Urban planning community

Poll results: Should the US bring back the Draft?

Voters
43. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it is only fair to distribute the burden equally.

    9 20.93%
  • Yes, if the concept is tweaked a bit.

    11 25.58%
  • I'm unsure.

    2 4.65%
  • No, but I'm not totally against the idea.

    11 25.58%
  • No, "Hell no we won't go!" Pass the doobie...

    9 20.93%
  • I have another idea, so let me explain below.

    1 2.33%
+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 60

Thread: Bring Back the Draft?

  1. #1
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,075

    Bring Back the Draft?

    Discuss and be please be nice.

  2. #2
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally posted by el Guapo
    Discuss and be please be nice.

    NO

    If the cause is so underwehlming, that enough people will not volunter in one way or another, it is probably not worth fighting for.

    In addition, if people will not volunteer to fight for thier way of life and society, it is doomed.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  3. #3
    Cyburbian jresta's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    1,472
    military or some sort of national service should be mandatory for 2 consecutive years of the persons choosing between the ages of 18 and 28 - medical waivers only for the disabled.

    i think professional militaries are a danger to any democracy . . . i went through basic training with kids who couldn't speak english and the team leader i had for half of my enlistment wasn't a US citizen.
    Indeed you can usually tell when the concepts of democracy and citizenship are weakening. There is an increase in the role of charity and in the worship of volunteerism. These represent the élite citizen's imitation of noblesse oblige; that is, of pretending to be aristocrats or oligarchs, as opposed to being citizens.

  4. #4
    I voted "yes, but tweak". Women (and womyn ) should be included in the draft as well. Also, a larger part of the standing (volunteer) force should be trained to handle conflict/battle duties, while inductees would be principally used in supprt/rear echelon types of duties.
    On pitching to Stan Musial:
    "Once he timed your fastball, your infielders were in jeopardy."
    Warren Spahn

  5. #5
    Cyburbian Tom R's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Akron
    Posts
    2,255

    draft

    I feel strongly both ways.
    If the country can do without it, good.
    But if we get into something over our head and need more troops, then a draft if fairly and equitably conceived is probably the way to go. As far as I can see, its the only way to get at the sons/daughters of the more privileged (for the most part) to serve. When the Halliburton CEOs see their sons/daughters being called up, they might see warfare from a different aspect.

    If, however, it is like the 60's (1860s or 1960s) when all that was needed was to have rich parents to get out of it, no.
    WALSTIB

  6. #6
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally posted by jresta
    military or some sort of national service should be mandatory for 2 consecutive years of the persons choosing between the ages of 18 and 28 - medical waivers only for the disabled.

    i think professional militaries are a danger to any democracy . . . i went through basic training with kids who couldn't speak english and the team leader i had for half of my enlistment wasn't a US citizen.
    Kind of smacks of the Romans using German auxiliaries. It proved thier undoing.

    Not really worried about the presence of non native english speaking troops in the ranks or non citizens. I also encountered both in the service and it never seemed to be an issue. In many cases, it is a shortcut to citizenship. Such people have always been a part of the ranks and should continue to be for as long as loyalty lies with wanting to be a part of the US. Thinking Von Stueben here
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  7. #7
    I think that the military could establish some type of incentive for people to join before they establish a draft. Maybe have a 2-year obligation option, no strings attached, no extensions, etc. Howver I have never served, so this may be a dumb idea.
    "I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are."

    - Homer Simpson

  8. #8
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally posted by Repo Man
    I think that the military could establish some type of incentive for people to join before they establish a draft. Maybe have a 2-year obligation option, no strings attached, no extensions, etc. Howver I have never served, so this may be a dumb idea.
    It takes 4 years of service to properly instill the discipline and methods of thinking that truly benifit the military. Less time than that and you can create a battle ready soldier with the skills required, but the actual institutional knowledge and next generation of small unit leaders have not yet developed in quantity or quality. There are exceptions.

