Is a US Military Draft Pending?

[beckfizzle]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/20/bush.main/index.html

Cliff notes:

Bush wants to enlarge the size of Army and Marines.
Says "all options are on the table" to do this.



I personally think its only a matter of time until it does happen. How does Bush expect to continue his wars in the Middle East? We can't keep these 18 month rotations of our troops going forever. All of our Guard and Reservists are already on active duty...where else do we pull from?

A lot of you might say this would be political suicide to do this, not only for Bush but for the Republican party but what other option does he have to attempt to do something in the Middle East. Especially with our build up of Navy forces to show a military strength in the Persian Gulf against Iran. If a draft doesn't happen now all it will take is one more domestic terrorist attack, or the involvement of Iran in some type of war.

Funny but terrifying video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w77sLtz754

[cslewis]

Mhh, I don't think a draft is in the works. It's not exactly the most popular option the president could take, and I doubt he would want to further damage his reputation when he's already so disliked. He's got a legacy to build, remember? I doubt he wants to be remembered as the president who supported an unpopular war with an even more unpopular draft late in his second term, where any draft instituted would likely be revoked by an incoming president anyway.

[apachie2k]

i really hope not... it wouldn't suprise me, does anything suprise anyone anymore?

[michaelsaxon]

Granted, this would be a political decision, but I'm in the Army and there are probably a total of three people in the entire US military who are in favor of a draft.

So, absent a world war, I'd say you're pretty safe.

[04440]

What a way to ruin the world.. It's tough enough to get a job.. We're losing so much money over the world.. You know what.. yeah let's waste more money on this.. More experiments.. So DUMB!!!!

[n-abounds]

No, don't worry, it won't happen. No one would support it.

If there was a draft, I would immediately drop what I was doing and protest at the capitol. I think there would be a huge amount of outrage for drafting people to an abysmal war that was started on lies.

We would leave Iraq a smoldering crater before we would institute a draft.

[n-abounds]

What a way to ruin the world.. It's tough enough to get a job.. We're losing so much money over the world.. You know what.. yeah let's waste more money on this.. More experiments.. So DUMB!!!!

Well most economists say starting a war is a good way to increase GDP...

[Josh396]

Well most economists say starting a war is a good way to increase GDP...
And most would be right just about every single time.

[skunk]

And most would be right just about every single time.Is this true apart from WW1 and WW2? Limited, unsuccessful engagements probably don't, cf. Suez, VietNam, Boer War, Iraq.

[Sayhey]

During the 2004 election campaign John Kerry put forward the idea of the need to expand the military along with concentrating on building up certain critical functions. Now, two and a half years later of saying everything was fine with the US military and Iraq on the verge of total collapse, Bush uses this idea for cover to accomplish something it was never meant to do - keep us in Iraq. If the greater numbers were even the answer to Iraq, they won't be on line until 2008. In the meantime we shall continue the same insanity with a policy that every knowledgeable military source says is going to "break" our military. The man is crazy.

[aristobrat]

All of our Guard and Reservists are already on active duty...where else do we pull from?
Since news has reports of the branches hitting their recruiting goals lately, perhaps the branches could get allowed (and funded) to increase their recruiting?

[Ugg]

Since news has reports of the branches hitting their recruiting goals lately, perhaps the branches could get allowed (and funded) to increase their recruiting?

Can't remember where but this morning I read something to the effect that due to attrition, etc, it's only realisitic for the US Mil to increase troop strength in the range of ~10,000 per year through normal recruiting.

They've already lowered standards to the lowest level ever, there's not much else they can do since the economy is, for the moment, doing okl.

The only way to increase troop strength quickly would be through a draft.

[mactastic]

Since news has reports of the branches hitting their recruiting goals lately, perhaps the branches could get allowed (and funded) to increase their recruiting?
As noted, the military is barely reaching their reduced target numbers through lowered standards, what the Commander-in-Chief has called "the soft bigotry of low expectations" in other contexts. They're already accepting recruits in their 40's, I just don't see how you get a surge of volunteers when you can barely meet the lowered goals you have now.

