3 ms·
As I'm barely out of draft eligible age (over 35), I don't have to worry about it. That said, I very much believe that 1) the US would quickly fill its 2.5 mil
by bmelton 12y ago
As I'm barely out of draft eligible age (over 35), I don't have to worry about it.
That said, I very much believe that 1) the US would quickly fill its 2.5 million troops needed, but also that 2) we wouldn't ever really need them.
To point 1) our military force is already insanely large, to the point that military recruiters turn away (or at least, don't rabidly pursue) recruits that aren't supremely eligible. They could probably get half of the 2.5 million needed just by calling back would-be recruits that are 'on ice', meaning, they're passively being recruited, but there are more qualified applicants ahead of them, so the US just keeps them in contract limbo.
To point 2) the US military is large. It would take China actively recruiting (or secretly expanding) their eligible-for-service and rapidly training them before there was even a real potential for being outmanned.
That said, if China were 'fully engaged' they've got ~600 million persons eligible for service[1], and could likely overwhelm the US in a full on assault, if that was their only objective.
This is a fun (though perhaps dated) military force comparison chart that illustrates overall, potential and other types of manpower available to nations:
[1] - http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp
- classicsnoot 12y agoI was just perusing that chart myself when i read your comment. Bangaladesh... who knew? I think you are not taking into account the real necessities and logistics of an actual war. The cost of the Kerfuffle on Terror would be a pittance, both in lives lost and in wealth use, compared to a shooting war in East Europe.
- classicsnoot 12y agooh, also, given the expanded capability of remote control warfare and logistics, a government could conceivably push the edge of eligibility to at least 50, maybe higher. I would also make the argument that all humans are cousins, meaning we are all one family, meaning a draft in any or all countries is a big deal, but i bet i would be called crazy.
- bmelton 12y agoYou make a salient point with the invention of the remote drone, but if I'm betting on it, I'd wager the bigger worry is them taking the draft age DOWN to tap into that primo gamer demographic.
- classicsnoot 12y agoHoly shit, hide the children, the government is after their thumbs. So would you do your 2 years Social Service or hide/ignore or leave?
- bmelton 12y agoIt would depend on a rather lot. I hate to be "THAT GUY", where the answer to a hypothetical is always more and more questions, but if it were right now, I'd have a hard time supporting American imperialism more than I already do with my taxes, especially as it currently seems hell bent on restricting, removing and or curtailing my individual rights. Our foreign policy has been, to put it gently, sloppy of late, and I have a hard time imagining that the kind of response you're describing as necessary isn't going to be seen historically as a "gross overreaction". So, the best I can answer at this point is "unlikely".