Time to discuss the draft.........
03-13-2007, 04:13 PM
#1
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
i was watching some war documentary's and got to thinking about how our national defense has changed sans the draft.
Let's face it there's a lot of decent theory behind drafting every of age male (much as it was prior to vietnam) and training them to help defend our country. We sent almost 3 million troops to vietnam and although i in no way support either war, we are having a hell of a time getting over 100,000 in iraq. It seems we would have a near impossible time forming a ground campaign against any sizable nation or even worse one on our home land where we couldn't use the overwhelming air power without wiping ourselves out. If Iraq has made a point of anything it's that we may have the technology and the bankroll, but we aint got the bodies.
I'm in no way suggesting we wage war in more countries nor am i in any way supporting any conflict (quite the opposite) but the question i pose is; do we need to reactivate the draft in order to mitigate the fact that we simply don't have the manpower to defend ourselves?
Let's face it there's a lot of decent theory behind drafting every of age male (much as it was prior to vietnam) and training them to help defend our country. We sent almost 3 million troops to vietnam and although i in no way support either war, we are having a hell of a time getting over 100,000 in iraq. It seems we would have a near impossible time forming a ground campaign against any sizable nation or even worse one on our home land where we couldn't use the overwhelming air power without wiping ourselves out. If Iraq has made a point of anything it's that we may have the technology and the bankroll, but we aint got the bodies.
I'm in no way suggesting we wage war in more countries nor am i in any way supporting any conflict (quite the opposite) but the question i pose is; do we need to reactivate the draft in order to mitigate the fact that we simply don't have the manpower to defend ourselves?
03-13-2007, 04:30 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 2,871
The problem is right there in your statement. The war in Iraq is not in defence of your country.
There were no shortages of manpower in WWII, where there was a real threat and a real war against a standing aggressor army.
Unfortunately Iraq is an invasion and police action. In those situations anyone walking down the street might start shooting at you, it's not so great for morale.
There were no shortages of manpower in WWII, where there was a real threat and a real war against a standing aggressor army.
Unfortunately Iraq is an invasion and police action. In those situations anyone walking down the street might start shooting at you, it's not so great for morale.
03-13-2007, 04:35 PM
#3
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Yea well like i said, i dont agree with and never have agreed with iraq.
That said it does demonstrate the lack of our ability to come up with a formidable number of persons, whether it be police action, defense of country etc.....
I dont want to turn this into a discussion about iraq as you and i would have nothing to argue about there. Let's face it ww2 we had a smaller population and were STILL able to put more men in the battle.
That said it does demonstrate the lack of our ability to come up with a formidable number of persons, whether it be police action, defense of country etc.....
I dont want to turn this into a discussion about iraq as you and i would have nothing to argue about there. Let's face it ww2 we had a smaller population and were STILL able to put more men in the battle.
03-13-2007, 04:46 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 2,871
That's just it though, our grandfathers could see why they were going to fight. It still took years for the US to join the war, so the picture was very clear to everyone why they needed to be there by the time they went. Japan actually attacked US soil with a military force, Germany was spread all across Europe.
Getting 18 year olds to volunteer to go halfway around the world to fight communism in some swamp they've maybe never heard of, or patrol a desert to protect the income of oil companies can't compare.
Getting 18 year olds to volunteer to go halfway around the world to fight communism in some swamp they've maybe never heard of, or patrol a desert to protect the income of oil companies can't compare.
03-13-2007, 04:54 PM
#5
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Ok then, compare it to vietnam as you just did and i did in my opening post.... we sent 3 million troops to vietnam, we can't get 120,000 to iraq. I doubt the US will ever have a war that the people will be behind again so to my question, is the draft the only way to have enough troops to protect the us?
The question i pose is this, do we have the troops available to us necessary to defend ourselves sans the draft? The question has nothing to do with whether or not we are in iraq, germany or staring at the wall.
i could say "world peace" would be a great solution too, but i dont think that would be very realistic.
