PDA

View Full Version : is a draft necessary to get the best people for the military?


jefhatfield
Aug 20, 2003, 03:03 PM
president bush mentioned that it will be a continuing challenge to get the best people possible for the military...especially the officers of the armed services

is the military full of people with no other options and hailing from the ghetto and trailer parks of americia?

is their only option for a job to put themselves in harm's way?

would a draft round out the military so it won't be just the poorest stratus of america putting their lives on the line?

thoughts?

mactastic
Aug 20, 2003, 03:13 PM
Oh boy, this belongs in politics.

And I think the best military is a volunteer military.

jefhatfield
Aug 20, 2003, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by mactastic
Oh boy, this belongs in politics.

And I think the best military is a volunteer military.

i am not trying to make this a right wing vs. left wing philosophy thing...ie) politics

there are proponents of the draft on both the left and right wing of american politics

i am just trying to bring this on as a sociological issue, not a republican vs. democrat thing...that's why i didn't put it into the political forums

i am not against the political forums...as long as it doesn't turn into a personal insult forum...i find the arnold talk in the political forums useful and interesting...but i have avoided the rest of the forum for now:p

vollspacken
Aug 20, 2003, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
is the military full of people with no other options and hailing from the ghetto and trailer parks of americia?

is their only option for a job to put themselves in harm's way?

would a draft round out the military so it won't be just the poorest stratus of america putting their lives on the line?

that's one of the reasons why we still have the draft in Germany (the other main one is the role the professional non-draft Army played in the decay of the Weimar Republic)

vSpacken

wdlove
Aug 20, 2003, 04:43 PM
I happen to think that we have a high quality of volunteers that enter our military. There does need to be a national discussion about a new draft. If they do reinstitute the draft, there should be no deferements. A 2 year committment should be the rule, community service or the military!

Kwyjibo
Aug 20, 2003, 05:20 PM
I dont' think a draft would be that effective. I also don't think any kind of mandatory service should be implemented. Some would argue that service might increase poltical particiaption and nationalism but at the same time resentment would grow among the future generations. I just registered for the selective service but if i was ever called up I would try my best to get out of it. America is about opportunity, people no longer value all miliatary experience as much as they used to. If I could spend a year in classes and a summer interning than being enlisted , i think i'd be utilizing more of my own potential than voluteering and doing a half a**ed job.

wdlove
Aug 20, 2003, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by Kwyjibo
I dont' think a draft would be that effective. I also don't think any kind of mandatory service should be implemented. Some would argue that service might increase poltical particiaption and nationalism but at the same time resentment would grow among the future generations. I just registered for the selective service but if i was ever called up I would try my best to get out of it. America is about opportunity, people no longer value all miliatary experience as much as they used to. If I could spend a year in classes and a summer interning than being enlisted , i think i'd be utilizing more of my own potential than voluteering and doing a half a**ed job.

Would you be interested in doing 2 years of community service? Doing the service in an area of your choice. It would be giving back to society for your freedom!

Billicus
Aug 20, 2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by wdlove
Would you be interested in doing 2 years of community service? Doing the service in an area of your choice. It would be giving back to society for your freedom!

I don't think that mandatory military service would work that well, because well, some of us, me included, are not in that great of shape. I simply couldn't handle it. I'm glad there are those that can, and that there are those that are willing to give their lives to our great country. If I had to do something for my country, community service is definitely the way to go.

mactastic
Aug 20, 2003, 05:47 PM
I would not really advocate forcing people to do something they don't want to. The ones that do want to can join as it is right now, and the others can find a service organization to volunteer for. I give time to Habitat for Humanity myself, but thats mostly because I like to build houses.

mischief
Aug 20, 2003, 06:18 PM
First is the issue of the Draft in it's current context: Providing warm bodies to supplement Army ground forces.

As it exists, the Draft is an outdated mechanism designed for a war that had a very large influx of specialists in the other branches so GI's on the ground needed massive supplementation. For the Pacific and European Campaigns of WW2, this was perfect. For conflicts as they exist now, it guarantees a Vietnam-like quagmire. Raw numbers of GI's just don't do it anymore.


Second is the issue of Mandatory National Service.

Many other nations practice this to stunning effect, though it should be noted early that it's only a small part of an overall strategy in most cases.

Usually this is the pattern for a country with a very socialist outlook: Israel, Switzerland, Russia, Japan, etc. It works well because the Millitary that's the primary vehicle of National Service is more like the US National Guard combined with the Army Core Of Engineers.

This Nation is unique in it's Standing Agressive millitary posture. The USA is constantly drilling it's millitary for foreign conflicts. That fact alone would poison public opinion for National Service in the USA.

If the US millitary was reduced in overall overwhelming force and more entreanched within it's own borders, effectively reduced to the "Millitias" mentioned for National Defense in the Constitution, National Service would be an excellent way of assuring both National Integrity and Millitary strength.

The problem is that a purely defensive Defense Department wouldn't be as good a cash cow.... nor would it be as good for siezing assets like Iraqi Oil Fields (though I agree Hussein was a psychotic nut-job).


Third is the implication of mandatory service.

With mandatory service there's a number of cultural landmines:

Would women be required too? They'd be pissed if they weren't and horrified if they were.

How would you decide combat versus non-combat roles when there's no longer an option like the draft to swell numbers when needed?

Would you call it all millitary and just have most of the work be Infrastructure?

That's the most common approach elsewhere; with Millitary training mixed in. The problem in a country this large is that such a system added onto the current one would exaggerate the Millitary Republic effect that's been the norm since the beginning of WW2.

