Trying To Bring Back The Draft...Again.

[mrjarrell]

Charles Rangel is at it again with his usual attempts to bring back a military draft and "universal service", as well. He's even putting women into the equation. No doubt in the name of fairness. When will he get it? Only tyrants, their supporters and slavers want involuntary servitude for our children. The military certainly doesn't want it and we don't need brownshirts in this country. Fortunately, he has no sponsors and likely no support, other than Obama.

via Gov Track

To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.

More at the source.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

I would *almost* be OK with this if they would properly define "wartime". We've not had a war since 1945.

I'm just glad that Rangel doesn't have much support for this bill.

 

[ATOMonkey]

He does this to get people into a tizzy as his own goofy way to try and end a war. He's not actually serious about bringing back the draft.

He's a dottering old fool who just needs to go.

 

[45calibre]

I would *almost* be OK with this if they would properly define "wartime". We've not had a war since 1945.

I'm just glad that Rangel doesn't have much support for this bill.

yup that sums it all up. "wartime" will have a very vague definition just like the patriot act definition of "terrorist".

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What if by National Service it included shredding copies of CFRs and cleaning out federal office buildings for the national surplus sale?

 

[DHolder]

I say remove all the "dottering old fools" get rid of career politicians, and make it to a service position. By the people, of the people , for the people.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I say remove all the "dottering old fools" get rid of career politicians, and make it to a service position. By the people, of the people , for the people.

I don't disagree, but you do realize that much of the regulatory crap we're enduring comes from the federal bureaucracy, right? As a corollary to making career policitians obsolete, we also need to severely downsize the federal bureaucracy.

 

[Colt556]

Personally I don't see anything wrong with having a 2 year mandatory service requirement. There are several countries around the world that do it and it works fine. To many people here do nothing but take from the government and country while never giving much in return. The freedom we enjoy has been paid for by the young, mostly poor, kids who couldn't get a deferment from military service. Yes, I know others have served with honor and dignity as well. If you were truly against being in the military your service could be in hospitals or as support/logistics. It might get some of the trouble off the streets, while also instilling a sense of belonging, pride and discipline to the participants. I'm putting my flame suit on now for the comments I know will be forthcoming from several members.....

 

[4sarge]

Personally I don't see anything wrong with having a 2 year mandatory service requirement. There are several countries around the world that do it and it works fine. To many people here do nothing but take from the government and country while never giving much in return. The freedom we enjoy has been paid for by the young, mostly poor, kids who couldn't get a deferment from military service. Yes, I know others have served with honor and dignity as well. If you were truly against being in the military your service could be in hospitals or as support/logistics. It might get some of the trouble off the streets, while also instilling a sense of belonging, pride and discipline to the participants. I'm putting my flame suit on now for the comments I know will be forthcoming from several members.....

Until Comrade Obama I would have probably agreed with you But with the misuse of Tax Monies (Outright THEFT) the failure to Prosecute Voter Fraud & Intimidation, The Government Bastardization of Health Care, Financial & Auto Industry among a long list of others and the looming threat to End the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 10th Amendments. If this was a State Militia organized for the Defense of the State that might make a difference to me.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Personally, I wouldn't mind, as I was thisclose to serving myself.

Philosophically, once you force people into service you remove all the altruism and honor associated with serving as a volunteer.

You'd cheapen the ideal of being a soldier.

In other words, when everyone is "special" no one is.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

Good 'ol Charlie's in a LOT of trouble. I think he's just trying to draw attention away from his ethics and tax issues. The Dems have no plan to maintain control so they're just trying to confuse us with crap like this.

 

[Colt556]

Personally, I wouldn't mind, as I was thisclose to serving myself.

Philosophically, once you force people into service you remove all the altruism and honor associated with serving as a volunteer.

You'd cheapen the ideal of being a soldier.

In other words, when everyone is "special" no one is.

I think the members of the military in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Israel and others might disagree with you.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Personally I don't see anything wrong with having a 2 year mandatory service requirement. There are several countries around the world that do it and it works fine. To many people here do nothing but take from the government and country while never giving much in return. The freedom we enjoy has been paid for by the young, mostly poor, kids who couldn't get a deferment from military service. Yes, I know others have served with honor and dignity as well. If you were truly against being in the military your service could be in hospitals or as support/logistics. It might get some of the trouble off the streets, while also instilling a sense of belonging, pride and discipline to the participants. I'm putting my flame suit on now for the comments I know will be forthcoming from several members.....

I'm not going to flame you for your attitude; I can even see where you're coming from, but I'd rather we keep the military "all volunteer" as long as we can. The draft of the Civil War, and the Draft, as instituted for WWII were responses for the sudden need for more troops than the nation was accustomed to having under arms. The general patriotism that existed in the population during those periods ensured that there would be enough support for such measures and that the men who were drafted (at least during WWII) were largely willing to go. (This is an oversimplified example)

Since the Vietnam era, our youth have largely been taught (at least in schools) that patriotism is outmoded and even immoral, and that they are entitled to the freedoms their grandparents and great-grandparents fought for. I saw a great qualitative difference in our Service personnel, between the time I enlisted in the Army in 1970, and the time I left it in 1980 (the "All Volunteer Army" was instituted @ 1974). I certainly was much more comfortable serving alongside soldiers who had volunteered for service, rather than those who had been drafted against their will and had no desire to be where they were.

The Russian Army had universal conscription and the vast majority of their army was largely untrained, even as they finished their term of service. Their NCOs were soldiers with barely more time in service than their Privates; it was their officer corps that were the "professional" soldiers.