    Military service requires a 180 in thinking, the good of the whole and whats best for the unit rather than the civilian me me me outlook. Somebody has to be the last out, and thats a dangerous place to be, me me me gets that person and many others killed.

    A professional military has been a danger through time. So far we have had truly exemplary behavior from our military men. I have seen no reason to doubt this at the present time. Not worried as long as the military leadership itself stays out of direct politics.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  9. #9
    Cyburbian Plus PlannerGirl's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Va
    Posts
    4,604
    If a draft were even and included all, women, gays etc then yes I am all for it. I have always thought some sort of gov service is a good idea for folks. Be it a teacher in an inner city or poor farming town or shooting a gun service to the "community and country" is the idea and all should share it in some way.

    We are in over our heads and if there is any sort of problem some where else we are big time screwed.

    BIGGER MILITARY, better equiped and trained *ok sorry the army brat roots showing*
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin

    Remember this motto to live by: "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, martini in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO- HOO what a ride!'"

  10. #10
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,512
    Nope we don't need it. If we payed our guys and gals wages high enough the numbers would improve. When we have military families on food stamps, no wonder we have trouble getting folks.
    “As soon as public service ceases to be the chief business of the citizens, and they would rather serve with their money than with their persons, the State is not far from its fall”
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau

  11. #11
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,540
    Quote Originally posted by giff57
    Nope we don't need it. If we payed our guys and gals wages high enough the numbers would improve. When we have military families on food stamps, no wonder we have trouble getting folks.
    I'm with giff on this one.
    "Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

  12. #12
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    11,966
    I think that they should… I think that there are too many lazy people who have a serious problem with authority. Something like this would help to curb many of the social problems that these people had. I also think that they do need to pay more. I am sure that they could stop spending $200 for a roll of toilet paper and such.

    Freedom isn’t Free.
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  13. #13
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Townville
    Posts
    1,047
    I am all for reinstating the draft in the event it is necessary. I am not convinced it is (though I admit to NOT being a military force expert). It seems to be there are more efficiencies yet to be realized (ie. remove troops rom S. Korea, have NATO enhanced in Central Europe).

    The all-volunteer corps is the best trained fighting unit in the history of the world.

    But, if instituted I would oppose deferment for anything but serious physical disability.

    I think the arguement that only the poor serve the all volunteer corps rings a bit hollow but a draft (assuming in the face of some mortal threat to America) needs to be a draft for all--Harvard sons of Senators and Barrio Boys alike.

  14. #14
    Cyburbian jresta's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    1,472
    i'm also with giff - excellent point.

    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis
    I think that they should… I think that there are too many lazy people who have a serious problem with authority. Something like this would help to curb many of the social problems that these people had. I also think that they do need to pay more. I am sure that they could stop spending $200 for a roll of toilet paper and such.

    Freedom isn’t Free.
    I spent 4 years active and 3 years guard and i have even more of a problem with authority as a result (the military, by nature, is an exercise in bureaucratic inefficiency). A lot of people think that everyone comes out of the army a conservative straight-shooter. I think it is what you make it and i think a lot of people come out with a much more balanced view of how things work and of their countrymen. As far as curbing social problems . . . the military is a microcosm of the US and spousal abuse, addiction, drug dealing, drive-by shootings, suicide and every other nasty we have is magnified there. Whether or not making military families middle-class families will change all of that . . . i can't say - but it is a start.



    Quote Originally posted by Duke
    It takes 4 years of service to properly instill the discipline and methods of thinking that truly benifit the military. Less time than that and you can create a battle ready soldier with the skills required, but the actual institutional knowledge and next generation of small unit leaders have not yet developed in quantity or quality. There are exceptions.
    I agree with all of this. Modling a private into a young NCO takes much longer than 2 years. My interest in 2 yr. mandatory service isn't for the military - it's for the country. There will always be incentives and people who are willing otherwise to stay for longer or to make a career out of it so i'm not worried that we'll have a shortage of sergeants.

