaking of which, what would make the public " see" the need? Frankly, a military disaster on par with a second 9/11 and nothing less.

    Bush could have had the Army and Marines expanded in the wake of 9/11 by issuing a call for volunteers. Congress would have given him a draft, had he asked or nearly anything else at that particular moment in time. Public political support hinges on mass emotional reactions to conflict at the moral level, not statistical or factual arguments. Factually, the U.S. needed a large military build-up prior to Pearl Harbor but FDR, as Tom pointed out, could only muster support for a barebones effort by a single vote in Congress. On Dec. 8, FDR could ask for, and get, the moon.

  2. #22
    i pwnd ur ooda loop selil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Belly of the beast
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zenpundit View Post

    We could have coffee sometime. Which BBQ place were you referring to BTW ?
    I was thinking Wagners Ribs, in Porter. It's a bar with some of the best Q' in the world. I always see IllAnoyans come down to our seedy backwater community to troll with the blue collar crowd.

  3. #23
    Council Member aktarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zenpundit View Post
    Need and political acceptance are two different issues.
    I know. I was asking under what circumstances (or events) would US public support the draft because they would think it's necessary. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

    Quote Originally Posted by zenpundit View Post
    The military's need is for increased manpower in the Army and Marines generally and in critical, highly trained, specialties where there are shortages. Say, for example, certain language skills. Most people across the political spectrum, though not all, agree that such a need exists.

    Filling that need is a question of costs or trade-offs. The draft would entail real costs, not simply provide a ready supply of less expensive manpower so Congress should look at possibly a combination of options, including outside the box ideas, instead of eliminating anything a priori. It may very well be that a new draft isn't the best way to go in terms of utility and I think public support would be lacking right now.
    OK. Do you think it's feasible that a combination of draft/volunteer armed forces would come along? Certain slots are filled by long term professionals (pilots, Marines, airborne....) and others by conscripts who serve outside US only if they volunteer to do so?

    also now Arab/Farsi/.... speakers have to be persuaded to join, with draft they would get in armed forces anyway and it would be only a matter of persuading them to stay in. Might be easier.

    Quote Originally Posted by zenpundit View Post
    Speaking of which, what would make the public " see" the need? Frankly, a military disaster on par with a second 9/11 and nothing less.
    OK, that was my original question. Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by zenpundit View Post
    Bush could have had the Army and Marines expanded in the wake of 9/11 by issuing a call for volunteers. Congress would have given him a draft, had he asked or nearly anything else at that particular moment in time. Public political support hinges on mass emotional reactions to conflict at the moral level, not statistical or factual arguments. Factually, the U.S. needed a large military build-up prior to Pearl Harbor but FDR, as Tom pointed out, could only muster support for a barebones effort by a single vote in Congress. On Dec. 8, FDR could ask for, and get, the moon.
    But do you think it would last a long term? Assuming there is a draft and Iraq is invaded in march 03 anyway do you think that people (troops, families....) would say "Hey, we agreed to draft to fight terrorism but Iraq is something else"?

  4. #24
    Council Member Mondor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zenpundit View Post
    The military's need is for increased manpower in the Army and Marines generally and in critical, highly trained, specialties where there are shortages.
    I agree that there is a need for increased manning levels in critical specialties. However addressing that need is a function of the individual services and of congress. One can not mass produce competent linguists any more than one can mass produce Special Forces. Again, if we need, and I believe that we do, additional intel, linguists, FAOs, and the like it can be addressed using the current volunteer force system. The individual services need to identify the need and congress needs to legislate the billets and fund them.
    It is right to learn, even from one's enemies
    Ovid

  5. #25
    Council Member Ray Levesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    20

    Default Liberal perspective

    Keep in mind that there is a liberal perspective to raising the idea of a draft.
    ** First, if a Democrat supports it he can argue that he's not soft on defense.
    ** Second, from a liberal perspective it makes great social sense because we can get the rich involved in the nation's defense - social justice.
    ** Third, if a draft is implemented it can make it theoretically more difficult to go to war because it affects more people.
    Ray

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •