5 ms·

That's exactly why I support having a draft. If everyone of military age had to worry about being drafted, we'd be much less likely to go to war. As it is, the

by lotusleaf1987 16y ago

That's exactly why I support having a draft. If everyone of military age had to worry about being drafted, we'd be much less likely to go to war. As it is, the burden of war falls on the backs of the poor and uneducated because it's the best job opportunity they have.

russell 16y ago
Wishful thinking. Having the draft did not keep us out of Vietnam (or the escalation). Eighteen yearolds have no influence on military policy and their parents buy the patriotic fervor. I am thankful that we dont have the draft and my son did not have to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan. I wish it were more difficult to wage war, not easier.
- w1ntermute 16y ago
  > Having the draft did not keep us out of Vietnam IIRC, the wealthy were able to stay out of Vietnam by going to college. Perhaps if the children of the influential were drafted as well, things might be different. Then again, knowing this country, any law reinstating the draft would not be complete without a loophole for the wealthy.
  - russell 16y ago
    Anyone got a college deferment, but were drafted afterward unless they were in an essential occupation, which did not exempt doctors, lawyers, and most professions. One way to get out of ground combat was to volunteer for the Navy or Air Force. I managed to string it out for 4 years, but was finally saved only by the lottery.
    - w1ntermute 16y ago
      > Anyone got a college deferment Of course, but back then, it was an indirect way of keeping the children of the wealthy out of harm's way, as manufacturing still had a big presence in the US. Rather than going to college, the children of the middle class/poor went to work in factories after high school, and so they could be sent to war. > were drafted afterward unless they were in an essential occupation That's good to know. Were there any other loopholes used by the wealthy (there must have been some)?
      - jonah 16y ago
        National Guard. (See G.W. Bush)
dantheman 16y ago
The draft is one of the most evil things that the united states government has ever done. Slavery is evil in all its forms, and conscripted armies are an especially heinous form.
- GHFigs 16y ago
  Is Norway evil? Finland? Brazil? South Korea? Taiwan? Germany?
  - Aqwis 16y ago
    I am not going to directly defend the Norwegian draft, but the Norwegian military does not send drafted soldiers who do not volunteer to fight in Afghanistan (or other foreign wars). The main reason Norway still has the draft is to have a population that can defend itself (admittedly with questionable efficiacy) in case a foreign power attacked Norway (such as what happened in World War II), not to send drafted youth involuntarily to their deaths in foreign countries.
  - dantheman 16y ago
    Is the country, or the people, evil, of course not -- but the action surely is. Involuntary servitude is wrong. If it's not, then where do you draw the line? Can the government draft people to work on farms, build infrastructure, etc? If not, then why is it ok to send them into battle?
    - jberryman 16y ago
      The point is in those countries it is not involuntary servitude; it is part of the social contract, just like taxes are not "the stealing of personal property at the barrel of a gun" as I seem to hear said around here.
      - knieveltech 16y ago
        http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:slavery&sa=X&ei=emNGTc3zFMP-8Aaem7S2DQ&ved=0CBcQkAE http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:... That seems to describe conscription to me. I'm not sure what "part of the social contract" means.
Duff 16y ago
I guess the logic of this position is that if the suburban soccer mom's were forced to send their sons and daughters to war, they would do something about it. Or that as a nation we would somehow be more sensible since we would all know someone who may be sent overseas. Maybe so, but traditionally conscription has been all about maximizing manpower to fight a protracted war, and isn't a concept that is typically associated with pacifism.

russell 16y ago

Wishful thinking. Having the draft did not keep us out of Vietnam (or the escalation). Eighteen yearolds have no influence on military policy and their parents buy the patriotic fervor. I am thankful that we dont have the draft and my son did not have to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan. I wish it were more difficult to wage war, not easier.

w1ntermute 16y ago
> Having the draft did not keep us out of Vietnam IIRC, the wealthy were able to stay out of Vietnam by going to college. Perhaps if the children of the influential were drafted as well, things might be different. Then again, knowing this country, any law reinstating the draft would not be complete without a loophole for the wealthy.
- russell 16y ago
  Anyone got a college deferment, but were drafted afterward unless they were in an essential occupation, which did not exempt doctors, lawyers, and most professions. One way to get out of ground combat was to volunteer for the Navy or Air Force. I managed to string it out for 4 years, but was finally saved only by the lottery.
  - w1ntermute 16y ago
    > Anyone got a college deferment Of course, but back then, it was an indirect way of keeping the children of the wealthy out of harm's way, as manufacturing still had a big presence in the US. Rather than going to college, the children of the middle class/poor went to work in factories after high school, and so they could be sent to war. > were drafted afterward unless they were in an essential occupation That's good to know. Were there any other loopholes used by the wealthy (there must have been some)?
    - jonah 16y ago
      National Guard. (See G.W. Bush)

dantheman 16y ago

The draft is one of the most evil things that the united states government has ever done. Slavery is evil in all its forms, and conscripted armies are an especially heinous form.

GHFigs 16y ago
Is Norway evil? Finland? Brazil? South Korea? Taiwan? Germany?
- Aqwis 16y ago
  I am not going to directly defend the Norwegian draft, but the Norwegian military does not send drafted soldiers who do not volunteer to fight in Afghanistan (or other foreign wars). The main reason Norway still has the draft is to have a population that can defend itself (admittedly with questionable efficiacy) in case a foreign power attacked Norway (such as what happened in World War II), not to send drafted youth involuntarily to their deaths in foreign countries.
- dantheman 16y ago
  Is the country, or the people, evil, of course not -- but the action surely is. Involuntary servitude is wrong. If it's not, then where do you draw the line? Can the government draft people to work on farms, build infrastructure, etc? If not, then why is it ok to send them into battle?
  - jberryman 16y ago
    The point is in those countries it is not involuntary servitude; it is part of the social contract, just like taxes are not "the stealing of personal property at the barrel of a gun" as I seem to hear said around here.
    - knieveltech 16y ago
      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:slavery&sa=X&ei=emNGTc3zFMP-8Aaem7S2DQ&ved=0CBcQkAE http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:... That seems to describe conscription to me. I'm not sure what "part of the social contract" means.

Duff 16y ago

I guess the logic of this position is that if the suburban soccer mom's were forced to send their sons and daughters to war, they would do something about it. Or that as a nation we would somehow be more sensible since we would all know someone who may be sent overseas. Maybe so, but traditionally conscription has been all about maximizing manpower to fight a protracted war, and isn't a concept that is typically associated with pacifism.