Unless of course, you are willing to pay soldiers what Blackwater is paying mercenaries in Iraq...

During the 2004 election campaign John Kerry put forward the idea of the need to expand the military along with concentrating on building up certain critical functions. Now, two and a half years later of saying everything was fine with the US military and Iraq on the verge of total collapse, Bush uses this idea for cover to accomplish something it was never meant to do - keep us in Iraq. If the greater numbers were even the answer to Iraq, they won't be on line until 2008. In the meantime we shall continue the same insanity with a policy that every knowledgeable military source says is going to "break" our military. The man is crazy.
My first thought when I heard this was of the ridicule heaped on Kerry for suggesting a military expansion back when it might have helped. And the ridicule, not to mention accusations of both cowardice and treason, launched at John Murtha when he suggested the phased redeployment option so many now favor. And the public upbraiding of General Erik Shinseki for suggesting that we might need a few more troops than was being contemplated, and that there might be a few more problems than the ones the President and his advisors would admit.

This administration has done nothing but play politics with our national security while destroying the best military in the world.

[jamesi]

haha, the day i let some draft force me into this ridiculous war is the day that....well i cant think of something ridiculous enough to compare it to.

bitchy comment aside, this cant be that far fetched of an idea b/c lets not forget the draft during the vietnam war. another ware that no one seemed to enjoy either and protestors were much more involved and vocal about it than now. saying that no one in the military is in favor of it means nothing b/c no one is really down to call all the young men to do battle. however, right now washington just wants to win this and have a good story to tell about how america saved iraq from "tyranny, oppression...etc" and as bush said, his cabinent is ready to send whoever elses son to war to get it done

[JurgenWigg]

There won't be a draft for political and military reasons.

Politically it's obvious - it's unpopular, and unpopular actions don't win votes.

Militarily, commanders don't want it. They learned all about conscripted armies in Vietnam. The US Military is a Professional army, which means that no one was unwillingly forced into service, which means that they will be so much more likely to perform to the best of their ability than say, some random guy that was forced by law into being shipped halfway around the world to fight in a war that he doesn't believe in with minimum training. Yeah, great, get another 10,000 troops, get another 100,000 troops from the draft (women, you won't be exempt this time around, equal rights and all that), but those 100,000 conscripted, impressed, and drafted troops won't fight as well as a professional regiment 1/10th that size. Unless we're going back to open field warfare, a la Age of Reason, numbers don't quite cut it.

What are we going to do then if we need more troops and people aren't running to the recruitment offices? Well, gosh, maybe we'll have to swallow our ego and go back to the U.N. and ask for some help.

[xsedrinam]

For those who might be interested. Conscientious Objector Rights (http://www.objector.org/girights/gettingout/conscientious-objection.html).

[poppe]

Inactive reserves have not been called yet so i really doubt a draft will be in the works soon unless a huge attack happens (Jericho anyone?)

[n-abounds]

For those who might be interested. Conscientious Objector Rights (http://www.objector.org/girights/gettingout/conscientious-objection.html).

LOL, better start making a history of your conversion to Buddhism now...

Or apply for that citizenship to Canada.

Me? I'm a citizen of Canada, Ireland, and therefore the EU. I can move anywhere ;)

[solvs]

Let them do a draft. I dare them. Then everyone who's against the war can say so and object. All those who support it can go. There are some right here on this board more than willing to support the war from home, let alone all the other armchair soldiers out there (seriously, go read some of those other forums, scary stuff... and that doesn't even count those not on the internets).

Maybe send some of those who don't want to be there anymore back. Or better yet, off to Afghanistan or something. You know, where the real terrorists are. Still haven't gotten that Bin Laden guy.

[MACDRIVE]

What are we going to do then if we need more troops and people aren't running to the recruitment offices?
^
Man you said it right there.

