Let 'them' send their own kids! Agree with him, and agreed with Rangel, back in the day.

It's pretty much a guarantee that loopholes would be built into the system for that very purpose.

My unstated condition: NO deferments, NO exceptions!

Don't vote? You are on standby. No means you are the last to go.

Not eligible for the draft? Sit down and STFU.

Exceptions for LEGALLY recognized disabilities.

So, no pimple on the butt deferment. (Hear that, Rush?)

No joining the national guard. You can do that when you get back if you like it enough.

No student deferments. No "i got a wife to take care of". (You hear me Darth?)

That'll change their tune in a hurry

and could not be drafted but I had one that needed incision with a tube in place and could enlist.

He didn't forget to whine. And, he wasn't faking it. Just crying like a baby over a pimple.

I knew I forgot something.

I was seriously considering enlisting. I have a scar on my tailbone the size of a half dollar so I knew I couldn't lie my way through it at MEPS. I told them what had happened and they said it wasn't an issue-it was very common.

With a draft guaranteed unlimited manpower and it'll fall on the backs of the powerless. Right back in Old Muddy again.

Medical and no I don't mean a butt pimple. Single parents. A single parent on first enlistment has to foster his/her child or be discharged. Religious, such as JWs. Just off the top.

Let's see that 62% contribute some blood, sweat and flag-draped coffins to another round of mid-eastern adventurism.

And I don't want to see any life lost, just to prove a point about the draft. If the MIC gets their hands on cannon fodder, not all the demonstrations in the country could stop the draft. The police are now locked and loaded, quite looking forward to demonstrations, IMO.

many of which are there due to not having the opportunities that many others have had, by making people have skin in the game. Many of our current military have served several tours overseas entailing months and years of their lives while the people who blithely vote to put them there have no relatives whatsoever on the line.

the last wars where he had drafts without large scale exemptions there were many, many, many family members of well connected people serving in war zones. No less than FDR's son saw action. So did two Kennedy boys among others.

be fighting these wars that require a draft?

or at least no where near the number we are currently fighting, but as long as you have a military made up of a small percentage of the electorate and that percentage of the electorate is the least connected and with the least opportunities we will be fighting a whole bunch of them. The military is blacker and browner than the rest of us, and it also is drawn from families that tend to be poorer than the rest of us. I can't imagine a better recipe for perpetual war than having a military who is made up of people society has shown it doesn't care about.

if he'd been a year or two older. IIRC he enlisted in the Navy but the war was over by the time he got out of BT.

Joe Jr (Army Air Corps) was killed in action (airplane explosion) and Jack (Navy) was seriously wounded.

I also think Ted was in the military though he was not near old enough to have fought in WW2.

though Joe Sr made sure he didn't get sent to Korea after what happened to young Joe and Jack.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy#College.2C_military_service.2C_and_law_school

We lost 50,000 soldiers in Vietnam BECAUSE we had a draft that could channel millions of soldiers through the killing machine. No thanks. I thought we'd learned our lesson that time.

Why he is still a Republican is a mystery to me.

I despair of the human race ever getting past the idea that killing each other, with individually or en masse, is a way to solve problems.

This is a war general, what else would he say!!!

That was before they took over half of Iraq and Syria. Clearly no one knows their size. Just people guessing.

And the coalition bombing campaign claims to have killed 12,000, but they just keep on getting new recruits.

They kept on getting bigger and our "victories" kept on moving closer to Saigon.

Plenty of people volunteer every year. And if someone truly wanted to defeat ISIS why would they use unwilling amateurs instead of seasoned professionals? I keep reading on this board "something needs to be done about ISIS". Well guess what? Air power whether it is bombs or missiles will not do it. And other neighbor countries will not do it either. I do not favor ground troops to combat ISIS. We have to let that horror run its course.

it's what's best for the country.

I was an infantry commander. If you think everyone in the infantry volunteers for infantry, you don't know much about the military. If you think every soldier in the infantry is a "seasoned professional," it just makes me laugh. A lot of "unwilling amateurs" did pretty well in the Civil War, WWI, WWII and Vietnam.

We lost that one if you remember. I was volunteer and no professional in the military wants the draft. Whatever party pushes a draft though will lose the youth vote for at least a generation and deservedly so.