Today, our soldiers are specialists in their career fields. If you don't believe me, ask E5Ranger375 about his Soldiers Common Tasks lists. Privates are expected to learn their jobs and know the jobs of the next guy in their chain of command so they can take over, if necessary. Operations Orders are typically issued down to Squad Level because everyone is expected to think for themselves and help make the Commander's Intent work, no matter how the circumstances may change. I'd just as soon we not dilute that working philosophy with folks who don't want to be there.

Should there be some sort of universal service for our young people? Sure, if you can find enough makework jobs for those who either don't want to be in the military or can't serve for one reason or another. Of course, before you can do that, you have to re-inculcate a sense that the individual should be willing to contribute something to the society in which he lives - and we've just spent two generations driving that out of our kids.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I think the members of the military in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Israel and others might disagree with you.

Really? Have you talked to them?

I work with a guy from Nigeria, and they have forced service over there. Since EVERYONE has to do it, it's very watered down cookie cutter training. They can't afford to do anything else, and it's only a month long tops. Then you're in "reserves" after that.

He's proud to have done it and completed it, but it's nothing special to him since everyone has to do it. Just like I'm proud I graduated HS, but so what.

As I mentioned above, we can't afford to do it if we wanted to. We don't have the money to train the troops we have, much less a bunch of weekend warriors who treat it like summer camp.

No thanks. The all volunteer military is the only way to go.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Good 'ol Charlie's in a LOT of trouble. I think he's just trying to draw attention away from his ethics and tax issues. The Dems have no plan to maintain control so they're just trying to confuse us with crap like this.

He has a history of doing this. He pulls it out about once a term.

 

[Colt556]

The draftees of 1970 were in the midst of the Anti War Movement and many just wanted to stay home and enjoy the Sex, Drugs and Rock n Roll mentality of the time. I joined the Navy in 74 and still saw a lot of it during my time in service even though the Navy was all volunteer. In the 1980s the Military was slowly getting over the stigma of Viet Nam and was a good alternative for lack of jobs in the private sector. Vets of my age never got the Thanks and praise the vets of today receive. Not meaning to take anything away from the Vets of today, just trying to show how things change over time. Anybody willing to serve our country, whether conscripted or voluntarily, deserves Thanks and respect. I'm not saying there won't be issues to start but I think it can be done and done effectively for both the conscripts and the country. Again JMHO.

 

[Colt556]

Really? Have you talked to them?

I work with a guy from Nigeria, and they have forced service over there. Since EVERYONE has to do it, it's very watered down cookie cutter training. They can't afford to do anything else, and it's only a month long tops. Then you're in "reserves" after that.

He's proud to have done it and completed it, but it's nothing special to him since everyone has to do it. Just like I'm proud I graduated HS, but so what.

As I mentioned above, we can't afford to do it if we wanted to. We don't have the money to train the troops we have, much less a bunch of weekend warriors who treat it like summer camp.

No thanks. The all volunteer military is the only way to go.

Don't see Nigeria on my list. It doesn't work for every country, but it has worked well for many of them. The money could be found. I'd rather pay conscripts than Welfare recipients or sending Billions overseas to countries that hate us anyway.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

The draftees of 1970 were in the midst of the Anti War Movement and many just wanted to stay home and enjoy the Sex, Drugs and Rock n Roll mentality of the time. I joined the Navy in 74 and still saw a lot of it during my time in service even though the Navy was all volunteer. In the 1980s the Military was slowly getting over the stigma of Viet Nam and was a good alternative for lack of jobs in the private sector. Vets of my age never got the Thanks and praise the vets of today receive. Not meaning to take anything away from the Vets of today, just trying to show how things change over time. Anybody willing to serve our country, whether conscripted or voluntarily, deserves Thanks and respect. I'm not saying there won't be issues to start but I think it can be done and done effectively for both the conscripts and the country. Again JMHO.

Most terms of service that I have heard about last for two years (Russia, one of the Scandanavian countries - I forget which), Korea). That's not long enough to train a specialist in his job. An Airborne Ranger probably spends his first 18 months in schools before he ever really gets to do his job. A straightleg infantryman probably spends a year to 18 months getting qualified in his job. A Warrant Officer flight candidate spends a year in basic training and flight schools before he ever gets to his unit - and that's not counting advanced aircraft training. Then he spends another 6 months validating his basic flight training and getting qualified on his tactical flying tasks. Then he may spend another two years or more before he becomes a Pilot-In-Command.

In a modern military the size of what we need to be prepared for the types of conflicts we can envision in the modern era, we can't afford the size army that Sweden or Austria or France can get away with. Neither can we afford the size army the Russians, Chinese, or Indians can field (remember quantity has a quality of its own), even if they can't match us in ability troop-for-troop.

 

[ATOMonkey]

The draftees of 1970 were in the midst of the Anti War Movement and many just wanted to stay home and enjoy the Sex, Drugs and Rock n Roll mentality of the time. I joined the Navy in 74 and still saw a lot of it during my time in service even though the Navy was all volunteer. In the 1980s the Military was slowly getting over the stigma of Viet Nam and was a good alternative for lack of jobs in the private sector. Vets of my age never got the Thanks and praise the vets of today receive. Not meaning to take anything away from the Vets of today, just trying to show how things change over time. Anybody willing to serve our country, whether conscripted or voluntarily, deserves Thanks and respect. I'm not saying there won't be issues to start but I think it can be done and done effectively for both the conscripts and the country. Again JMHO.

Do you want someone serving with you that has no desire to be there and does the bare minimum to get by? Someone's who's motto was "better you than me."

We have enough of those in the all volunteer service. I'd hate to see what it would be like with 100% conscription.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Don't see Nigeria on my list. It doesn't work for every country, but it has worked well for many of them. The money could be found. I'd rather pay conscripts than Welfare recipients or sending Billions overseas to countries that hate us anyway.

The flaw in your logic is that you believe conscripts will feel the same way you feel about your service.

I doubt that would be true.