• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US Draft - restart inactive thread?

Kalatzi

Banned
Banned
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
210
The last post was in 2004 and it seems inactive.

Here is an intersting article from Thomas Ricks - someone who usually knows what he's talking about.

reproduced under the fair dealings provision of the copyright act
from The Washington Post


Toss out the all-volunteer military


since the end of the military draft in 1973, every person joining the U.S. armed forces has done so because he or she asked to be there. Over the past decade, this all-volunteer force has been put to the test and has succeeded, fighting two sustained foreign wars with troops standing up to multiple combat deployments and extreme stress.

This is precisely the reason it is time to get rid of the all-volunteer force. It has been too successful. Our relatively small and highly adept military has made it all too easy for our nation to go to war — and to ignore the consequences.

The drawbacks of the all-volunteer force are not military, but political and ethical. One percent of the nation has carried almost all the burden of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while the rest of us essentially went shopping. When the wars turned sour, we could turn our backs.

A nation that disregards the consequences of its gravest decisions is operating in morally hazardous territory. We invaded Iraq recklessly. If we had a draft, a retired general said to me recently, we probably would not have invaded at all.

If there had been a draft in 2001, I think we still would have gone to war in Afghanistan, which was the right thing to do. But I don’t think we would have stayed there much past the middle of 2002 or handled the war so negligently for years after that.

We had a draft in the 1960s, of course, and it did not stop President Lyndon Johnson from getting into a ground war in Vietnam. But the draft sure did encourage people to pay attention to the war and decide whether they were willing to support it.

Resuming conscription is the best way to reconnect the people with the armed services. Yes, reestablishing a draft, with all its Vietnam-era connotations, would cause problems for the military, but those could never be as painful and expensive as fighting an unnecessary war in Iraq for almost nine years. A draft would be good for our nation and ultimately for our military.

Thomas E. Ricks is a fellow at the Center for a New American Security and the author of “The Generals: American Military Command From World War II to Today,” forthcoming in October"

I was long against a return to the draft. Now I think it a it could be a good idea. Give some of the kids playing milporn like  MW3, '"theres a little soldier in all us us"something to do.

Canada I'm for the status quo
 
A quick review of debate on national service/compulsory military service:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/105089.0/all.html
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/24424.0.html
Repeat as required....

Kalatzi said:
I was long against a return to the draft. Now I think it a it could be a good idea. Give some of the kids playing milporn like  MW3, '"theres a little soldier in all us us"something to do.
Funny nobody suggests turning these kids into cops.  After all, if we're going to train young people in the potential use of lethal force to protect us, what better candidates?
 
milnews.ca said:
Funny nobody suggests turning these kids into cops.  After all, if we're going to train young people in the potential use of lethal force to protect us, what better candidates?

When I was in school, Metro Police hired full-time Police Cadets after their 16th ( it later went up to 17th ) birthday. Police Cadets were promoted to Constable when they turned 21.
( You had to be a long-time city resident, and it helped to have a "legacy" on the force. )

You could join Emergency Services after your 18th birthday.
I believe the average age of military recruits was younger 40 years ago than it is now.

The practice was relatively customary in those days. Younger unmarried men were considered to be more easily "moldable" to the culture than older individuals with "life experience."

I read that the average age for TPS recruits is now 27.
 
The democrats in the House [when they had control] brought up reinstating the draft.The measure went down in flames.The result, a 402-2 vote against the draft.

 
I wonder who the 2 were that voted for it?
 
mariomike said:
When I was in school, Metro Police hired full-time Police Cadets after their 16th ( it later went up to 17th ) birthday. Police Cadets were promoted to Constable when they turned 21.
( You had to be a long-time city resident, and it helped to have a "legacy" on the force. )

You could join Emergency Services after your 18th birthday.
I believe the average age of military recruits was younger 40 years ago than it is now.

The practice was relatively customary in those days. Younger unmarried men were considered to be more easily "moldable" to the culture than older individuals with "life experience."

I read that the average age for TPS recruits is now 27.

The shift in demographic is representative of the new reality in social policing. Whereas in the past relative physical strength, compared to the general population, was the main component of qualification for policing, today's modern police recruiters favor sociology and psychology majors. This alone raises the age of the typical recruit to 22+. Given the level of competition for a position on a force that is generally only hiring to replace losses due to natural attrition, imposed through austerity measures, most candidates also complete a further 2 years in college obtaining a justice relevent diploma; again raising the typical age to 24+. Combining these candidates with other persons who either started later or are coming in with other experience the average of 27 is quite accurate. 
 
jeffb said:
I wonder who the 2 were that voted for it?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll494.xml

John Murtha (D) Pennsylvania

Pete Stark (D) California
 
RDY2SRV12 said:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll494.xml

Pete Stark (D) California

Of Stark Industries? Of course, it all makes sense now!  :)
 
Interesting;

Murtha should know what he is talking about according to his Wiki;

Military service
Service/branch United States Marine Corps
Rank Colonel
Battles/wars Vietnam War
Awards
Bronze Star
Purple Heart (2)
Combat Action Ribbon
Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry
American Spirit Honor Medal
 
RDY2SRV12 said:
The shift in demographic is representative of the new reality in social policing. Whereas in the past relative physical strength, compared to the general population, was the main component of qualification for policing, today's modern police recruiters favor sociology and psychology majors. This alone raises the age of the typical recruit to 22+. Given the level of competition for a position on a force that is generally only hiring to replace losses due to natural attrition, imposed through austerity measures, most candidates also complete a further 2 years in college obtaining a justice relevent diploma; again raising the typical age to 24+. Combining these candidates with other persons who either started later or are coming in with other experience the average of 27 is quite accurate. 

Because recruits are older now, Bill 206 was passed in the Ontario legislature in 2006 to improve the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) for police officers, firefighters and paramedics:
http://www.omers.com/pdf/Supplemental_Plan_handbook.pdf


 
Back
Top