He survived a year in the A Shau Valley with the 101st Airborne and the siege of FB Ripcord. Got a couple of Air Medals too-you know-the one awarded for 25 combat assaults? I'd say he did VERY FUCKING WELL. Oh-and he didn't think much of lifers...

Many didn't. Lifers did not like draftees and draftees did not like lifer. Standard stuff in the military.

Did you survey all the "professionals in the military?" LOL. I think you must have missed the O-6 in the OP.

And, as I said before, it's what's best for the country, not the military. The military exists to serve the nation, not the other way around. The military will always have a cadre of career officers and NCOs who are the "professionals." Most of the enlisted men nowadays are there because of economic reasons, not to become professional soldiers. Most need a job or just want to get the educational benefits. A large majority of enlisted men serve just one hitch.

The draftees didn't lose Vietnam, genius. In fact, they fought pretty fucking tough. Why not regale us with your wartime observations? The people correctly didn't support the war and the generals lied their asses off that they just needed one more division. A total military effort was never undertaken by the US, but those unfortunate soldiers who got sent over there fought as well as any American soldiers at war. Your scurrilous slur on the draftees is uninformed and pathetic.

But that's pretty much what we've come to expect.

Have you surveyed all the professionals in the military? I didn't think so. Besides the long retired Colonel mentioned in the OP who supports the draft in the military? I won't hold my breath.

That was my experience in Vietnam as an Army Infantry platoon leader in the same division as catnhatnh's brother--the 101st Airborne Division.

Just like enlistees, draftees fought and performed as if their lives depended on it--because they did.

That's just my personal experience and observation, but I do know what I'm talking about. It's my informed opinion based on experience with my own men in-country.

Me, at left, as a 20-year-old Infantry platoon leader in Vietnam. Outside Firebase Bastogne, I Corps, October 1969.
''

R.I.P. Dan (center) and Russ (right).

That war was lost. Can we agree on that? We lost for many reasons and one reason was that people had been taken from their civilian lives and did not want to be there. I notice none of the posters can come up any current military professional who wants a draft.

"your uninformed response is what I expect..."

No more than the unsupported and inaccurate allegations that we may expect from you.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other (and both as petulant as the other, too... regardless of whether you hold your breath, or simply put it away for safe keeping)

I remember during the endless 2nd Iraq war, it did not matter if a person's term of service was actually due to end, if the military wanted they guy/gal to stay in, they were forced to say in. Military Stop Loss

It is vey different to be in the military today then what is was like for my Dad in WWII. You knew who your enemy was, there was a specific, achievable goal and the war ended. Now a says, the MIC and PTB are constantly looking for the next war to keep the MIC funded. Fighting the war or terror is like fighting smoke or the Hydra. You take out one group and another group will rise up because no one has successfully dealt with the root cause of terrorism and terrorist groups. There is no logic to this stragtegy and no foreseeable ending. To me, the concept of perpetual war is to keept the focus elsewhere and not on what is going on within our own country. The masses are stupid to fall for this game because it is already proven that the MIC and PTB have no interest in cleaning up their mess when people come back disabled, phyically or emotionally.


If they really want to continually wage war then there should be mandatory military service for all young people no matter what there socio-economic-racial background. The rich 1%ers should be required to serve up their children like the rest of us.

I really wonder if, at some point, an international coallition will be put together to take on the US because we are truly becoming the 21st Century version of Nazi Germany.

And take the consequences. Those will be recession and more instability in the world. I want to reduce the military but I am not naive enough to think their will be no consequences.

The Saudis have been brilliant at getting us to do their dirty work in the Middle East.

Continuing to fight wars with a religious context is like living Groundhogs day over and over. You will never win a religious war because all sides are equally crazy and will refuse to learn to get along. Even the various factions within Islam can't get along with one another. It is time that we pulled out and let them have at it. With all of the various wars we have fought there, at not time as the underlining issues ever been dealt with so there will always be wars there.

As to a war on terror, that is the most stupid war to ever get into because terrorism is like a hydra, you get rid of one group and another rises up to take its place because, again the underlining issues have never been dealt with.