Personally I think there are a lot of bennifits to Mandatory National Service. I just think that the USA isn't mature enough to handle it.

jefhatfield
Aug 20, 2003, 10:04 PM
i am very torn on this subject...being a minority, i used to see the ground forces at fort ord and saw very few white faces carrying M-16s...in the mostly affluent white area where i live, a lot of people here figured that was because they didn't have a better option...there were plenty of rich, white people i met who really reached out to the military community which was blacks, hispanics, and poor whites and often opened their homes to them and got christmas presents for their kids

it is interesting as a philosophical issue, but i have friends who are in the military who point out the social injustices they see

1) at the defense language institute, i befriended an enlisted woman with a college education who was in the army studying a foreign language...she is from rancho palos verdes, a very rich area in southern california...i mentioned that was something probably unusual...she basically told me that all her classmates and barracksmates were poor and lower middle class people who actually found that being a corporal would possibly be the highest paying job they could ever get which was then under a grand a month or so...so i asked why she did it...she did it because from her area, she was the only person from her high school that she knew of who went to the armed services...they could all go to an upper echelon job(s) or just live off of some trust fund

she felt she was doing her part thinking being in the army would mean someone poor wouldn't have to be there in harm's way

i also knew of a man during the 60s, who upon his graduation from the very pretigious USC joined the marines as a private to fight in vietnam so somebody less fortunate wouldn't have to

scem0
Aug 20, 2003, 10:12 PM
If I get drafted my parents will do something drastic. (Im 16 now, so if all this **** is still going on in a couple years I would be eligible :().

There is no way they are going to allow me to fight. I dont want to either....

Im afraid I don't keep up on politics. I want to save politics for a later day. I guess until I can vote.

Oh and I think a draft would be 'effective', but the effective thing isnt always the best thing. It would be very effective for me to walk into my school and shoot people who I dont like, but not very cool of me. I don't think it would be very cool of the US to enforce a draft.

And once again, I really don't keep up on politics, but with my limited knowledge I think the draft would be a bad thing. Anyone who wants to fight can sign up. Personally, that's not my thing.

scem0

Kwyjibo
Aug 20, 2003, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by wdlove
Would you be interested in doing 2 years of community service? Doing the service in an area of your choice. It would be giving back to society for your freedom!

I had to do 24 hours of community service, in 12 of those hours i was doing random stuff , selling split the pot tickets at a fundraiser ....my partner stole ten bucks and I told him he shoudlnt' but its not like i'd rat on him... 6 of them were sitting (moved tables for about 15 minutes) outside at an event called strut your mutt....the rest were other events in which i didn't work very hard. Mandatory community service is worthless when you don't care you don't care. I'm one of the few of my friends that reads the news and registerd to vote b4 an electio nwas on the horizon....i'm involved way beyong many americans already

funkywhat2
Aug 20, 2003, 10:32 PM
I'd rather go to jail than have my soul, and possibly my life, forcibly stolen from me by the government.

If there ever is a draft, and I'm eligable, I'm outta here faster than the ****ing Concorde. Why? The government has no right to tell me that I have to do something. Government is such to govern, not to steal. And the draft is stealing. (Then again, Social Security is too, so...)

Jerry Spoon
Aug 20, 2003, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by Billicus
I don't think that mandatory military service would work that well, because well, some of us, me included, are not in that great of shape. I simply couldn't handle it.

And what about those of us that are just plain chicken? I know not everyone in the military is in a combat situation, but you never know where they will want to use you.

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 12:51 AM
when i was draft age...18-26...it was a no brainer...i hated the idea of a draft and thought the volunteer army was just fine, but i was told when i got older, i may see some other sides to the issue

i have also seen some recent footage about military history and the issue always comes up of poorer, less privelidged kids getting into combat

realize that dan quayle, clinton, and george w bush had connections to avoid direct combat in vietnam...connections many who died there never had

was it fair that because one didn't have access to college or the social upbringing to get there educationally that they should go to vietnam?

RandomDeadHead
Aug 21, 2003, 12:56 AM
Communty service or the draft? Is that the options?

I pay taxes, theirs my community service.

I have a full time job, don't smoke crack, and I actualy take care of my son, there is my community service.

Actualy I am probably too old to be drafted.;) It's a good thing too, because if they sent me into the desert I would be to fu**ed up on afgani hash to fight in a war. :eek:

I remember when my parents helped my brother dodge the vietnam draft. I was 12 years old and not quite shure what was going on. They gave him an old beat up chevy and five thousand dollars cash, along with directions to canada.
To this day my mother says that it was the best investment that they ever made, and I agree. If not for my brother, I would probably have never met my wife.


So this old tree huggin' hippy says, Down with the draft, and make love not war.

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 01:10 AM
when i finally weigh out the pros and cons, i am still against the draft

but realize that social status plays a much stronger role when it comes to who goes to war and that there could never truly be a volunteer army as long as their is an "unseen" or "unofficial" caste system

many joined the armed service to make money and to fight only to defend america...but what about things now when the usa is playing worldwide 24/7 world police officer and always being in the line of fire?

...and those who couldn't go to college, or graduate from a "good" college end up coming back in body bags

vollspacken
Aug 21, 2003, 05:33 AM
Originally posted by wdlove
A 2 year committment should be the rule, community service or the military!

as I said above, we have the draft in Germany... but I did NOT go to the army (for several reasons, I'm not a pacifist though). I did my one-year community service in a nursery school/kindergarten for handicapped children... that was awsome!!! plus I got payed more than my friends who went to the army, I could sleep at home right away, had fixed working hours and did not have to work on the weekends..!

vSpacken

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 08:55 AM
The biggest problem I see with a draft is that you can't include everyone in it for obvious reasons; some aren't physically capable, consciencious objectors, educational deferments, etc. Once you let any class of people out of the draft you will have people pulling whatever strings necessary to avoid combat. Take Bush and Clinton for example. Both were able to avoid duty "in country" during the Vietnam war - while there was a draft going on! The rich and powerful are no more likely to serve under a draft system than they are now. Even during the draft period in Vietnam most of the faces were minority. Heck, during the South's draft during the Civil War they didn't even bother to hide it, you could just hire a "substitute" to go in your stead if you had the money. It's always going to be a "rich man's war, poor man's fight."