    Non-citizens or people who have trouble with their english doesn't bother me either. It's the percentage of them that does. The army and navy actively recruit overseas to fill the gaps left by lack of interest at home. 19 year olds aren't interested in working 60 hours a week for $15k a year but it's easy to find some struggling Filipino who will. It's not that i think it's wrong that people use it as a path to citizenship I just don't think we should have recruiting stations in Quezon or Mexico City because that makes "a mercenary force - not an American force."
    (straight from the mouth of a Marine recruiter.)
    Indeed you can usually tell when the concepts of democracy and citizenship are weakening. There is an increase in the role of charity and in the worship of volunteerism. These represent the élite citizen's imitation of noblesse oblige; that is, of pretending to be aristocrats or oligarchs, as opposed to being citizens.

  15. #15
    Moving at my own pace....... Planderella's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 1998
    Location
    NOLA
    Posts
    4,468
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis
    I think that they should… I think that there are too many lazy people who have a serious problem with authority. Something like this would help to curb many of the social problems that these people had. I also think that they do need to pay more. I am sure that they could stop spending $200 for a roll of toilet paper and such.

    Freedom isn’t Free.
    So you believe that the DRAFT will take care of these lazy people with social problems? The purpose of the military is to serve and protect your country, not serve as some social service agency or a cure-all for wayward citizens.
    "A witty woman is a treasure, a witty beauty is a power!"

  16. #16
    Cyburbian Tom R's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Akron
    Posts
    2,255

    draft

    Quote Originally posted by Planderella
    So you believe that the DRAFT will take care of these lazy people with social problems? The purpose of the military is to serve and protect your country, not serve as some social service agency or a cure-all for wayward citizens.
    During Vietnam they lowered the physical and mental criteria of draftees. This was "to help these individuals to improve their lives and circumstances." What really resulted was a increase in desertions, AWOLs and other violations of the UCMJ. Not a good idea. The people that go into the service with these severe problems either don't make it or are a detriment to their service.....for the most part. I'm sure there are execptions.
    WALSTIB

  17. #17
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by PlannerGirl
    If a draft were even and included all, women, gays etc then yes I am all for it.
    The problem with that is that they have standards for entry. I think if you want to be that inclusive, you have to go with Heinlein's theory: accept anyone and everyone who wants to join and if they are a blind, deaf mute, you have them counting the hairs on a caterpillars back by feel or some such.

    I am not really for Heinlein's theory but it had its merits. He put forth in some of his fictional works the idea that if you wanted full citizenship, you had to serve. And if you wanted to run for office, you had to serve. But "standards" would not bar anyone from enlisting.

    And there are some real issues with "take everyone". But I don't feel like going into it right now. I just think that if you advocate for "take everyone", you have to consider the very real consequences and how they can practically be addressed.

  18. #18
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    11,966
    Quote Originally posted by Planderella
    So you believe that the DRAFT will take care of these lazy people with social problems? The purpose of the military is to serve and protect your country, not serve as some social service agency or a cure-all for wayward citizens.
    I do think that the big difference between my era and my dad era is people back then cared about things, and they had opinions. They either hated the government, or hated the government. Today, it seems that people just don’t care, mainly because they have no reason to care. They could think one thing one day, and the opposite at the same time. I also think that today too many people my age are a bit over weight because they never do anything but sit and watch TV or pay video games. I remember hearing stories when kids would sign patriotic songs in school, and say the pledge of allegiance. Now, people are mad because their kids do say the pledge, [side rant] I am still disgusted with that guy from CA who took it to the supreme court [/side rant].

    Over all, the only thing worst thing is being apathetic about life. Every person that I have met from the military at least feels strongly about things in life.
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  19. #19
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,075
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    The problem with that is that they have standards for entry. I think if you want to be that inclusive, you have to go with Heinlein's theory: accept anyone and everyone who wants to join and if they are a blind, deaf mute, you have them counting the hairs on a caterpillars back by feel or some such.