With modern day weapons, you don't need a huge military and it is wasteful to have such a large military budget. It is horrifying that the MIC and PTB wnat to fight war after to war to fund the MIC and yet they don't really care about the consequences of all of these wars - the men and women who come back home physically or emotionally damaged. They get these people torn up and don't want to pay to put them back together which is morally wrong.

Reducing military spending would allow us to invest in our own country. Our infrastructure is crumbing at a far greater rate then it can be repaired. More and more manufacturing is shipped overseas. More money could be spent on creating alternative energy sources and innovation. This country has stopped investing in itself while allowing the 1%ers and Corporations to ship more jobs overseas. A bloated military budget is speeding up the decline we face within our own country. History has shown that as a country spends more money and resources on war, the country drops in global standing. For example, the USSR broke up because it could not keep pace with the US level of military spendig. Great Britain used to be the biggest global power but lost that crown by the end of WWII as it saw some of its empire vanishing.

The only thing that keeps us where we are in international affairs are our nuclear weapons. It is not how much everyone else admires us. I just don't think that we are viewed in anywhere near as favorable a light around the work as a lot of people think we are. I think that a lot of countries probably view us a greater threat then gropus like ISIS because we have te ability to throw our weight around on a much larger scale.

If we want to make a mark in the world let it be for better reasons then fighting religious wars. The issues of climate change and endangered/protected species have more long range global impact then fighting the next group in the Middle East.

It's an infuriating period in American history when the BOTTOM 1% of income earners fight all the wars, and the TOP 1% of income earners profit from it.

They want a war? Open the draft and call up 3,000 to 5,000!

No "college" deferrals either!

Because not everyone can handle war. As it is, even of those signing up voluntarily, too many come back with PTSD, or worse.

As much as I want to say "hell yes...let them be drafted", it would also catch up too many who are not responsible for the wars they end up dying in.

that their tax dollars not fund military funding (with the exception of the VA Hosiptials and programs to take care of the physically and emotionallly damaged members of the military. Imagine if conscientious objectors started across the country to refuse to pay taxes. That has the potential to be a huge mechanism of non-violent protest. What will the government if there was a massaive tax revolt over the issue of the military? Particularly if the volume of protestors far exceeded their capacity of the government to deal with them.

The Hobby Lobby ruling could be used to catapault the non-vioent, anti-military movement. Being anti-war, anti-military is just as much a part of a person's religious beliefs as being pro-life.

Are women going to be drafted? With the combat restrictions gone, the primary reason for exempting women no longer exists.

Including the 1% women and of-age relatives, and all the Wall Streeter's and their kids. Including all of the politician's daughters & granddaughters. No deferments. No excuses.

Wanna stop all this bullsh&t before it even starts? Well that'll kill any bullsh&t about sending troops over, toot-sweet. They don't care about sending other folks kids to get blown away, but there's no way they are going to send their little princess over to get their ass shot off, nuh-uh, no way.

whether or not we should go to war. If the answer is yes, then EVERY American needs to be affected. It can't just be biz as usual.

A million of us marched on Washington during those years, millions more were in the streets of their home towns. We were noisy but law-abiding, and I was glad of that. Unfortunately we were ignored.

But during the Vietnam War what truly roused the young was how personal it was, and it was personal because they were all in fear of the draft. It may be the only thing that restrains the warmongers even a little bit.

Re-instating the military draft does not mean what a lot of people think it means.

They are putting the cart before the horse.

The only way there will be a military draft in this country is if a majority of voters support sending their sons/brothers/husbands (and themselves, if military age) to fight and die in some hellhole like Iraq.

And the only way THAT is going to happen is if the situation gets so bad as to constitute a REAL threat to America (not the over-hyped BS we've been fed since 9/11).

It's easy to think about a draft in the abstract, and as a means to prevent sending our people to be maimed & killed for MIC profits and delusional neocon ambitions. A legitimate threat of imposing the draft might have some effect, but an actual military draft is not to be desired under any circumstances!!!

Because that would mean it is widely viewed as necessary in a situation where we'd be sending a lot more troops into conflict than we have during the last 14 years.

of being drafted. Of course, then there would quickly cease to be wars requiring troops on the ground.

