So the word has now hit the mainstream. Draft. Only a matter of time, I guess before it came up. Charlie Rangel, a Korean-war vet brought it up long ago, but aside from some media-whore 'ha-ha', the echos of his speechs faded as the republicans clamored for their 'no-sacrifice war'. Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, a veteran and I believe a Bronze-star recipient has finally talked about seeing elephants in the room. As I have poked around blogtopia, I find that the consensus is mixed to neutral. Kos.
Unlike most people around these parts, I actually support a military draft (with the option of alternate service for conscientious objectors). I think the burdens of our Democracy should be shared by all. And as a side benefit, the more people serve, the more stake everyone will have in potential military conflicts. It's a lot easier to advocate for war if you don't know anyone who might suffer consequences. It's a lot harder to remain aloof if war may impact your friends, children, or grandchildren.
I have mixed feelings about the draft. Though, the farther away I get from prime draft age the less I actually like the idea. Those 18 year olds get younger every day, and while plenty of 18 year olds are serving and getting killed, there's a difference between those who choose to go and those who would be forced. Plenty of 18 year olds are just not equipped (nor 19 nor 30 for that matter). That's not the only reason, of course.
However, I definitely don't like the idea of what amounts to an emergency draft for a situation which frankly isn't an emergency. The reinstitution of mandatory conscription would fundamentally overhaul both our military and our society. Perhaps if the idiots in Congress and the Pentagon would increase pay and benefits, rather than funneling all that money into wonderful private security costing orders of magnitude more, we wouldn't have people like Chuck Hagel opining about the possible need for it.
I think the fact that the military has become all-volunteer makes it easy for the deaths in Iraq and elsewhere to be overlooked. We can at least partly rationalize away the deaths knowing that the troops supposedly chose to be there. If we were talking about 18 year olds being forced against their will to this country and being murdered, it would be a hell of a lot harder to go about our business. But just because these soldiers chose to serve their country does not make their lives any less valuable or their deaths any less tragic.
The branches of the military don't sell service in a realistic manner. I remember a few years ago, I was just out of high school (or maybe just finishing up high school) and was contacted by a rep for the Navy. I've never had any interest in being involved in the military in any way, so I don't know why I let myself get talked into going in and testing, but I did. I wasn't sure what to do with my life, and I think that uncertainty led me to at least consider the possibilities. I went into the local office and took the entry test. I scored in the 99th percentile and the recruitment officer was all over me. He promised me the world; some easy service followed by a $50,000 college scholarship and a guaranteed job in journalism when I got out of school--basically whatever I wanted. He made it sound like a cakewalk with huge rewards. It was a no-brainer.
You know, for a moment I considered. Then I thought, "What the fuck am I doing?" and came to my senses. I'm a liberal, I'm a vegetarian (how well does that work in the military), and I'd always had a dim view of the indoctrination I believed occurred in the military.
...
A draft scares me to death. I am 23 years old; I am draft age. My friends are draft age. I am terrified that our government will attempt to send us to die for a war that should never have been started. This isn't just fair, this is criminal. I shouldn't have to die for George Bush and my friends shouldn't have to die for George Bush. We shouldn't have to die for his mistakes while he makes his goddamn speeches and makes his goddamn attacks and engages in what he believes to be a holy war, all from the comfort of his perfectly safe life. This is a man who has never known sacrifice and never will know sacrifice.
This is a man who, with a draft, would force innocent Americans to go die in a war that he began with lies, and then wouldn't even bother to attend the funerals.
No. I will not go die for that man. My friends will not go die for that man. This cannot happen. It simply cannot happen.
As I said below, one of the reasons I support renewing the draft is because it would act as a deterrent against unnecessary wars of choice by the President. The Framers included such a deterrent in the Constitution by granting Congress alone (not the President) the power to declare war. The thinking was that this provision would force Congress - being the most accountable branch - to think long and hard about commiting to a war.
I have for a long time thought that Charlie Rangel would one day be exonerated for his proposal of bringing back a draft in some form or another. A truly shared sacrifice, like the lives and well-being of our youth and country has to be in the mind of any President. The draft would not just be a mechanism of war, but also a mechanism of accountability, something sadly lacking in the war-mongering officials who hold the titles required to sign off on the cavalier use of the military to pursue agendas not yet made clear for vague and inarticulate reasons.
I understand the dilema which the author of Nightmares for Sale feels. It's natural for anyone to not want to be doing something they feel coerced into, and that's OK on a lot of levels. Offering them and others a viable, honorable alternative to serving in the Armed Forces might be a really good outcome for them, and for us as a country. Everyone has a part, and becomes important for their contribution; within a generation there would be no one who has not had to carry the burden at some level, and be responsible for someone. Hell, it could put the republicans out of business.
