A primary purpose of the all volunteer army was to put a limit on unpopular wars. By ending the draft, it provided the population a mechanism to "vote with their feet", and refuse to support a militaristic presidents mad schemes.
No, it is not a perfect mechanism. It has a significant lag built in, because we must have a standing army for defense. But it does limit the number of soldiers that can be fielded for a war without the support of the people.
The only reason we have not invaded Syria and Iran is because we lack the troops. With a draft, this war happy madman will soon put 500,000 or more troops into the middle east. Extension of this criminal war to other countries will follow immediately.
This practical side is separate from the moral issue that the draft is slavery. Anyone who supports the draft is a slaver, who would quite literaly own others. Sometimes temporarily and sometimes for the rest of their very short lives.
Don't give Bush43 the most important war material he needs to expand his wars of aggression.
Posted by m at December 10, 2005 05:45 AMTh dftcrt prty hs fldd nmrs clls fr rsmng th drft, llgc n th thrs f chldsh tntrm. Thy sm dtrmnd t sqndr mrc's ndpndnc n grvlng sbmssn t th cltn f th dsgrntld.
[Editor: ignore=off]No doubt Bendito is 4-F.
Posted by at December 10, 2005 07:49 AMTwo thoughts on a draft: 1. A poll weary GOP congress will never go along with it.
2. If for some crazy reason they did, it really would be the death of the Republican party.
you mean the 25,000 private contractors
aren't enough?
Bendito-bot's fart today is even more incoherent than his usual efforts.
There are some fatal bugs in the software, but we've known that for a long time.
I was interested by m's take on the volunteer force above.
My view has been that the all-volunteer force has been a huge boon to the endlessly bellicose executive branch, allowing it to fight numerous wars without real involvement or concern of the citizenry.
I can't imagine that our professional presidential class would ever want to give up their personal strike force and return to the unwieldy conscripted force.
Posted by euzoius at December 10, 2005 08:42 AMPessimist, in your theory would the draft be instituted simply for the Iraq war or to 'protect' the US from the growing distaste for us from our one-time allies? Or both?
Funny, 'cause the very same sentence came out of my mouth last week after watching one of his many war-mongering speeches about how 'as long as he is commander-in-chief' it will be done his way. I turned to my husband and said 'that evil bastard is going to institute the draft.'
I cannot see it going through congress, I cannot fathom them ever allowing it - but who knows anymore what the Repubots will rubber stamp.
The American people would not stand for it. I think that one of the reasons that America has not been more outraged about this war is because it happens in a closet and affects very few. We don't see the coffins, we don't hear the truth, we aren't paying for it (yet). There have been no taxes raised to pay for this insanity, no rations, no nothing - just this massive global disaster that no one really seems to know about.
A draft would open people's eyes and cause me to go North.
Posted by Anjha at December 10, 2005 08:52 AMPessimist, in your theory would the draft be instituted simply for the Iraq war or to 'protect' the US from the growing distaste for us from our one-time allies? Or both?
It would come about because of the growing distaste for Bu$hCo America (the American people still are highly regarded in many countries that don't like Bu$h, but that is weakening the longer we let him run things). When the time is right-wing enough, Syria, Iran, maybe Libya (they are getting too close to the Brits and the rest of the EU) are to be attacked. George wouldn't be able to count on even those who began Iraq with him anymore.
Funny, 'cause the very same sentence came out of my mouth last week after watching one of his many war-mongering speeches about how 'as long as he is commander-in-chief' it will be done his way. I turned to my husband and said 'that evil bastard is going to institute the draft.'
Just goes to show that we arrived at our conclusions independently - a necessary fact when demonstrating reliability.
I cannot see it going through congress, I cannot fathom them ever allowing it - but who knows anymore what the Repubots will rubber stamp.
It doesn't have to go through Congress at all! There are many (dozens!) of Executive Orders on the shelf that only have to be declared to be in force by the White House. Some have prior conditions, but that wouldn't stop Bu$hCo!
The American people would not stand for it.
The USA Patriot Act just got 'renewed'. We no longer matter. One peep out of us, and we get 'renditioned' - maybe into a front-line unit!
I think that one of the reasons that America has not been more outraged about this war is because it happens in a closet and affects very few. We don't see the coffins, we don't hear the truth, we aren't paying for it (yet). There have been no taxes raised to pay for this insanity, no rations, no nothing - just this massive global disaster that no one really seems to know about.
We Americans of all stripes will care when Asian banks pull the credit plug! That time is coming soon!
A draft would open people's eyes and cause me to go North. - Posted by Anjha at December 10, 2005 08:52 AM
A smart person would get prepared.
Posted by pessimist at December 10, 2005 10:05 AMbender-tito you are such a babyboy tosser
Posted by godman at December 10, 2005 04:24 PMThe American people would not stand for it. I think that one of the reasons that America has not been more outraged about this war is because it happens in a closet and affects very few. We don't see the coffins, we don't hear the truth, we aren't paying for it (yet). There have been no taxes raised to pay for this insanity, no rations, no nothing - just this massive global disaster that no one really seems to know about.
Isn't that the very reason that Rangal tacked a draft provision onto a bill earlier this year? To light a fire about how we were going to need more troops to keep this Iraq diversion going? I personally wish they would institute a draft. Think of the political mileage the Dems would get from it. But they won't because it would be the end of the Republican Party.
They need more troops now. Tony Blankley was just on McLaughlin screaming about how we need to spend more money on the military and that we need to build the troops. In the meantime, Rummy was on C-Span this morning saying that at any given time in Iraq you can find someone who says we need more troops on the ground but he still thinks we can "win" the way we've been going.
I find it amusing that Reps will scream about the need to spend more on the military, offer signing bonuses as incentives to get kids to sign up for service, at the very same time they claim that we can't fix our education system by throwing money at it. Of course, if the schools were better, we wouldn't have so many poor kids to "volunteer" for service.
It just occured to me how wrong the phrase "volunteer army" truly is. Volunteers are by definition unpaid. I guess we really just have a poor mercenary army.
Posted by ann at December 10, 2005 05:21 PMBush will go for bringing the draft back.
I'm just going by past behavior. Has he EVER reconsidered a bone-headed decision? Has he ever made a decision that was NOT bone-headed? Has he ever hesitated over MAKING a bone-headed decision?
I'm just just co-ordinating the X, Y, and Z points on this Bush Prediction graph. (All of which arrive at zero points, meaning the predictability of any bone-headed decision is 100%.)
Which bone-headed decision? That is where the fine-tuning comes in. I think you do the math using the variable: of Doing Maximum Harm to Vast Numbers in a way that will Benefit The Rich.
So I think he will call for a draft.
Posted by WereBear at December 11, 2005 09:51 AM