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 09:21 AM
I am 100% for a draft. Becuase I have served in the military, and I know how it changes a person. Teaches them teamwork, and responsiblity. I don't understand how people can say that if they were drafted they would leave the country, etc. If your country needs you, you have a duty, and obligation to serve your country. That is part of the problem in this country today is that the youth of this country have no root of what people have done in history for them.

Most know nothing of the history of this country. My Grandfather served this country in WWII. He started off as a Navy Gunners Mate. He was wounded on the Indianapolis. Came home, and changed his name, because his DD-214 said he could not be drafted again, or serve because of his injuries. So, after changing his name, and doing over a year of therapy to get strong again, enlisted in the Marine Corps, and was on Iwa Jima. Got wounded again, and tried to change his name a third time, and was caught, and had to stay home.

That is honor. I wonder how many people today would do that?

sturm375
Aug 21, 2003, 10:32 AM
If we assume the following to be true: The current military/volunteers are not enough for current or future operations.

I see 3 ways to go to fix the situation:

1) Institute a new draft, including women, totally random (or as close as we can get) with similar guidlines as WW2, and Vietnam.

-Pro: Totally fair (Theoritically), as anyone within the given age range should have an equal chance at seeing action.

-Con: Probably not going to get the best of the best. Many people will be there and not want to be there. Most of these will do all in their power to survive, not do the best job.

2) Pick and choose the best people out of industry or other workplaces.

-Pro: You get the best (hopefully)

-Con: People won't want to be there, borderline kidnaping, very disruptive of the economy and domestic life.

3) Lastly, and possibly the most palitable, is to increase Defence Department Funding expressly for paychecks, not for new toys. You then increase pay scales accross the board, such that as a the entry level enlisted get paid $30K-$40K per year. Along with this, you increase technical requirments for most jobs.

-Pro: You attract the best, most agressive people. All voluntary, so no-one is there that doesn't want to be there.

-Con: Expensive

I personally prefer the 3rd option. Especially if it includes adding a 5th branch of the Armed Forces. Add the Peace Corps., but give them equal funding as the Army, Airforce, Marines, and Navy. This new branch would be perfect for what we are doing right now in Iraq. After war clean-up/Policing/re-educating/Medical. In peacetime or when not needed in other countries, there are plenty of jobs for this branch to do domestically.

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 10:38 AM
Good idea sturm! Let's apply the same logic to teachers, firefighters, police, EMT's etc. All the people who serve this country should be able to make a more reasonable fraction of what they could make in the private sector. It would attract and retain a much higher quality person to the job. In addition, lets cut a whole bunch of the bureuacratic middlemen out of the mix.

sturm375
Aug 21, 2003, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
I am 100% for a draft. Becuase I have served in the military, and I know how it changes a person. Teaches them teamwork, and responsiblity. I don't understand how people can say that if they were drafted they would leave the country, etc. If your country needs you, you have a duty, and obligation to serve your country. That is part of the problem in this country today is that the youth of this country have no root of what people have done in history for them.

Most know nothing of the history of this country. My Grandfather served this country in WWII. He started off as a Navy Gunners Mate. He was wounded on the Indianapolis. Came home, and changed his name, because his DD-214 said he could not be drafted again, or serve because of his injuries. So, after changing his name, and doing over a year of therapy to get strong again, enlisted in the Marine Corps, and was on Iwa Jima. Got wounded again, and tried to change his name a third time, and was caught, and had to stay home.

That is honor. I wonder how many people today would do that?

First and foremost, if he is still with us, give your grandfather my thanks. That is true dedication to one's country.

I have to disagree with you, or at least offer a differing view point on the draft. As you stated, your grandfather voluntered for the extra duty, it was not forced upon him. And although I applaud him, as well as anyone who serves in peace or war, that lifestyle is not for everyone.

It is true that some people need, and even want, the rigors of military life. We as a sociaty do not need everyone to go through this. We need the "free-thinkers" and dreamers in this country, just as much as we need the "team players." Just look at most of the great people in history/science. Advances are mostly made by those (pardon the catch phrase stealing) that "think different."

I am not saying that someone can't go through basic training and still be able to "think different." I am sure some do, however I bet 9 times out of 10, the "dreamers" will come out of training/military having had that inovative spirit stifiled.

Just something to think about.

sturm375
Aug 21, 2003, 10:50 AM
Originally posted by mactastic
Good idea sturm! Let's apply the same logic to teachers, firefighters, police, EMT's etc. All the people who serve this country should be able to make a more reasonable fraction of what they could make in the private sector. It would attract and retain a much higher quality person to the job. In addition, lets cut a whole bunch of the bureuacratic middlemen out of the mix.

Just gut the Department of Homeland Insecurity, whittle down the Pork, and re-create the '90s Internet Boom, and we can pay for it.:D

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by sturm375
First and foremost, if he is still with us, give your grandfather my thanks. That is true dedication to one's country.

I have to disagree with you, or at least offer a differing view point on the draft. As you stated, your grandfather voluntered for the extra duty, it was not forced upon him. And although I applaud him, as well as anyone who serves in peace or war, that lifestyle is not for everyone.

It is true that some people need, and even want, the rigors of military life. We as a sociaty do not need everyone to go through this. We need the "free-thinkers" and dreamers in this country, just as much as we need the "team players." Just look at most of the great people in history/science. Advances are mostly made by those (pardon the catch phrase stealing) that "think different."

I am not saying that someone can't go through basic training and still be able to "think different." I am sure some do, however I bet 9 times out of 10, the "dreamers" will come out of training/military having had that inovative spirit stifiled.

Just something to think about.


Well, he passed away in 1987, but thank you for that. He was an incredible man. As for the draft. He was drafted the 1st time and did not want to go, but did. As for the draft, and having been through basic myself, I have seen the people that I went into the military with come out to do very great things. One of my shipmates works with the CDC, and has been working on a cure for West Nile! If you look at the statistics of people that come out of the military and go into the civil sector, they are more successful than those without military experience. Creativity isn't stiffled in the miltary, but rewarded. Look at the great military minds.