I don't know how many of you guys that are 20 something, but if I were that age now, I'd seriously be thinking about getting over to Canada some how.

I've got two nephews; one 25 and the other 20. I've told my brother that he needs to start thinking about getting them set up in Canada, but he just side steps the issue and doesn't respond.

All it takes is one other "event" to force congress into starting a draft. Why do I say this? Because we've already got a shortage of soldiers as it is. It wouldn't be so if we could pull out of South Korea and Bosnia. Yeah, it's easy to forget about those guys over there; they're never in the news.

But seriously, you guys that are of age, I strongly recommend that you start making plans to set up camp outside the U.S. :cool:

[Black&Tan]

What they will probably do is shuffle the troops. Activate National Guard and Reserves (possible the IRR) and move them to replace support and non-combat soldiers worldwide. Then move the regular army troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. Even the cooks nowadays are taught how to lug a rifle/M60 and expected to qualify on the ranges...

[it5five]

^
Man you said it right there.

I don't know how many of you guys that are 20 something, but if I were that age now, I'd seriously be thinking about getting over to Canada some how.

I've got two nephews; one 25 and the other 20. I've told my brother that he needs to start thinking about getting them set up in Canada, but he just side steps the issue and doesn't respond.

All it takes is one other "event" to force congress into starting a draft. Why do I say this? Because we've already got a shortage of soldiers as it is. It wouldn't be so if we could pull out of South Korea and Bosnia. Yeah, it's easy to forget about those guys over there; they're never in the news.

But seriously, you guys that are of age, I strongly recommend that you start making plans to set up camp outside the U.S. :cool:

I've already had my Canadian escape plan set up for a while. The more tyrannical this president became the more I started to think about leaving in the event of an emergency. :cool:

[Motley]

^
Man you said it right there.

I don't know how many of you guys that are 20 something, but if I were that age now, I'd seriously be thinking about getting over to Canada some how.

I've got two nephews; one 25 and the other 20. I've told my brother that he needs to start thinking about getting them set up in Canada, but he just side steps the issue and doesn't respond.

All it takes is one other "event" to force congress into starting a draft. Why do I say this? Because we've already got a shortage of soldiers as it is. It wouldn't be so if we could pull out of South Korea and Bosnia. Yeah, it's easy to forget about those guys over there; they're never in the news.

But seriously, you guys that are of age, I strongly recommend that you start making plans to set up camp outside the U.S. :cool:

Still think the draft is never going to happen, unless something happens with Iran or N. Korea (fingers crossed). If there was a draft there'd be rioting in the streets.

Either way, I'm fairly safe. I know too much!

[Desertrat]

Jurgen, I knew many draftees who fought well in Korea. Hero medals and all that. I was drafted, but served only in occupation duty there. Had the balloon gone back up, I and the other draftees would have fought as hard as anybody. People who bum-rap draftees are dumber'n hammered dirt, as far as I'm concerned.

Whether or not a Draft is re-activated is up to Pelosi et al, seems to me. It doesn't matter what Bush wants; no money, no Draft. The $$$ control is with the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.

'Rat

[mactastic]

Whether or not a Draft is re-activated is up to Pelosi et al, seems to me. It doesn't matter what Bush wants; no money, no Draft. The $$$ control is with the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.
Observations about the quality of the average draftee versus the average recruit aside, this statement is, at best, only half true. While "Pelosi et al" may control the supply, it is Mr. Bush who controls the demand on the military.

[emmawu]

Let's not forget this boys and girls. This time, if there is a draft, they will draft boys and girls probably from ages 17 to 26. Ah yes, gotta love "The Decider" :(

[clayj]

There's not going to be a draft, for the big reason stated above: Draftees aren't anywhere near as effective as volunteers, and since they are there involuntarily, they often create discipline and morale problems.

If the President wants to expand the armed forces, the solution to do this is obvious: Step up recruiting and offer higher salaries and bonuses. It's just a question of how much money you want to spend.