Military and national service with limited, limited deferments would not be the worst of things. After all, isn't it worth something to have a voice and make your mark?
But then, no matter how much I find myself in agreement with Kos and others, I find myself sick that I have to write about this at all.
1600 Crew Bastards.
posted by Jo Fish on 04.20.04 at 06:52 PM
Comments:
Thanks, Jo, that's a great post. Here in my home city a few years back they did away with jury duty exemptions. Alla sudden, everybody from movie stars to former mayors were showing up and doing their civic duty.
Unfortunately, the 1600 Crew won't reinstate the draft until they have fully ignited WWIII, which has been their goal all along. (note how blithely jarvis, reynolds, sullivan, and other castratos in the church 'o W's blog choir refer to it already as WWIII. the rightwing suicide girls desperately want it to be true, they are really all pining for millions dead and an excuse to use nukes., because they think somehow they will be safe in their suburban cul-de-sacs)
posted by: OTB on 04.20.04 at 07:32 PM [permalink]
Great entry, Jo, and some good thoughts. Thanks for linking to my blog. I do like your idea on serving the country in some fashion outside of the Armed Forces. I'm not against doing some kind of service to make the country better, but I am pretty averse to serving in the military, in any fashion. Particularly if I am forced into it because of a war that we should never have fought, based on lies, against a country that posed no threat to the United States.
That's the short version of the response I put up at my blog. Thanks again for the reference.
Jo, in the present military force wouldn't two year draftees only be good as cannon fodder? I'm not sure the idea is that fair if the draftees get to be the Foreign Legion.
posted by: Tim H. on 04.20.04 at 08:45 PM [permalink]
Legal Fiction wrote:
"The thinking was that this provision would force Congress - being the most accountable branch - to think long and hard about committing to a war."
So, after the display of spinelessness we were treated to in the fall of 2002, does anyone think we can depend on Congress to rein in somebody like George "AWOL" Bush in the future? Congress was afraid of being held accountable for not being patriotic enough to "fight terrorism." The executive branch deceived and manipulated the legislative branch into doing its will using national security to shelter its schemes. Congress didn't have the nerve to ask hard questions. The vast majority of the public trusted the president and enjoyed the explosions on TV, while flying flags from their car antennas. And Nader is signed up to run again in 2004. My expectations from politicians and voters could not go much lower.
Who wants to be trapped in any kind of national service when this kind of thing happens again? I don't think I'll live long enough to get over the cynicism this invasion of Iraq has engendered in me. I was 19 in 1970. I marched, and argued, and I have always, always voted. I thought my generation had learned something.
All the facts coming out about the lies, the total incompetence this administration has displayed, and Bush is still ahead of Kerry in the polls. I beg of all of you, do not support the idea of a draft for ideological reasons. There is no telling when or how the next moronic megalomaniac will be crowned by 51% of the voters (or close enough for government work.)
My worst nightmare is for Bush to be elected in 2004 and then having the draft reinstated. What will keep him from using these human beings like toy soldiers then? No third term anyway. But he could be come convinced that God was telling him to prepare for the Horsemen.
posted by: Cowalker on 04.20.04 at 09:28 PM [permalink]
In the recent payraise for the military, they limited the increase for E-1 to E-3 and O-1 to 1-1/2% while everyone else got 4+%. A two-tier system with the people at the bottom getting screwed.
They really getting ready for a draft.
No deferments, everyone gets two years of national service and most of them can rebuild the national parks and clean up the inner cities. There are plenty of things that need doing. Only volunteers would enter the military to satisfy national service or any other dangerous job function.
posted by: Bryan on 04.20.04 at 09:52 PM [permalink]
Bryan, what you say is completely accurate, although I believe Congress did unilaterally (OK, bilaterally in the sense that both houses signed off on it) add more money to the pay increases for the lower ranks in both EM and Officer groups.
We all know that any draft revived after George's second theft of the Oval Office will be every bit as unfair as the Bushit economic revival has been.
There will be NO children of Congresscritters, corporate heavyweights, or big Fascist Party donors being drafted.
Depend on it. Our War of Imperial Expansion (2005-2014) will be financed by the middle class and will contain cannon fodder only from the serfs.
posted by: Lurch on 04.20.04 at 11:26 PM [permalink]
Well over a year ago, I wrote to a Congressman for whom I have a lot of respect about the need for reinstiuting the draft. His response was to the effect that Congress would not do so, stressing the technology that has made our armed forces so effective. One of the things lacking today, as compared to the late 1960s, is the relative inaction on college campuses about the situation in Iraq and other hot spots. The main reason, in my view, is that there is no draft that college students may have to face. At the same time, their parents and relatives to a great extent also do not challenge W's Administration. Meantime, there may be a quagmire developing. What if other hot spots break out? If Americans had to face more sacrifices, then perhaps there would be better awareness of the problems that W and his Administration have gotten us into - not just Iraq but also the domestic situation.