As for women in the draft. No. It should be able bodied males from 18 - 26.

Desertrat
Aug 21, 2003, 11:20 AM
It seems to me that in this thread and others where the draft has been discussed, the primary "anti" position stems from the modern-day "misuse" of our military due to various foreign policy decisions.

I went into the Army 50 years ago, come January 19th. :) I've thought about the uses of our military in these ongoing decades, and have generally come toward a negative view of our foreign policy. Too meddlesome.

Lemme interject that for the average American male or female, there are far more "personal-growth" benefits to a couple of years of military service than there are drawbacks.

Anyhow, I have difficulty in differentiating between the good intentions of such as EPA, OSHA, AFDC, ESA, etc., etc., and the good intentions of getting rid of a Milosevic or a Hussein or "peacekeeping" in Somalia or Liberia. Good intentions cost a lot of money and get a lot of people killed. And apologies for bringing politics into this.

Seems to me that if we're talking about defending the country, or the obvious best interests of the country, not many folks are gonna talk about going to Canada.

'Rat

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by sturm375
Just gut the Department of Homeland Insecurity, whittle down the Pork, and re-create the '90s Internet Boom, and we can pay for it.:D

hey sturm...see that post called "i agree"...that is supposed to be a compliment for your idea but i hit start new thread instead of post reply...oh well

i think paying military people more will be something they may have to do gradually department by department or field by field

i have a friend who teaches senior level military personnel near the end of their careers to be information technology managers at a military grad school...after they get out and possibly get promoted, they still make less than the average entry level techie in the private sector

and the highest a government network administrator can start at with a master's degree in networking can make when i worked for uncle sam was the same as a private industry high school grad as the most entry level network techie...i like to check out visual basic magazine's annual salary survey...take that and compare it to the military pay scale...and then you can see why the military and civil service have a rough time getting techies:p

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 11:23 AM
If someone's coming to mess with my home or my family I'll be the first in line to sign up to defend it.

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Desertrat
It seems to me that in this thread and others where the draft has been discussed, the primary "anti" position stems from the modern-day "misuse" of our military due to various foreign policy decisions.

I went into the Army 50 years ago, come January 19th. :) I've thought about the uses of our military in these ongoing decades, and have generally come toward a negative view of our foreign policy. Too meddlesome.

Lemme interject that for the average American male or female, there are far more "personal-growth" benefits to a couple of years of military service than there are drawbacks.

Anyhow, I have difficulty in differentiating between the good intentions of such as EPA, OSHA, AFDC, ESA, etc., etc., and the good intentions of getting rid of a Milosevic or a Hussein or "peacekeeping" in Somalia or Liberia. Good intentions cost a lot of money and get a lot of people killed. And apologies for bringing politics into this.

Seems to me that if we're talking about defending the country, or the obvious best interests of the country, not many folks are gonna talk about going to Canada.

'Rat

Rat, I agree with you. I think the military has gotten a very bad rap. My father served in Vietnam 4 tours. 23rd Air Force Pararescue/Special Forces. After his 1st tour he came home to be spit on and called a baby killer. He then volunteered for the next 3 tours because he said the people in Vietnam respected him more than his own countrymen. We have passed that point now, but non the less, the military is viewed in negative eyes.

I would love to know how many people in the civilian world could handle being a Sonar Tech on a Sub. Or a Nuke Specialist on a carrier, or some of the other difficult jobs. Even a foot soldier for that matter. I wonder if people wonder why there are only just over 200,000 Marines.

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
If you look at the statistics of people that come out of the military and go into the civil sector, they are more successful than those without military experience. Creativity isn't stiffled in the miltary, but rewarded. Look at the great military minds.



being a former department of defense human resources person, i can tell you that there is a prejudice against military personnel which may still be a leftover throwback to the vietnam days, but military personnel, regardless of rank, have a harder time getting rehired or hired in the civilian sector

i worked for operation transition in the defense department and it was a part of my job to get former military and retired military personnel new jobs in the civilian sector

human resource officers like to see a long unbroken list of private industry jobs similar to the job being applied for...especially if that person has years of experience working for a competitor

what determines success? it's not former military service...at least not according to what i read...

from the book "millionaire next door", it's basically still a birthright in america because two out of three millionaries in america are born that way as was our president and former president kennedy...there's nothing wrong with inherited wealth, but all americans should see how the chips are really stacked in our caste system

this is why some people for taxing inheritance even more...basically to equalize wealth so it isn't the same people running the show every year

...and when is the last time one heard of log cabin to white house?;)

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 12:35 PM
And sadly I have met many vets who are working in dead end jobs as well as ones who are doing well. I've noticed that officers tend to do better than enlisted people do.

sturm375
Aug 21, 2003, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Well, he passed away in 1987, but thank you for that. He was an incredible man. As for the draft. He was drafted the 1st time and did not want to go, but did. As for the draft, and having been through basic myself, I have seen the people that I went into the military with come out to do very great things. One of my shipmates works with the CDC, and has been working on a cure for West Nile! If you look at the statistics of people that come out of the military and go into the civil sector, they are more successful than those without military experience. Creativity isn't stiffled in the miltary, but rewarded. Look at the great military minds.

As for women in the draft. No. It should be able bodied males from 18 - 26.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but I thought the basic idea behind basic training was to break down the individuallity of the person, to make him/her part of a cohesive fighting force. In order to do this, some, if not all, of the individualism of a person is stifled, perhaps forever. It is exactly this individualism that makes most great people great. They think outside the box. Einstein, Eddison, and such are know because of their ability to think out of step with the rest of the world.

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by sturm375
Correct me if I am wrong here, but I thought the basic idea behind basic training was to break down the individuallity of the person, to make him/her part of a cohesive fighting force. In order to do this, some, if not all, of the individualism of a person is stifled, perhaps forever. It is exactly this individualism that makes most great people great. They think outside the box. Einstein, Eddison, and such are know because of their ability to think out of step with the rest of the world.