[pseudobrit]

If the President wants to expand the armed forces, the solution to do this is obvious: Step up recruiting and offer higher salaries and bonuses. It's just a question of how much money you want to spend.

That might require a trimming of the contractor budgeting. And we all know that's a nonstarter for this administration.

[Macky-Mac]

There's not going to be a draft, for the big reason stated above: Draftees aren't anywhere near as effective as volunteers, and since they are there involuntarily, they often create discipline and morale problems.

If the President wants to expand the armed forces, the solution to do this is obvious: Step up recruiting and offer higher salaries and bonuses. It's just a question of how much money you want to spend.

I agree

[zimv20]

from the your timing couldn't be worse (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/22/draft.machines.ap/index.html) files:

The Selective Service System is planning a comprehensive test of the military draft machinery, which hasn't been run since 1998.

The agency is not gearing up for a draft, an agency official said Thursday. The test itself would not likely occur until 2009.

[...]

The Selective Service "readiness exercise" would test the system that randomly chooses draftees by birth date and the network of appeals boards that decide how to deal with conscientious objectors and others who want to delay reporting for duty, said Scott Campbell, Selective Service director for operations and chief information officer.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Let's not forget this boys and girls. This time, if there is a draft, they will draft boys and girls probably from ages 17 to 26. Ah yes, gotta love "The Decider" :(

If our so call decider starts dropping bombs in Iran then you will know a draft is coming. Bush, isnt about to admit a mistake no matter how many thousands more die. You have to remove the complete administration and half of congress before we get out. Were working on it. May take 2 more years though and Bush/Cheney can screw up a lot in 2 years.

[poppe]

I know about 6 months ago to join the reserves you had a sign on bonus of $30,000 and if you were an inactive (my mom is) and decided to become on active duty you'd get $10,000.

[KingYaba]

A vote for Bush is a vote for the draft! Or so it was in 2004. Yet here is Rangel saying he will push for a draft (a Democrat :eek: ) again in the new Dem controled congress

:p

[Ugg]

A vote for Bush is a vote for the draft! Or so it was in 2004. Yet here is Rangel saying he will push for a draft (a Democrat :eek: ) again in the new Dem controled congress

:p

He knows it won't pass, the reason he's doing it is to highlight the social inequalities that a volunteer army fosters.

[TequilaBoobs]

Rumsfield was the last official statement on the draft, and he said there was absolutely no need for that, plus the quality of troops would go down because the conscripted wouldnt perform as well as the volunteers, obviously.

However, the draft would equalize the troops, and the RICH and the poor would have to serve, which Bush would never let happen since he is such a money whore. The draft would have serious consequences to an already precarious situation - and Bush is not a betting man, esp in this point in his career.

[KingYaba]

No one wants to be stuck in a foxhole with a draftee. Or so the saying goes.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I wish I was paying closer attention yesterday, I saw some congressman and news guy talking about it and they had allready created a new spin term for the draft. I forgot what it was but any new new spin term from this administration is worrysome. Just the fact that they were using this new spin phrase bothered me.

[zimv20]

LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-draft24dec24,1,6012314.story?track=rss)


Expanding the military, without a draft

Proposals to sign up more troops are raising concern about lower recruiting standards.

[...]

Supporters of the volunteer force say it is of much higher quality than that of the draft era, which ended in 1973. But critics suggest the Army already has lowered its standards to meet current recruiting goals and would have to lower them even more to meet a larger goal.

Since the beginning of the Iraq war, the number of recruits with high school diplomas has fallen sharply, according to a new study by the National Priorities Project, a research group in Massachusetts. The number of soldiers with a general equivalency diploma — as opposed to a high school diploma — rose from 13.1% in 2004 to 26.7% in 2006, according to the study, based on Army documents obtained through a Freedom of Information request.

[...]

After struggling in 2004, the Army missed its recruiting target in 2005. To meet its recruiting goal of 80,000 new soldiers in 2006, the Army was forced to loosen rules for those they were willing to accept. Commanders have allowed an increase in the number of "Category 4" recruits, enlistees who score the lowest on military aptitude tests, and have raised the enlistment age from 35 to 42.

