Is a US Military Draft Pending?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by beckfizzle, Dec 20, 2006.

  1. beckfizzle macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #1
    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
     
  2. cslewis macrumors 6502a

    cslewis

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Location:
    40º27.8''N, 75º42.8''W
    #2
    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.
     
  3. apachie2k macrumors 6502

    apachie2k

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Location:
    was NYC...now MIAMI
    #3
    i really hope not... it wouldn't suprise me, does anything suprise anyone anymore?
     
  4. michaelsaxon macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    #4
    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.
     
  5. 04440 macrumors member

    04440

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #5
    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!!!!
     
  6. n-abounds macrumors 6502a

    n-abounds

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    #6
    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.
     
  7. n-abounds macrumors 6502a

    n-abounds

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    #7
    Well most economists say starting a war is a good way to increase GDP...
     
  8. Josh396 macrumors 65816

    Josh396

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2004
    Location:
    Peoria/Chicago, IL
    #8
    And most would be right just about every single time.
     
  9. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #9
    Is this true apart from WW1 and WW2? Limited, unsuccessful engagements probably don't, cf. Suez, VietNam, Boer War, Iraq.
     
  10. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #10
    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.
     
  11. aristobrat macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    #11
    Since news has reports of the branches hitting their recruiting goals lately, perhaps the branches could get allowed (and funded) to increase their recruiting?
     
  12. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #12
    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.
     
  13. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #13
    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...

    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.
     
  14. jamesi macrumors 6502a

    jamesi

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Location:
    Davis CA
    #14
    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
     
  15. JurgenWigg macrumors 6502

    JurgenWigg

    Joined:
    May 20, 2006
    Location:
    Delaware
    #15
    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.
     
  16. xsedrinam macrumors 601

    xsedrinam

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
  17. poppe macrumors 68020

    poppe

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Location:
    Woodland Hills
    #17
    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?)
     
  18. n-abounds macrumors 6502a

    n-abounds

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    #18
    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 ;)
     
  19. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #19
    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.
     
  20. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #20
    ^
    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:
     
  21. Black&Tan macrumors 6502a

    Black&Tan

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    #21
    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...
     
  22. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #22
    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:
     
  23. Motley macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    #23
    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!
     
  24. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #24
    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
     
  25. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #25
    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.
     

Share This Page