Not so. Soldiers need to be able to think on their feet, and learn the job of the person above and below them as well as their own. I've met very intelligent military people, and some who I would even consider freethinkers. Not many, but I don't find many in regular society either.

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by mactastic
Not so. Soldiers need to be able to think on their feet, and learn the job of the person above and below them as well as their own. I've met very intelligent military people, and some who I would even consider freethinkers. Not many, but I don't find many in regular society either.

Yes, in basic you are tought to think as 1. But you also learn teamwork, and trust. Commitment, things of that nature. A-School requires you to think on your feet. To diagnose a problem. Commanders don't want foot soldiers without opinion. In fact, most encourage their troops to make suggetions to them.

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Yes, in basic you are tought to think as 1. But you also learn teamwork, and trust. Commitment, things of that nature. A-School requires you to think on your feet. To diagnose a problem. Commanders don't want foot soldiers without opinion. In fact, most encourage their troops to make suggetions to them.

That's true. From what I've heard it has been a big advantage for us. Our soldiers are motivated to think for themselves, while many other armies use fear to control their troops. When we fought Iraq the first time his army was so afraid to do anything without orders that our strikes at command and control facilities essentially paralyzed them. That would never happen to U.S. forces.

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 02:08 PM
Originally posted by mactastic
That's true. From what I've heard it has been a big advantage for us. Our soldiers are motivated to think for themselves, while many other armies use fear to control their troops. When we fought Iraq the first time his army was so afraid to do anything without orders that our strikes at command and control facilities essentially paralyzed them. That would never happen to U.S. forces.

Exactly, and that translates to everything that they do in life after they leave the military. Jef, I know there are exceptions to this rule, but for the most part, of the 58 guys that went to basic with me, all are very successful except for 3 that are in jail.

sturm375
Aug 21, 2003, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Yes, in basic you are tought to think as 1. But you also learn teamwork, and trust. Commitment, things of that nature. A-School requires you to think on your feet. To diagnose a problem. Commanders don't want foot soldiers without opinion. In fact, most encourage their troops to make suggetions to them.

Well, that is certianly food for thought. Still, when I think of the people in history that have greatly contributed to sociaty moving forward, were not military minds.

Again, these "free thinkers" are a minority, but because they are so rare, it is important to support them, and not stifle their creativity. I know I am not one, as I would never have thought up radio, or the lightbulb, or the theory of relativity.

In my mind, instituting the draft risks the possibility of "picking" the next Mozart, and turning them into just another soldier, or perhaps a military band leader. I would much rather have a strong volunteer military, then to have to draft people.

BTW: Speaking of military, did anyone see last month's Popular Mechanics? They did an article on America being the "Only Megapower." According to this article, we have surpased superpower, to become the worlds only Megapower. Contributing factors are: Stealth Technology, and Mobility.

We are on the 3rd generation of Stealth Technology, and the rest of the world has yet to develop 1st generation.

It also discussed the difference between our 1.4 million standing military, and China's 2.5 million. Basically, even though China out numbers us, we can actually mobilize all of ours. China would be lucky to get 10% mobilized in a major confilct. During the last week prior to Gulf WarII, we moved 100,000 troops into the area, without disrupting commercial, or maritime traffic. No other nation in the world could even dream of doing this right now.

We are the best, but we could be even better.

Frohickey
Aug 21, 2003, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by wdlove I happen to think that we have a high quality of volunteers that enter our military. There does need to be a national discussion about a new draft. If they do reinstitute the draft, there should be no deferements. A 2 year committment should be the rule, community service or the military!

There is the argument that a mandatory time commitment for service would lead some elected officials to use the military in an imperialistic expansion. There is also the argument about forced servitude, but lets discard that argument for now.

A mandatory service in the military service would be good in instilling pride of country and community in the young people in the US. A 2 year commitment would be good, but I would say a 2 year active duty commitment, followed with a 30+ year reserve duty would be best.

The additional, and most important stipulation that I would add is that this commitment would have to be served within the borders of the United States. That would quash the ambitions of would-be imperialists.

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Exactly, and that translates to everything that they do in life after they leave the military. Jef, I know there are exceptions to this rule, but for the most part, of the 58 guys that went to basic with me, all are very successful except for 3 that are in jail.

So are most of the 300 or so people who were in my freshman class at college. Except for a couple who left to form a band, and some who washed out before the 5 years were up. Does that mean the military is any better or worse than college? trade school? seminary?

sturm375
Aug 21, 2003, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Exactly, and that translates to everything that they do in life after they leave the military. Jef, I know there are exceptions to this rule, but for the most part, of the 58 guys that went to basic with me, all are very successful except for 3 that are in jail.

Just to be clear in my argument, I don't equate successfulness with inovation. There are a great number of very successful people in this world, not many of these are innovators. Also, there have been a great number of innovators, that were never very successful during their lifetime.

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by mactastic
So are most of the 300 or so people who were in my freshman class at college. Except for a couple who left to form a band, and some who washed out before the 5 years were up. Does that mean the military is any better or worse than college? trade school? seminary?

Actually yes, it is better. ;)

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by sturm375
Well, that is certianly food for thought. Still, when I think of the people in history that have greatly contributed to sociaty moving forward, were not military minds.

Again, these "free thinkers" are a minority, but because they are so rare, it is important to support them, and not stifle their creativity. I know I am not one, as I would never have thought up radio, or the lightbulb, or the theory of relativity.

In my mind, instituting the draft risks the possibility of "picking" the next Mozart, and turning them into just another soldier, or perhaps a military band leader. I would much rather have a strong volunteer military, then to have to draft people.



Remember, Elvis was drafted and served ;)

As for the rest of your statement, you are right. There isn't a country in the world that can do what we can with their military.

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Actually yes, it is better. ;)

:D Good to hear the unequivocal truth right from the souce!;)

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by mactastic
:D Good to hear the unequivocal truth right from the souce!;)

Well, I am bias you know. I know how the military has made men great. And great men have made the military great. Washington, Adams, Lincoln, Eisenhower, and many others were all free thinkers, and innovators, and they served in the military.