According to Army data, the service also has issued more than 13,600 medical or "moral character" waivers to recruits in 2006, up more than 2,500 over last year's levels. Waivers given to recruits who had been engaged in "serious misconduct" in the past — crimes, repeated instances of substance abuse or misconduct involving weapons — nearly doubled, from 630 to 1,017, and those for recruits with misdemeanors on their records went from 4,587 to 6,542.

As recruiting problems have grown, so has the economic disparity within the military. According to the National Priorities Project, the number of recruits from wealthy neighborhoods continues to decline. Although wealthy ZIP codes have long been underrepresented in the armed forces, the numbers dropped further from 2004 to 2006, said Dancs, the group's research director.

[...]

Charles Moskos, a military sociologist and professor emeritus at Northwestern University, said that without a draft, the burden of war falls disproportionately on the working class. He noted that of his 1956 Princeton University class of 750 men, 450 served. In the Princeton University class of 2006 there were 1,108 men and women, but only nine so far have joined the military.

"They call this an all-volunteer military," Moskos said. "But in the United States we are paying people to die for us."

[...]

After missing 2005 recruiting goals, the Army sharply increased bonuses offered to those willing to sign up for extended tours. In January, the maximum for a recruit enlisting for four years or more in the active-duty Army was doubled from $20,000 to $40,000. Six-year commitments for the reserves went from $10,000 to $20,000.

The Army in October also unveiled a new marketing campaign aimed at recruits, called "Army Strong," which will cost the service $200 million every year.

The incentives have borne fruit. The 2006 recruiting season, which ended in October, saw the Army pull in 80,635 recruits, just over its 80,000 goal. It has stayed above targets since then.

But it may not be the most cost-effective approach. A Congressional Budget Office study released in October found that adding more recruiters on the ground generated more enlistees, and frequently cost less, than national ad campaigns and increased bonuses.

The CBO said an additional 800 to 1,100 recruiters, which would cost up to $150 million every year, could increase the number of enlistees annually by 6,500 to eventually reach new targets. By relying on enlistment bonuses, on the other hand, the costs would run as high as $430 million.

The CBO warned, however, that adding 15,000 to 20,000 soldiers by 2010 would take recruitment and retention rates that had never been sustained over long periods.

[YS2003]

There's not going to be a draft, for the big reason stated above: Draftees aren't anywhere near as effective as volunteers, and since they are there involuntarily, they often create discipline and morale problems.

If the President wants to expand the armed forces, the solution to do this is obvious: Step up recruiting and offer higher salaries and bonuses. It's just a question of how much money you want to spend.

Good point. Some proponents of draft installation say the current volunteers' background is from under-previleaged households. But, can you believe Harvard eggheads can hold machines guns straight? If you let people they don't believe in doing or don't want to do, the outcome would be sub-par.

I am not a US citizen. So, this is none of my business nor concern. But, I think it is not likely George W will mess things up any further with Iraq than it is. Okay, I will take it back. It is possible (or, highly probal) he does so before his term ends in 2 years. My guess is, when his term is over, the world will have nuclear Iran and North Korea (which is said to have already) with big tax payer contributions to this war.

[pseudobrit]

But, can you believe Harvard eggheads can hold machines guns straight?

I don't know. Maybe guys like these could.

64729

[YS2003]

I don't know. Maybe guys like these could.

64729
Maybe one or 10 out of thousands at that school? There is always an exception to anything.

[puckhead193]

if Bush wants to keep his freedoms, he wouldn't want me on the front line :eek: :D ;)
everyone would be drinking from some puddle and i'll ask where's the poland spring :p

[sushi]

if Bush wants to keep his freedoms, he wouldn't want me on the front line :eek: :D ;)
everyone would be drinking from some puddle and i'll ask where's the poland spring :p
Funny. However, the military has a way of making one conform to their policies and procedures.