    I am not really for Heinlein's theory but it had its merits. He put forth in some of his fictional works the idea that if you wanted full citizenship, you had to serve. And if you wanted to run for office, you had to serve. But "standards" would not bar anyone from enlisting.

    And there are some real issues with "take everyone". But I don't feel like going into it right now. I just think that if you advocate for "take everyone", you have to consider the very real consequences and how they can practically be addressed.
    Michele
    I read Starship Troopers thinking I was getting a quick Sci-Fi story and I got a paradigm shift instead. I think he was right on the money with the service = full citizenship and franchise concept. Unfortunately, it will take more than a constitutional amendment to ever reach the realization of that form of government. There are too many people sucking on the teat of entitlements to ever change the system short of a total economic collapse. The situation reminds me of another book that shifted my paradigm without even bothering to use a clutch*.




    *Origin: Dilbet Comic Strip

  20. #20

    Registered
    May 1997
    Location
    Williston, VT
    Posts
    1,371
    To require service as a prerequisite of citizenship really is a paradigm shift. It would eliminate the philosophical basis for everything else in our system, which is that we all have certain natural, inalienable rights simply as a consequence of our very being. I acknowledge that the founding fathers didn't see the trap that having well defined rights without well-defined responsibilities would lead to, but I don't think anyone should underestimate the philosophical difference, or the consequences that difference could have. There are lots of sci-fi novels set in worlds where one class of people is confined to a permanent ghetto, while another makes the rules. You all are assuming that you will be on one side of the wall, not the other.

  21. #21
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,075

    You know what happens when you assume...

    Quote Originally posted by Lee Nellis
    To require service as a prerequisite of citizenship really is a paradigm shift. It would eliminate the philosophical basis for everything else in our system, which is that we all have certain natural, inalienable rights simply as a consequence of our very being. I acknowledge that the founding fathers didn't see the trap that having well defined rights without well-defined responsibilities would lead to, but I don't think anyone should underestimate the philosophical difference, or the consequences that difference could have. There are lots of sci-fi novels set in worlds where one class of people is confined to a permanent ghetto, while another makes the rules. You all are assuming that you will be on one side of the wall, not the other.
    I'm not assuming that which you assume I assume.
    I'm assuming that perhaps our current model of governance is not the last word on the subject in the long march of time and humanity.
    I'm assuming that a renter trashes a house about 4 out of 10 times and a homeowner trashes his house 1 out of 100 times.
    I'm assuming that representative democracy has many more entitlement pimps and panderers than producers.
    I'm assuming that the so-called open minds cabal on the left are capable of considering more than what Hillary and John tell them, and they might really have good intentions.
    I’m assuming that Sci-Fi may contain some gemstones of value on occasion, and the source is not suspect.
    I’m assuming that a world that requires some investment into one’s society may be uplifting and provide a higher uniform quality of life for mankind.
    I’m assuming that poverty might someday be eliminated if the form of government changed to one where increasing the number of poor people with franchise was a necessary political base building action for the selfish form of government that is reflected in our current two party systems.
    I’m assuming that we have not perfected society and that we ought to at least try.

  22. #22
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally posted by Lee Nellis
    .......There are lots of sci-fi novels set in worlds where one class of people is confined to a permanent ghetto, while another makes the rules. You all are assuming that you will be on one side of the wall, not the other.
    The term and concept you are looking for is "propinquity", or search for self/sameness. Basicly, if your on this board, you would be on the positive side of the proverbial fence.

    Every society is dystopic. Dystopia is part of the human condition. For every scheme to instill "loyalty, conditioning, obligation, etc. all" you have a subset of the population that will find it intolerable. That is what makes our present system the best in the world, because of its self correcting function by voting. By this I do not mean it actually works well, just better than other systems (for us, others maybe not).

    The Starship Troopers paradigme was great, but putting into practice would be difficult. Personally, when I hear Michealski talk about baking my leadership and allowing shifting reasons for justifying a war, I get worried. Being anti-administration right now is a sign to me that you care what happens to our democracy.