Dont Hurt Me
Aug 21, 2003, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
president bush mentioned that it will be a continuing challenge to get the best people possible for the military...especially the officers of the armed services

is the military full of people with no other options and hailing from the ghetto and trailer parks of americia?

is their only option for a job to put themselves in harm's way?

would a draft round out the military so it won't be just the poorest stratus of america putting their lives on the line?

thoughts? this is a very bad post and ill tell you why,the military is not posted by ghetto and trailer parks people but people who are skilled enough to fly and work on jet planes, trained enough to pilot and man nuclear submarines, electronics,avionics,propulsion technology etc etc. I think the author thinks that all ground pounders represent the military. a draft is not needed. when i went in the service they checked your education,tested etc. anyone in the ghetto as you call it has the option to move or go where there heart takes them and to link this with the military is inaccurate to say the least. sure a lot of low income people find there way into the military but dont associate that as an escape from the ghetto, a lot of young people are looking for ways to explore the world, do good, get an education, learn and do exciting things and even put their lives on the line for what our country ask us to do.

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Well, I am bias you know. I know how the military has made men great. And great men have made the military great. Washington, Adams, Lincoln, Eisenhower, and many others were all free thinkers, and innovators, and they served in the military.

Yup. I tend to look up to Jefferson, he was an architect. Sadly, the only one ever to be president.:p

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by mactastic
Yup. I tend to look up to Jefferson, he was an architect. Sadly, the only one ever to be president.:p

The thing that amazes me is that conscription existed in this country for a very long time, and people were still free thinkers, and wonderful inventors.

And that was when they nearly killed you in basic. Now, they have time out cards for DI's if they are too offensive to a recruit the recruit can hold up a card for a time out. :rolleyes:

Dont Hurt Me
Aug 21, 2003, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
The thing that amazes me is that conscription existed in this country for a very long time, and people were still free thinkers, and wonderful inventors.

And that was when they nearly killed you in basic. Now, they have time out cards for DI's if they are too offensive to a recruit the recruit can hold up a card for a time out. :rolleyes: you got be kidding

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
The thing that amazes me is that conscription existed in this country for a very long time, and people were still free thinkers, and wonderful inventors.

And that was when they nearly killed you in basic. Now, they have time out cards for DI's if they are too offensive to a recruit the recruit can hold up a card for a time out. :rolleyes:

I think there was only one person claiming that the military dulled your mind. Not many would seriously claim that military people are somehow limited in their mental faculties.

Now just to throw a little gas on this fire, how do people feel about a taxpayer-funded institution of higher learning having a "Peace Studies" program?

Link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95237,00.html)

Garrett Bucks, who graduated with a degree in peace and global studies from Earlham College in Indiana last May, said the opportunity to participate in peace studies was a major factor in deciding which college to attend. Bucks said he thought peace studies encouraged students to think for themselves about global issues and their own values.

"If anything, one is really led to question those core values through peace and global studies," Bucks said.

But Matthew Spalding, director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at the Heritage Foundation, said the peace studies programs are more ideological than educational.

"Peace studies has a narrow focus -- it has certain premises and it looks for certain outcomes," Spalding said. "One would seriously have to wonder whether these programs are really a form of advocacy that is masquerading in the guide of academic studies."

If the military has a War College, isn't it then fair for others to have a Peace Studies degree?

Frohickey
Aug 21, 2003, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Well, I am bias you know. I know how the military has made men great. And great men have made the military great. Washington, Adams, Lincoln, Eisenhower, and many others were all free thinkers, and innovators, and they served in the military.

I don't think Lincoln served in the military. He was a lawyer turned politician.

A person in Lincoln's era that served with distinction in the military, and who was admired as well is Ullyses S Grant.

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
this is a very bad post and ill tell you why,the military is not posted by ghetto and trailer parks people but people who are skilled enough to fly and work on jet planes, trained enough to pilot and man nuclear submarines, electronics,avionics,propulsion technology etc etc. I think the author thinks that all ground pounders represent the military. a draft is not needed. when i went in the service they checked your education,tested etc. anyone in the ghetto as you call it has the option to move or go where there heart takes them and to link this with the military is inaccurate to say the least. sure a lot of low income people find there way into the military but dont associate that as an escape from the ghetto, a lot of young people are looking for ways to explore the world, do good, get an education, learn and do exciting things and even put their lives on the line for what our country ask us to do.

and what of the phrase, "rich man's war, poor man's fight"

there is a real inequality going on here if you haven't noticed...just go to any military base and then to a nearby college and tell me you see "equality" going on...note the breakdown by race, for instance

look at starting salaries of a college grad vs a gs-5/o-1 college grad in the civil service or military

a draft would put in a more representative cross section of america in the armed forces

why are there tons of recruiters in the poor hispanic areas in los angeles and none in rancho palos verdes (rich, white area)

why was there only one harvard grad to be enlisted in a fifteen year war in vietnam? then take a poorer section anywhere near cambridge, MA and see who went to vietnam

i am not saying the people in the military are idiots without skills, but many skilled people in their fields chose outside of military or civil service due to 1) stigma left over from vietnam, and 2) pay

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 03:46 PM
..oh, and skilled people in the military...

what happens to a pilot, captain in the air force, nearing 30, going to do with the possibility of becoming a commercial pilot for 2 or 3 times more money?

what about a petty officer helmsman who can make six digits working for an oil company if he/she gets out and goes civilian?

george w bush, if you want to quote the "author" of this thread, is the one concerned about talent leaving the military or not even going there in the first place

a two year draft, maybe stateside like mentioned, would alleviate any problems of a lack of talent in every area if there could be enough people gotten for the jobs in the military

and let's face it, getting ivy and baby ivy leaguers in the services would bring in a wealth of smarts never before seen in the services since world war II...when my dad was in the army then, he said an officer was like "god" being that there were many very educated elites (like harvard or yale types like some of our presidents) wearing second lts. bars...do you see that today?

