Quote:
Originally Posted by SamIam
I too agree with most of the list.
I think we need to go back to having a citizen's army (yes - gasp - the draft).
At this point something like one half percent of all Americans have served in the volunteer army.
That means that the vast majority of Americans have no stake
in whatever latest foreign "democratization" process is going on.
If more Americans were impacted or potentially impacted by our foreign excursions,
the government would be forced to be more responsible in carrying them out
and deciding if they should be carried out in the first place.
<snip>
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
<snip>
The draft has a lot of things going for it, including the main point you mention.
I haven't given a return to the draft much critical thought in many years though so my brains are rusty on this score.
|
My wife and I go round this often, and we wholeheartedly endorse Sam's argument.
But the military seems to be pleased with their "all volunteer army",
and probably would resist a
permanent draft, as is likely for the general public.
All the time while recent demands on US National Guard and military families have been terrible.
The draft during the Viet Nam war
did help to bring that war to a close,
but not until after the troops on the ground were overly represented
by Blacks, Hispanics, and the poor who could not find a way to avoid conscription.
The more well-to-do managed to get into a different branch of service (e.g., Air Force),
a deferment, or went to a foreign country in one guise or another.
Now back to the "HOW's" issue...
A temporary national draft before or during a military excursion would serve
a useful purpose, but would need very strong safeguards against discriminatory inductions.
.