    Questioning authority is a GREAT thing. If your leadership can't justify the questions, then you can rest assured they are being sneaky and anti-democratic.

    This is true of ANY organization that holds power, secular or religious.
    Just because it is in/on the printed page, does not make it true.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  23. #23
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,075
    Quote Originally posted by Duke Of Dystopia
    The term and concept you are looking for is "propinquity", or search for self/sameness. Basicly, if your on this board, you would be on the positive side of the proverbial fence.

    Every society is dystopic. Dystopia is part of the human condition. For every scheme to instill "loyalty, conditioning, obligation, etc. all" you have a subset of the population that will find it intolerable. That is what makes our present system the best in the world, because of its self correcting function by voting. By this I do not mean it actually works well, just better than other systems (for us, others maybe not).

    The Starship Troopers paradigme was great, but putting into practice would be difficult. Personally, when I hear Michealski talk about baking my leadership and allowing shifting reasons for justifying a war, I get worried. Being anti-administration right now is a sign to me that you care what happens to our democracy.

    Questioning authority is a GREAT thing. If your leadership can't justify the questions, then you can rest assured they are being sneaky and anti-democratic.

    This is true of ANY organization that holds power, secular or religious.
    Just because it is in/on the printed page, does not make it true.
    FLAW: Why couldn't people that have served, earned their franchise and participate in the government also question authority. John Kerry may or may not have pitched his ribbons, medals, or Yale decoder ring in a fit of near protest to fight a war he may or may not have been against.


    Some people assume that because you are conservative you don't question authority. Folks I'm a conservative on many issues and I question the hell out of authority. And guess what? Some times you can even agree with authority

  24. #24
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally posted by el Guapo
    FLAW: Why couldn't people that have served, earned their franchise and participate in the government also question authority. John Kerry may or may not have pitched his ribbons, medals, or Yale decoder ring.


    Some people assume that because you are conservative you don't question authority. Folks I'm a conservative on many issues and I question the hell out of authority. And guess what? Some times you can even agree with authority
    I agree with your statements above completly. You don't need to have served to question authority intelligently for legitimate reasons.

    Does it matter in any way shape or form if he pitched his rings. I would say, no.

    Our system was built with distrust of authority in mind and as the primary requirment to maintain the system. To not be distrustful is anti democratic and anti system.

    I too am conservative, but the GOP lost me when they told me that I don't need civil liberties. When they asked for a blank check and then abused the system with it. Its not that conservatives don't question authority, it is that they ARE the authority right now and they don't like having to answere hard questions. I don't question thier motives, I question thier methods.

    Do you really think 2 draft dodgers should be flinging mud at Kerry for his service record? Sure, there are people in both parties that care. In fact, I think most of them do but given free reign, they will run amok. I trust McCain, I trust Kerry, Powell and many more, worts and all.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  25. #25
    Cyburbian Rumpy Tunanator's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Intervention
    Posts
    4,475
    I picked I have another idea, so let me explain.

    Allright, this is going to sound far fetched and a little crazy, but it might be possible.

    Create clones of people and train them to fight. Clone gets killed, who cares. Clone goes awol or gets into trouble, remove and dispose of. Clone makes it out alive and has forfilled its purpose, remove and dispose of.
    A guy once told me, "Do not have any attachments, do not have anything in your life you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you spot the heat around the corner."


    Neil McCauley (Robert DeNiro): Heat 1995

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Work sample question - to bring or not to bring
    Career Development and Advice
    Replies: 11
    Last post: 03 Jan 2013, 12:40 PM
  2. Replies: 33
    Last post: 22 Nov 2006, 3:44 PM
  3. Draft Back-up
    Fantasy Football
    Replies: 2
    Last post: 15 Aug 2005, 2:25 PM
  4. Replies: 92
    Last post: 19 Dec 2003, 9:14 PM