The D-word again... Draft.

[Nathan Poe]

From www.hackworth.com

"Uncle Sam Will Soon Want Your Kids"

By David H. Hackworth



Recently, when John Kerry brought up the possibility of a return to the draft, SecDef Donald Rumsfeld was quick to respond that Kerry was full of it.



But my take is that Kerry is right on the mark. Not only because Rummy has been flat wrong on every major military call regarding Iraq, but because this is a war that won’t be won by smart weapons or the sledgehammer firepower we see every night on the tube.



Right now – with both our regular and Reserve soldiers stretched beyond the breaking point – our all-volunteer force is tapping out. If our overseas troop commitments continue at the present rate or climb higher, there won’t be enough Army and Marine grunts to do the job. And thin, overworked units, from Special Forces teams to infantry battalions, lose fights...

Although Pentagon puff artists insist they’re making quota, recruiters are already saying it would be easier to find $100 bills on the sidewalk outside a homeless shelter than fill their enlistment quotas, even with the huge bonuses now being paid.



So the draft – which will include both boys and girls this time around – is a no-brainer in ‘05 and ‘06.



Oh sure, the Pentagon suits will fight it. Volunteers tend to go with the flow and seldom blow the whistle on military stupidity, flawed tactics and self-serving leadership. And draftees don’t hesitate to make waves and tell the truth. Not to mention influential citizens with draft-age kids who’ll soon be demanding an answer to the same type of hard question their moms and dads shouted during the Vietnam War: “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?”



Rumsfeld, in fact, has already kicked off the anti-draft campaign by denigrating the draftees who fought in Vietnam. The SecDef, who prefers sycophants who don’t ask questions, recently stated that Vietnam-era draftees added “No value, no advantage, really, to the United States armed services ... because ... it took an enormous amount of effort in terms of training, and then they were gone.”

Any thoughts?

 

[InnerPhyre]

My thoughts are that democrats should stop pushing for the draft in Congress.

 

[Glaz]

Being a longtime Hackworth fan, I think its prudent to note that he has been pro-draft for several decades. Whether we have one or not is a different story.

 

[joebobned]

My thoughts are that democrats should stop pushing for the draft in Congress.

Seriously.

Democrats instituted the draft, Republicans repealed it.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Seriously.

Democrats instituted the draft, Republicans repealed it.

Seriously.

2 Democrats instituted a Draft Bill into the House.

ALL the Rebublicans and Democrats voted it down.

Care to guess why?

 

[Glaz]

Cool, you'll like Hackworth. "About Face" is a must read.

 

[InnerPhyre]

My view on the draft is that of Tommy Franks. The draft takes an army of professional soliders and turns it into a rabble of riff raff. Bad idea.

 

[Glaz]

Heres the really telling factor, a quote from his website:

Army Recruiting In Trouble?
"We the recruiters who beat the streets for the Army are struggling very hard, especialy the Reserve and Guard. The senior army leadership continues to openly deny this but I'm hear to tell you otherwise. I've been recruiting for years now and it's never been worse"

This is the kind of things he learns about because he protects the identity of the troops who write him. One thing I know for certain about the military, they always try to make things sound better publicly than they actually are, and the more they make a point of 'no draft' it seems more likely to me there will be one. The military is not allowed to make statements that would reflect negatively on the administration, so any talk of recruiting goals being met and no need for a draft should be met with skepticism. However, I wouldn't say for certain theres going to be a draft, but as you heard me say before, if I were worried about being drafted I'd be seriously concerned right now.

 

[HisEagle]

Any thoughts?

Yeah....

Apparently no one paid attention to the debates last night. Both Bush and Kerry emphatically stated there would be NO DRAFT!!

 

[Evee]

Yeah....

Apparently no one paid attention to the debates last night. Both Bush and Kerry emphatically stated there would be NO DRAFT!!

Well good can't make someone be a good soldier.
You either go as a volunteer or you go dragging your feet.
This is just an opinion.

 

[ChrisB803]

No draft malt beverages? How dissapointing!!

Seriously though, I think Bush's explaination last night made sense: We provide the troops needed for Iraq by pulling men from Europe and replacing them with smarter equipment. Put the men where they're needed in order to get the job done, and then simply work smarter in the rest of the world.

 

[transientlife]

I say if you made Bush (or any other president) serve with the men he's sending over to kill and be killed, you'd probably not have as many little tiffs with other countries and our men wouldn't be spread all over the place.
I would think a veteran would be a better president than someone who didn't serve (or in current cases- wasn't bravely defending the homeshores of where? Alabama?) because they would realize the sacrifice, understand the repercussions, and be able to empathize with the needs of his troops and all around would be more savvy when it came to military issues.

I'm relieved the draft was knocked down.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Yeah....

Apparently no one paid attention to the debates last night. Both Bush and Kerry emphatically stated there would be NO DRAFT!!

Well then, that settles it! After all, has anyone ever known a politician to *gasp* LIE to the American people?!?

 

[Peso]

I really don't understand how either party can make that promise, when our resources are being drained as much as it sounds like they are...but what do I know?

 

[ShadowAspect]

Seriously though, I think Bush's explaination last night made sense: We provide the troops needed for Iraq by pulling men from Europe and replacing them with smarter equipment.

More of the same? Hasn't the last two years already proved that Smart Equipment has been the failing of the west's military?

There is a definite over reliance in technology. It's good for industry, bad for the military.

 

[HisEagle]

Well then, that settles it! After all, has anyone ever known a politician to *gasp* LIE to the American people?!?

Hmmm - good point. Okay, so which liar do we vote for?

 

[Nathan Poe]

No draft malt beverages? How dissapointing!!

Seriously though, I think Bush's explaination last night made sense: We provide the troops needed for Iraq by pulling men from Europe and replacing them with smarter equipment. Put the men where they're needed in order to get the job done, and then simply work smarter in the rest of the world.

I think Bush's explanation misses a few critical points:

1: If it were that simple, why not just "work smarter" in Iraq?

2: Has Bush forgotten that every volunteer soldier comes with a time limit? They are not re-enlisting, and recruitment is at an all-time low. What to do when the well runs dry?

3: The reason for having men in Europe is because terrorists are operating there as well (Madrid train bombing, anyone?). Terrorism is pretty much a global pastime. Pulling troops from any area is akin of painting a big red bulls-eye on it.

4: Terrorists cells are naturally mobile and flexible. We are not. Bush's plan sounds too much like Wile E. Coyote chasing the Roadrunner across the desert.... with our skeleton crews in Europe getting stuck with all the "Acme" equipment.

In short, Bush is way too far out of touch with the harsh realities..... either that, or at least he's smart enough to shelve his draft plans until after the election.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Hmmm - good point. Okay, so which liar do we vote for?

The one who's bungled the least so far.

 

[Glaz]

3: The reason for having men in Europe is because terrorists are operating there as well (Madrid train bombing, anyone?). Terrorism is pretty much a global pastime. Pulling troops from any area is akin of painting a big red bulls-eye on it.

The European nations are more than capable of handling counter-terrorism on their own. They don't need our troops their to protect them. These nations are targets anyway regardless of our troop status, they are allies of America and guilty by association. Your other points are pretty good though.

 

[Key Peninsula Redneck]

Seriously.

2 Democrats instituted a Draft Bill into the House.

ALL the Rebublicans and Democrats voted it down.

Care to guess why?

Actually, I do believe that a couple of Democrats voted for it.