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by Frohickey
I don't think Lincoln served in the military. He was a lawyer turned politician.

A person in Lincoln's era that served with distinction in the military, and who was admired as well is Ullyses S Grant.

a lot of presidents have had very brief stints or were in the military but that part was not emphasized

reagan was a public relations army officer, ford and nixon were in the military, carter graduated from annapolis, etc

it's not military service in some war which can help a president get elected these days...it's deep pockets and if the president was in the military, believe me, it's not known by the majority of the people who vote

also famous candidates were in service...dukakis was a sgt, perot was in the navy after annapolis, dole was a war hero, etc...

and if i spend a lot more time on the internet, i can find many others

Dont Hurt Me
Aug 21, 2003, 04:19 PM
just goes to show that a lot of great people have served in this great country god has blessed us with.

wdlove
Aug 21, 2003, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by mactastic
I think there was only one person claiming that the military dulled your mind. Not many would seriously claim that military people are somehow limited in their mental faculties.

Now just to throw a little gas on this fire, how do people feel about a taxpayer-funded institution of higher learning having a "Peace Studies" program?

Link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95237,00.html)



If the military has a War College, isn't it then fair for others to have a Peace Studies degree?

Those would be the individuals that serve in our state Department!

Desertrat
Aug 21, 2003, 06:33 PM
Nothing wrong with Peace Studies, but there are a couple of provisos which should be taught: It takes two to have peace; it only takes one for war. And, there will always be some with whom no negotiation is possible. There is more to "Peace" than the avoidance of combat.

As far as smart people volunteering, we've had two moderators from a firearms web site who went to the Army after 9/11. One other went back into active duty status. These were folks who were smart enough to get involved in a website, and common-sensical enough in their postings to be invited to become moderators.

'Rat

Frohickey
Aug 21, 2003, 09:01 PM
Since we are talking about people and the military, here are a few military hand signals. :D

http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~shane/stasj/div_bilder/signals.png

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by Desertrat
Nothing wrong with Peace Studies, but there are a couple of provisos which should be taught: It takes two to have peace; it only takes one for war. And, there will always be some with whom no negotiation is possible. There is more to "Peace" than the avoidance of combat.

As far as smart people volunteering, we've had two moderators from a firearms web site who went to the Army after 9/11. One other went back into active duty status. These were folks who were smart enough to get involved in a website, and common-sensical enough in their postings to be invited to become moderators.

'Rat

but does that mean that the draft would bring in idiots?

btw...i am against the draft but think a random draft would bring in a higher caliber of people...maybe not as willing, but still a very high caliber crowd

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 09:18 PM
do you honestly think that the volunteer enlisted are as smart and capable as the random high school graduates pulled from a totally random draft?...and do you think the officers of the volunteer military are as capable as the random college grads?

many who have no other options go military and that is wrong...the military should be a fair, average cross section of society, not people too poor or uneducated to have other options...sure, there are smart people and even brilliant people in the military, but not in the same ratio as the american population as a whole

why have the poor man fight the rich man's war??...it just is not fair..we all have freedom because of the armed forces...don't let the working class and poor keep us all safe while the rich and upper middle class get to sit out the combat

like said before...rich man's war, poor man's fight

RobVanDam
Aug 21, 2003, 10:38 PM
First off, Backtothemac, I wish there were more people in America like your Grandfather. I feel for your loss, he sounded like a great man.

btw...i am against the draft but think a random draft would bring in a higher caliber of peopleJef, a draft by definition IS RANDOM.

Now, as a whole Jef, you're just not making much sense at all in any of your opinions.

do you honestly think that the volunteer enlisted are as smart and capable as the random high school graduates pulled from a totally random draft?...and do you think the officers of the volunteer military are as capable as the random college grads?I think the enlisted are smarter. Why? Because they're enlisted. When you're in the military you learn what you need to learn. Being a soldier doesn't require an insane amount of thinking, you need to know where to be, what to do, and how to do it. That's pretty simple. Besides that, the Army, Navy, and Air Force can teach people better than any high school or college because the day is set up in those three to be incredibly structured learning environments. As for the officers, most college grads would do horrible. I would not want a Liberal Arts major leading me. I'd much rather have a guy that has been enlisted for about four to five years and is head and shoulders above every college graduate at thinking on his feet with bullets flying by him. Jef, you're really underestimating the intelligence of the average soldier. Think I'm wrong? A lot of soldiers know what they're fighting for, they know more than almost every American civilian. As for the college graduate arguement, college isn't about if you're smart enough anymore, it's more if you can pay or not. If you have a 22 ACT score, 1200 SAT score, and a 2.5 GPA, you WILL get accepted somewhere. Then if you want more proof, turn on Jay Leno and watch when he has this segment called Jaywalking. He will go out and in many cases ask college students ELEMENTARY school questions and they will bomb them horribly. Some questions are as easy as "Who were we fighting in World War II" and people will answer wrong (hell, one college guy said England). Schooling means nothing, training means everything.

Also, it's not a "rich man's war". This is a pre-emptive war, so it's actually more of a "poor man's war" because if say WMD's were used against us, more poor men would die than rich men because there's many more poor than rich. But that's a whole different story.

Also, don't worry about a draft occuring anytime soon. There are two, and only two reasons why a draft would be re-instated:

1) World War III
2) War with China

That's it. And I doubt either will happen very soon. How do I know this? Simple. Other than those two situations, voting yes to a draft is simply put, career suicide.

jefhatfield
Aug 21, 2003, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by RobVanDam
First off, Backtothemac, I wish there were more people in America like your Grandfather. I feel for your loss, he sounded like a great man.

Jef, a draft by definition IS RANDOM.

Now, as a whole Jef, you're just not making much sense at all in any of your opinions.