[YS2003]

if Bush wants to keep his freedoms, he wouldn't want me on the front line :eek: :D ;)
everyone would be drinking from some puddle and i'll ask where's the poland spring :p

I thought US military already serves Poland Spring bottled water to its service men:D. I think they should, given the money it is spending now (including spending to some expensive contractors).

[dornoforpyros]

I'm too lazy to read these whole thread, but I would once again like to extend an invitation to Canada. Draft dodgers are actually quite revered in Canada as many of them have become outstanding members of our communities.

We've got gay marriage and semi legal pot as well. Yes, it's cold, but that's what the whiskey and beer are for :)

[TequilaBoobs]

I'm too lazy to read these whole thread, but I would once again like to extend an invitation to Canada. Draft dodgers are actually quite revered in Canada as many of them have become outstanding members of our communities.

We've got gay marriage and semi legal pot as well. Yes, it's cold, but that's what the whiskey and beer are for :)

canaduh is where celine dion is from.

[pseudobrit]

Maybe one or 10 out of thousands at that school? There is always an exception to anything.

Right. You really think the average Harvard male couldn't figure how to operate a rifle? :rolleyes:

[TequilaBoobs]

Right. You really think the average Harvard male couldn't figure how to operate a rifle? :rolleyes:

no, he'd be too busy reading the textbook on how to shoot a rifle.

[dornoforpyros]

canaduh is where celine dion is from.

yes, and we've apologized for that many times :P

[TequilaBoobs]

yes, and we've apologized for that many times :P

dont apologize, just take her back.:p

[zimv20]

no, he'd be too busy reading the textbook on how to shoot a rifle.
why are you participating in this thread? education stereotyping is as tired as racial stereotyping.

[TequilaBoobs]

why are you participating in this thread? education stereotyping is as tired as racial stereotyping.

im participating in this thread because i want to, and as far as what you call 'education stereotyping', i call that being tongue in cheek, especially coming from an alum of Harvard's arch rival.

[dornoforpyros]

dont apologize, just take her back.:p

no dice! she's your problem now! :D

[TequilaBoobs]

no dice! she's your problem now! :D

fine, fine... at least we get mike myers, almost a fair tradeoff.
if i had to move there id move to British Columbia. lots of tasty treats there.:D

[solvs]

why are you participating in this thread? education stereotyping is as tired as racial stereotyping.

Wasn't Bush Ivy League educated? Doesn't that tell you something? :p So was John Kerry BTW. Look at how they turned out. I don't know about you, but I think I'd rather be in a foxhole with a high school drop out than one of those jokers. Well, some high school dropouts. Not all of them.

But aren't we talking about people who don't want to be in the military? It's not so much a matter of qualifications, but of lack of desire. I guess if you're put into the situation you'd react, I know I would. And I'm sure I could do a good job in a support position like tech or supplies or food prep. But if you have someone who isn't qualified for much, doesn't want to fight, and you put them into that situation... I don't think that's such a good idea.

[MacNut]

What would the old timers of WW2 say, Im sure a lot of them never wished the draft went away. I always hear them say, "these kids now a days don't respect anything and when we went to war and fought we had a respect that doesn't exist anymore."

[mrkramer]

What would the old timers of WW2 say, Im sure a lot of them never wished the draft went away. I always hear them say, "these kids now a days don't respect anything and when we went to war and fought we had a respect that doesn't exist anymore."

In WW2 there actually was a reason to be fighting, in Iraq we have no real reason to be fighting there.

[Dont Hurt Me]

In WW2 there actually was a reason to be fighting, in Iraq we have no real reason to be fighting there.Try telling that to our Arrogant missing from the National Guard President and his team of draft dodgers.

[MacNut]

In WW2 there actually was a reason to be fighting, in Iraq we have no real reason to be fighting there.But I think there biggest complaint is that when there was a draft a kid has to take responsibly that they don't have to worry about now.