Draft Comes Back? Let's hope not!

As I said, Let's Hope not!

Originally Posted by Article

Frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the all-volunteer force and made it worth considering a return to a military draft, President Bush's new war adviser said Friday.

"I think it makes sense to certainly consider it," Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio's "All Things Considered."

Luckily I'm not only an only child, but also in college and strongly against this war itself. I think this is bullshit and I hope that we can get Bush out of office before this actually happens.

Discuss

Originally Posted by Dekoa

I think this is bullshit and I hope that we can get Bush out of office before this actually happens.

Originally Posted by TFA

President Nixon abolished the draft in 1973. Restoring it, Lute said, would be a "major policy shift" and Bush has made it clear that he doesn't think it's necessary.
...
Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has called for reinstating the draft as a way to end the Iraq war.

Of all the things Bush can be blamed for and accused of, trying to reinstate the draft isn't one of them.

It has nothing to do with Bush and everything to do with Dems trying to instigate people.

I'm finally out of draft age so what the fuck do I care?

DO IT

I still think that unless there is another major conflict (say, Iran openly attacks Iraq) the political support for this would be minimal, at best. Honestly though, I think it would be too little, too late to draft as a reactionary measure as you cannot train a large body of un-trained soldiers in days or weeks but rather months, and by then it may be too late.

I would rather this didn't happen, but it seems as if poor war strategy by the Bush administration is limiting the (dignified) alternatives.

The draft is political suicide. The hollering about it will remain, but nobody is going to try it. For one thing, Congress would probably cut funding for it in minutes, and I wouldn't be surprised to see massive protests/riots over it.

It's a no show.

Barring a full-scale war with China -- including the exchange of nuclear weapons -- I just don't see a draft happening.

If a draft occurs, then it means another World War.

If nukes were exchanged, a draft would be unnecessary. While you Americans DO disagree with each other, I admire your ability to set aside disagreements and stand united against a common enemy.

I wonder why the President seems really against the draft. It seems like what he would logically want, here.

^If he reinstate the draft, assasination attempts would be so out of control that he'd have to do his business underground. The country as a whole would not go for a draft. We've lost enough lives to this pointless "war on terrorism" as it is. The bush administration wants the people to take care of thier mistakes, with thier lives. That's message I get from them, and this "consideration of a draft" just confirms it.

Originally Posted by Winter Storm

^If he reinstate the draft, assasination attempts would be so out of control that he'd have to do his business underground. The country as a whole would not go for a draft. We've lost enough lives to this pointless "war on terrorism" as it is. The bush administration wants the people to take care of thier mistakes, with thier lives. That's message I get from them, and this "consideration of a draft" just confirms it.

I don't think it was the President who was reccomending it, but his newly appointed war Czar. I recall reading an article several days ago stating that the Bush was still against the draft (in response to the statement), so it seems unlikely he would take that course of action unless the situation changed. Bush has pretty much ignored most recommendations that have conflicted with his strategy (i.e. the Iraq Study Group report) so I don't see why this would be any different.

That wasn't the question. The question was, "Why is Bush so anti-draft, considering the rest of his attitude toward the war?"

The only answer was assassination attempt. I somehow think he might be thinking of other ideas, myself.

You mean like not inciting an impeachment? I'm serious.

The reason Bush is so adamantly against a draft is because instating it would tear the country apart.

Well, going to war with Iraq has torn the country apart, too. I would just prefer a little consistency from this guy. If we go to war, why didn't we go to win? Not that I'm seriously suggesting the draft should be put into place, but if the war was such a wonderful idea, I wonder why he's so against something that would benefit it, that's all.

Probably because conscripted soldiers are only useful as cannon fodder.

A draft rarely gives any real advantage to a war, unless the strategy was to simply overwhelm the enemy with people till they are exhausted. That has not been considered a viable strategy for decades now.

The surge, as far as I understand it, was to fill in personnel gaps to make sure that Iraqi people themselves (troops and law enforcement) had enough training and understanding to run their own show when we leave. The report from Petraus has shown that some things have gone right (but that depends on how you spin it, really, because no one is willing to take things at face value anymore).

Originally Posted by Bradylama

Probably because conscripted soldiers are only useful as cannon fodder.

History, oddly enough, dictates otherwise.

Modern-era weaponry has seriously reduced the effectiveness of a possible draft. Not only are the technical systems far more complex (although many basics such as the service rifle of the US forces, have not really had the fundamentals changed since the last use oif the draft), the tactics have grown to be far more complex as part of what is very wrongly called "the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA)."

Furthermore, you'd need to train a whole bunch of junoir officers, quickly, and post some very senoir NCOs (I may slip the term "NCM" occassionally - sorry if this confuses people, it's a Canadian terminology) to watch over them. Again, as warfare is now far more complex, training junoir leaders is now a very trying task indeed.

The idea of using conscripts as "cannon fodder", while morally wrong, is also veyr ineffective. Why bother equipping and training a suicide soldier to do a recce when you can just look through an IR device, use UAV data or gather satellite recconaissance? With the overwhelming artillery and air power now availible, the idea of a "human shield" is somewhat less attractive than one of a "shield of fire" in the form of an artillery or air barrage.

Draft? Unlikely.

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

History, oddly enough, dictates otherwise.

It's easier when you're fighting Great Patriotic wars.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

It's easier when you're fighting Great Patriotic wars.

Armies aren't undone by how the soldiers in them were brought into them. If the idea that "conscript soldiers are only useful as cannon fodder" were true, the vaunted Prussian and German military systems would have never been vaunted and Israel would have been wiped off the map long ago.