I think the enlisted are smarter. Why? Because they're enlisted. When you're in the military you learn what you need to learn. Being a soldier doesn't require an insane amount of thinking, you need to know where to be, what to do, and how to do it. That's pretty simple. Besides that, the Army, Navy, and Air Force can teach people better than any high school or college because the day is set up in those three to be incredibly structured learning environments. As for the officers, most college grads would do horrible. I would not want a Liberal Arts major leading me. I'd much rather have a guy that has been enlisted for about four to five years and is head and shoulders above every college graduate at thinking on his feet with bullets flying by him. Jef, you're really underestimating the intelligence of the average soldier. Think I'm wrong? A lot of soldiers know what they're fighting for, they know more than almost every American civilian. As for the college graduate arguement, college isn't about if you're smart enough anymore, it's more if you can pay or not. If you have a 22 ACT score, 1200 SAT score, and a 2.5 GPA, you WILL get accepted somewhere. Then if you want more proof, turn on Jay Leno and watch when he has this segment called Jaywalking. He will go out and in many cases ask college students ELEMENTARY school questions and they will bomb them horribly. Some questions are as easy as "Who were we fighting in World War II" and people will answer wrong (hell, one college guy said England). Schooling means nothing, training means everything.

Also, it's not a "rich man's war". This is a pre-emptive war, so it's actually more of a "poor man's war" because if say WMD's were used against us, more poor men would die than rich men because there's many more poor than rich. But that's a whole different story.

Also, don't worry about a draft occuring anytime soon. There are two, and only two reasons why a draft would be re-instated:

1) World War III
2) War with China

That's it. And I doubt either will happen very soon. How do I know this? Simple. Other than those two situations, voting yes to a draft is simply put, career suicide.

hey, acutally, i agree with a lot of what you say

i just don't think it's fair that the military, thru the system now as it is with the socio economic situations, is right having the fighting men and women being pulled from just a small segment of american society...a draft would pull from everybody equally

sure, some college grads are idiots as jay leno points out, but that is probably not the norm...do your own test and ask college grads who we fought against in world war II:p

RobVanDam
Aug 21, 2003, 11:09 PM
i just don't think it's fair that the military, thru the system now as it is with the socio economic situations, is right having the fighting men and women being pulled from just a small segment of american society...a draft would pull from everybody equallyWhat do you mean being pulled from a small segment? The segment called "Wants to be in the military"? Our army is the second largest in the world, behind China. Our army has the biggest budget by far. Our army has the best equipment by far, and it can be argued that our army has the best special forces.

Why is a draft even necessary barring a war with China or WWIII?

Just because someone is poor doesn't mean they enlist. Look at the number of homeless people in NYC for example.

There are other people who just won't enlist. I know people who's parents have kicked them out and they won't enlist. Then again, they'd probably make ****ty soldiers, so it's probably for the best.

One of the guys that will enlist that I know however comes from a middle class family and scored a 32 cumulative on his ACT's.

Besides, why should you judge someone by the number in their bank account?

Someone's rich? Great for them. They want to be a politician? Fine. They do a good job? Great, congratulations on your re-election. They do a ****ty job? Too bad, sucks to be you, hope you win that election for Alderman in some useless town in North Dakota.

Backtothemac
Aug 21, 2003, 11:11 PM
Originally posted by RobVanDam

Why is a draft even necessary barring a war with China or WWIII?



Because we have more troops deployed overseas now, than any time in History.

Look at all of the places where our troops actually are.

RobVanDam
Aug 21, 2003, 11:23 PM
I believe you mean we have more troops deployed during peacetime than at any other point in time.

mactastic
Aug 21, 2003, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by RobVanDam
I believe you mean we have more troops deployed during peacetime than at any other point in time.

This is peacetime?

Backtothemac
Aug 22, 2003, 12:37 AM
Originally posted by mactastic
This is peacetime?

Word my man, word.

RobVanDam
Aug 22, 2003, 03:59 AM
Are you sure we have more troops out now than at any other time in history? Could you post me a link or something for that?

I'm just skeptical because I would have sworn we have had more out in WWII or Vietnam.

mactastic
Aug 22, 2003, 08:52 AM
It might be more troops as a percentage of our total force structure. I don't know exactly what BTTM meant though.

jefhatfield
Aug 22, 2003, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by RobVanDam
What do you mean being pulled from a small segment? The segment called "Wants to be in the military"? Our army is the second largest in the world, behind China. Our army has the biggest budget by far. Our army has the best equipment by far, and it can be argued that our army has the best special forces.

Why is a draft even necessary barring a war with China or WWIII?

Just because someone is poor doesn't mean they enlist. Look at the number of homeless people in NYC for example.

There are other people who just won't enlist. I know people who's parents have kicked them out and they won't enlist. Then again, they'd probably make ****ty soldiers, so it's probably for the best.

One of the guys that will enlist that I know however comes from a middle class family and scored a 32 cumulative on his ACT's.

Besides, why should you judge someone by the number in their bank account?

Someone's rich? Great for them. They want to be a politician? Fine. They do a good job? Great, congratulations on your re-election. They do a ****ty job? Too bad, sucks to be you, hope you win that election for Alderman in some useless town in North Dakota.

again, i don't disagree with you

but look at what you are saying, for one second...we have a large military

but they are being pulled from volunteers mostly from the lower socio-economic sections of american society like bush mentioned in his speech on cspan to his troops...cheney has mentioned that this is not fair and "maybe" a draft could happen...but he would not elaborate on that

yes, i am still against the draft and i don't like the idea of forcing you or anybody in your high school...i know you mentioned some seniors you know who scored high on the ACTs who volunteered...to go directly into harm's way

...it's just that we have a vice president who may be president who does not like the inequality today in the services and may change things...and it won't take a war with china or world war III

when i was your age over 20 years ago, i was struggling with the idea of getting drafted to fight communism in central america and reagan was mentioning a major battle against evil down there...it scared us silly...when i signed up for selective service, the postman ( a vietnam vet) was scared, too since he thought we were headed for another long war, vietnam style, but in the jungles of nicaragua or panama