Even in the military, the wealthy or well connected are still able to get assignments on general staff, at installations far outside of the combat area, or stateside. Ted Kennedy, for example, spent much of the the Korean war stateside and in Paris. He climbed the Matterhorn on one of his weekends off. That's not to say that happens to ALL the children of the wealthy, but I'll bet he didn't get that assignment by "luck of the draw".

If you were physically unable to fight you would work at other duties in the Armed forces. I know of course that this would never happen. But it would be very effective in preventing wars.

Another way to do this would be to require a tax on all earnings and dividends and interest (all sources of income) above 1/2 million a year sufficient to pay all war costs. Even if said tax had to be 100%. and do the same for estate taxes. I predict such a scheme would lead to world peace rather quickly.

In some cases, you'll need people fit enough to perform non-combat duties, so someone is going to end up with those jobs.

In either case, instituting a draft to make sure the wealthy feel the pain of war, or even taxing everyone at 100% won't be effective. If the government takes gobs of money to spend on the military, why wouldn't the wealthy just dump their money in defense stocks? Their "profits" wouldn't show as any source of income until they sell, and why would they sell when the government is ensuring those companies get lots of business. And as this would only be American policy, this would really only prevent US military involvement even if it did work, so world peace would still be a world away.

IMHO, The best way to prevent most wars would be to not elect politicians that vote for unnecessary ones.

That would most likely put a stop to war... or at least U.S. involvement in it.

...unless you literally meant to draft every eligible child in America, simple mathematics shows that the 'skin in the game' argument is bad. The true elites are ~.1% of the population. You randomly call up 500,000 people out of 50, 60 million possible...your odds of hitting an 'elite' are really low. Losing one or two replaceable sons in exchange for control of another nation or five of people? No big loss.

Disgusting as sin obviously...but definitely their mindset.

... What the real reason for wars is:






http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-l0153IVKH04/UeZwdo_AA7I/AAAAAAAASM0/VL-cxH0-j1Q/s1600/War+is+Business+1.jpg

Not sacrifice for these god damned people to profit from. There is little to no threat to this country. Does anyone think the rich assholes won't get their kids out of it. Come on now. Stop the nonsense!

They want a war? Their kids can fight it.

When you have a professional, all-volunteer force ready, willing and able to carry out the mission.

I think within a couple of decades we'll be dropping robot soldiers into battle from unmanned aircraft anyway. Check out these things Google is building:

Followed by their family members.

Fuck war.

When motivated by a desperation level of unemployment and the lure of bonuses the poorer classes have admirably stepped up to prevent any unseemly manhandling of the better classes youth by the military.

And I know that our young enlistees have an amazing love for our country. I'm being snarky regarding how the warmongers see filling out the ranks for their unpopular wars.

A few examples:

Ret. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson discusses possibility of a conspiracy to kill JFK

Ex-Bush Official Col. Lawrence Wilkerson: "I am Willing to Testify" If Dick Cheney is Put on Trial

Ex-Powell Aide Suggests CIA Assassination Program Was Actually Active

understands the point. Wilkerson is not being an idiot or a typical GOP doofuss.

Quite simple: There'd be no boots on the ground or in the air if the moneyed thought their babies would have to go fight and if they made no profits from it.

We can't defeat a movement like ISIS from the air. We pretty much learned that lesson in Vietnam -- and again in Afghanistan. If you think we can, then you don't understand the working of a caliphate.

Once a caliphate is established (and there are conditions for this) then all devout Muslims are required to support it. Now, some Muslims may consider themselves devout and not support it, but caliphate leaders would say they were apostates and can be killed.

Killing off members of the caliphate is counterproductive. They believe that in their battle against the forces of evil, most of them will be killed. When they are down to 10 percent, the Mahdi (their Messiah) will appear and defeat the infidels. All the caliphate members go to heaven. It's kind of like the Christian rapture nonsense. So, killing off ISIS members from the air is proving that they are doing Allah's work and it encourages them -- and motivates people from all over the world to go join them.

The only way to defeat the caliphate is to deny it land. Land is a requirement. If it has no land, the caliphate ends. Right now, ISIS has land -- some of it desolate desert, some of it major cities -- and as long as it does, it endures. The only way to deny it land is to have boots on the ground. It's sad to say, but just dropping planeloads and droneloads of bombs can't do the job.