If elected this Fall, W will be a lame duck. He did not have a mandate as a result of the 2000 appointment 5-4 by the Supreme Court and look at the boldness (silliness) of his actions. As a lame duck, he would probably extend this.
So the issue is whether our national interests are such that a draft may be necessary. This should be debated before November.
posted by: Shag from Brookline on 04.21.04 at 06:47 AM [permalink]
Great post Jo. Thought provoking.
I think a lot of the public apathy today is because there is no threat of draft hanging over the heads of this generation. I believe that if the draft was reinstutited today the public would be more vocal in their objections to sending our youth to war. We might even start demanding that the Congress fulfill their constitutional duty. Only Congress can declare war. We've allowed the Executive branch to usurp the Congress's power for several generations. It is time to put an end to this. The draft would be an incentive to correct this laziness on the part of our Legislative branch.
I was drafted and sent to Vietnam. I've never forgotten what happened. The experience made me more aware of the perils of allowing the Executive branch to unilaterally make decisions over our engaging in wars. If the Congress was doing their jobs and executing their duties we would not be in this mess right now. It is time to hold their feet to the fire and force them to uphold the offices they were elected to.
I agree with the previous posts that alternate duty should be permitted for those who object to war. There is plenty that the youth today can do to contribute to society. The only reason that we have an all volunteer armed forces today is because the economy is in such a shambles that there is no other place for them to go.
posted by: Lowell on 04.21.04 at 10:04 AM [permalink]
But he could be come convinced that God was telling him to prepare for the Horsemen.
Uh, hate to break it to ya... he's already there.
posted by: minusp on 04.21.04 at 12:29 PM [permalink]
There's a soul searching entry on Beneath Buddha's Eyes blog today...
Lowell said - "The only reason that we have an all volunteer armed forces today is because the economy is in such a shambles that there is no other place for them to go."
So, so true....when we get to hear the stories of the troops who have died, how many times have you read "he/she joined to get the money for college?".
a friend of mine joined the Army in January 2003, knowing what was about to happen, because he hadn't been able to find real work in almost 2 years and couldn't afford to finish school.
he's spent the past 6 months or so in Afghanistan, and occassionally would send emails joking about unique driving techniques to avoid land mines.
he's due back home in 4-6 weeks for a while, but no one knows how long.
i wonder how many other active duty members found themselves making the same choices for similar reasons.
I'm with Lurch here--The draft is only defensible if it applies to everyone--and there's no way in hell that's going to happen with the Bushes in charge.
As the country becomes more stratified into rich and poor and is run by people who clearly think this stratification is just great, not only are the poor going to serve and the rich going to skip, but the decisions about what that service entails will become increasingly callow about soldiers' welfare.
You think Bush and Rumsfield are screwing with our soldiers in Iraq? Wait 'til they're playing with draftees' lives.
posted by: Molly, NYC on 04.21.04 at 05:41 PM [permalink]
I have a question for he veterans here: Is it possible for someone (not draft elligible) to volunteer to take the place of a kid who is, if they're physically fit enough to make it through basic and do the job?
It just seems to me that we're only blood-letting at this point because this crew refuses to acknowledge that they've made terrible errors and they'll keep on making them - to the detriment of our troops. Shouldn't I be able to volunteer to go over for a kid who still has their whole life ahead of them? Hell, I've got a ton of guys who'd help train me to make it back alive (or give me a better chance than basic anyway).
I'm just thinking out loud I guess. Still, I'd like to know.
posted by: Kimberley on 04.21.04 at 07:32 PM [permalink]
One good thing that might come of this is an energized youth vote in the fall. Time to press on the kids that they absolutely must vote this fall. Need to ditch Duh-W before he takes us into Syria, Iran and N. Korea.
I retired from the Army in 1995. My eldest son will report to Marine Corps boot camp in less than two months.
You are a bunch of hypocrites, except Atrios.
The impetus behind the liberals' (mostly) call for a draft is not national security or military effectiveness. It is social engineering: Kos, for example (cited in the post).
I'd like Kos to post how many of his social peer group he has urged to enlist so that the burden will be more evenly shared.
When I see conscription proponents enlisting, if age eligible, or actively encouraging eligible members of their peer groups to enlist, I'll take their "social-benefit" reasoning seriously.
Yeah, let's clean up the national parks with slave labor, that's a true American ideal. Amazing that you complain about low-paid volunteer soldiers but want to use equally low-paid draftees for "public services."