Again, as i tried to state in the opening paragraph and maybe didn't get accross, i am not posing this question because i have an affection for war or the draft, i don't want to see either. I am posing it because i think that it's something we'll need discussed in the looming presidential race. The dems will say we're pulling out, the reps will say we're staying in... ok so if we stay in we need to figure out where to get the bodies from, no?
The question i pose is this, do we have the troops available to us necessary to defend ourselves sans the draft? The question has nothing to do with whether or not we are in iraq, germany or staring at the wall.
i could say "world peace" would be a great solution too, but i dont think that would be very realistic.
Again, as i tried to state in the opening paragraph and maybe didn't get accross, i am not posing this question because i have an affection for war or the draft, i don't want to see either. I am posing it because i think that it's something we'll need discussed in the looming presidential race. The dems will say we're pulling out, the reps will say we're staying in... ok so if we stay in we need to figure out where to get the bodies from, no?
03-13-2007, 05:12 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 2,871
I don't think they ever had 3 million in Vietnam all at once did they? Isn't that spread over 10 years?
And they had the same problem, why would some kid from Arkansas or Alabama volunteer to go to Vietnam to fight communism in some little country they don't give a crap about?
18 year olds might some like a bunch of ******** these days, but I would like to believe they would volunteer for service if North Korea warships started shelling Seattle. China and North Korea have huge standing armies, but they are not capable of invading any other way then by land so actual serious danger to the security of the US is very limited.
And they had the same problem, why would some kid from Arkansas or Alabama volunteer to go to Vietnam to fight communism in some little country they don't give a crap about?
18 year olds might some like a bunch of ******** these days, but I would like to believe they would volunteer for service if North Korea warships started shelling Seattle. China and North Korea have huge standing armies, but they are not capable of invading any other way then by land so actual serious danger to the security of the US is very limited.
03-13-2007, 05:38 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,837
i think we dont have the bodies because most people here dont feel theyre in a war. I mean WWII effected people daily a lot more, being worried about an invasion on your own soil by some crazy army that took over Europe rather then Iraq where a lot of people dont worry about anything but the gas prices.
I think if our homes were in danger of an identifiable known enemy more people would sign up.
plus we dont even have our whole armed forces in iraq, theyre still spread all over, i dont know if they were that widespread back then.
kevin.
I think if our homes were in danger of an identifiable known enemy more people would sign up.
plus we dont even have our whole armed forces in iraq, theyre still spread all over, i dont know if they were that widespread back then.
kevin.
03-13-2007, 07:00 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: central WA state
Posts: 446
OK, as an old phart who was 18 during nam, there was no joy in the draft, and as in all things, some were more likely to be drafted than others (college deferments, medical deferments, etc). I vacilated between enlisting in the marines and heading to vancouver bc.... as did most 18 year olds because who the hell knows what they want to do when they are a kid?
i think phins is right in thinking draft, except i think we should model the swiss, or at least the way i think the swiss system works. Every citizen should be required to give some amount of time in service to the country. The problem with the last 3 or 4 "police actions" is that most of us are unaffected by the conflict. WWII was a visible and palpable threat to the US way of life. Most people could see that and agree to it. Every action since has been less noticible to the populas at large.
We are a nation of 200 million + unconnected individuals. We aren't taught that we have a common heritage or that freedom isnt free anymore. Maybe if we all had those 2 years of commonality, there would be more understanding and a lot of the red vs blue crap would go by the wayside. it ain't gonna happen, but i think it would be a good thing...
my 2 cents.
i think phins is right in thinking draft, except i think we should model the swiss, or at least the way i think the swiss system works. Every citizen should be required to give some amount of time in service to the country. The problem with the last 3 or 4 "police actions" is that most of us are unaffected by the conflict. WWII was a visible and palpable threat to the US way of life. Most people could see that and agree to it. Every action since has been less noticible to the populas at large.
We are a nation of 200 million + unconnected individuals. We aren't taught that we have a common heritage or that freedom isnt free anymore. Maybe if we all had those 2 years of commonality, there would be more understanding and a lot of the red vs blue crap would go by the wayside. it ain't gonna happen, but i think it would be a good thing...
my 2 cents.