So, if we want to put boots on the ground, let's have a draft. Draft people in this order:

NRA members
Militia members
Open-carry advocates
White supremacists
Anyone flying a Confederate flag

(I realize there's probably a lot of overlap here, but it's a start.

Then:

Tea Partiers
Republicans in general
Members of Congress

You get the point. The draft would end within 24 hours.

All those between 18 and 35 will be assigned to combat units, and all those between 36 and 50 will become cooks, clerks, drivers, and assorted support troops. Do deferments for any reason.

Presto, peace magically appears.

Last edited Tue Aug 18, 2015, 06:42 PM - Edit history (2)

1. Return to the draft - all men under 35 are eligible for active-duty service, all men and women 35-55 are eligible for Stateside reserve service. No exceptions or exemptions, except for physical disability, single-parent or CO status.

2. All physically qualified children and grandchildren of current or former members of Congress, current or former presidents and cabinet secretaries, and current or former Chief Justices will receive draft lottery numbers of 50 or lower - the same rule would apply to state legislatures, governors and court systems.

3. Top marginal tax rates go to 95%; elimination of the carried interest deduction; American-domiciled corporations holding offshore assets have two choices - return all assets to the United States to be subject to federal taxation, or face dissolution of their corporate charters. Elimination of the SS tax cap.

4. Establish an active-duty military force of fifteen million, with an additional fifteen million in the reserves or National Guard.

5. Contingency planning for occupation of Iran and other Mideastern nations for at least 50 years, with concomitant permanent conversion to a planned and centralized war economy.

6. Gasoline rationing, and conversion of all civilian vehicle production to military production.

Come on, folks, let's face it - given the awful, terrible, horrible, mortal, pathological DANGER posed to all of us RIGHT NOW by ISIS and IRAN, and AL-QAEDA - with our national survival at stake, we must mobilize every asset, and on a long-term basis.

No more pretty, shiny TV war on the cheap - if these arrogant, stupid cocksuckers want to invade Syria, invade Iran, re-invade Iraq, everybody gets an invitation to the sandbox party. Everybody.

warmongers, chickenhawks, and war profiteers than to ensure at least some of them are exposed to a potentially big downside to their aggression?

minds Real quick-Especially if the Ended the deferments that "important, wealthy, politicians kids" abused to avoid being drafted.

but Elvis was drafted as were several famous athletes such as Joe DiMaggio. In addition Bush, two Kennedy's and FDR's own son served in WW2.

No Mormons on missions exemptions, either. Everybody goes.

Last edited Wed Aug 19, 2015, 01:14 AM - Edit history (1)

And we need to know the truth about how that group got started and who is supporting them. They have weapons. Where are they getting them? If they are building them themselves, with what materials? Where are they getting the materials to build weapons?

How are they able to hold territory when we have air cover?

We don't need boots on the ground. They do not yet have the infrastructure that they will have in five years. We need to stop the flow of weapons and not just to ISIS.

It's precisely the same (lack of) logic.

The Iraq army drops their weapons and runs when attacked. If they will not defend their country then we will spend no more American blood or treasure! It is just that simple. This is stupid.

The middle east has a problem. We have no problem. If the rest of the world wants us to play cop then it is way past time they start chipping in.

Israel is a perfect example of a country that has never seen a war they don't want the United States to fight.

Even Canada is mouthing off lately. So how about Canada spends half of their GDP on an army!!!! Then come talk.

I agree that a draft would help stop some of this bat shit craziness.

that people like the Bushes, Cheneys, etc. always get away with dodging the draft, that won't change unless all loopholes are taken out of the equation, and I don't mean loopholes like being "legally blind" or having some kind of "medically proven" disability, otherwise these people with deep pockets will manage to dodge it.

But I agree that the poll numbers will come down very fast if that is the case.

I totally agree, as I'm sure the rest of you do too. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: rich people start wars and poor people fight them. Disgusting.

A Vietnam veteran peace studies professor I talked with said supports a draft (civic service and military) because he said it would make it much less likely that the electorate in the US will support war. He thinks that opposition would be much more vociferous now that we have had more misguided wars.