The size of the military is set by Congress.

If Congress wants a larger force, they just need to say so.

The draft is a good idea. Here's why:

It would broaden the social base of the military. Right now a large share of people in the service are either career oriented or working class, looking for a leg up from GI benefits. There's nothing wrong with that, but what IS wrong is when the casualty reports come back with a conspicuous lack of names from the upper-middle and upper economic strata of our society. That's a far cry from, say, World War II, when future presidents and the children of presidents fought. Teddy Roosevelt's sons are buried in France. JFK's brother was lost.

America got behind that war from top to bottom. It wasn't just a sideshow for some elements of society.

Which gets to the second point. Empowered people might be more skeptical of sending Americans off to die if their children or grandchildren were on the front lines. Congress responded weakly to Bush's proposed adventure in Iraq. If 300 of the 435 members of Congress had relatives in the service, I think they might have taken more ownership.

The Vietnam era draft was flawed in that it let too many people obtain deferments (I'm one of them). In my mind, our political leadership in the prior two administrations has lacked a degree of moral authority because its members did not make the sacrifice of taking part in active military service. The National Guard back then was a dodge for the connected, I'm sorry to say.

Finally, our military is showing signs of wear. The personnel are called upon to do an awful lot. Multiple tours of duty in a war zone are excessive. In Vietnam, soldiers did their time in country and came home. Many went back, but they didn't have to.

We should look to Israel for an example of a conscription system that works. Universal service for two years, with a three-year stint for those trained in combat and highly technical assignments that could provide valuable career skills in the private sector. Post-military benefits would reflect the length and type of service (i.e., combat).

If we only the world could just get along.


Neither will ever happen.

__________________
Thank You!
Fred
2009 ML350
2004 SL600
2004 SL500
1996 SL600
2002 SLK32
2005 CLK320 cabrio
2003 ML350
1997 C280 Sport

As has been often stated on this forum, the federal government is incapable of the management of large scale operations, paid for by taxpayers, to benefit the greater good . . so the privatization model must surely be best.

1. I don't think we need a larger military. USA plus our allies have a much larger military than the rest of the world.

2. The draft would have to be done fair and we are not ready for that. Are we ready to draft females? Will college keep you out of the draft? Like the Vietnam era draft rules that only served to keep upper class out of the draft.

This is the reason I would be for the Draft. The survivors of War should have a resonable chance of home and haveing a reasonably normal life and not be entirely burned out.
We should care enough for them to see that enough replacments are available to share the load so that Troops can retain their mental health.

__________________
84 300D, 82 Volvo 244Gl Diesel

How would War Profiteering/War for profit be or efficient?

By the way the Federal Government has already managed several large scale wars/operations. So I think the facts prove it can be done.

__________________
84 300D, 82 Volvo 244Gl Diesel

lol. Excellent.

__________________
1984 300TD

The British tried that and it finally backfired.
I do think a manditory service for 2-3 years is a good idea but it would not have to be in the military.

__________________
1983 300SD
200000miles

Sounds like a very communist idea. That's something that my native country (Czech Republic) has transitioned away from after the fall of communism, and it's now using the same professional army model that the US uses. Personally I think the military should continue to be an all-volunteer force and we should let people decide for themselves what they want to do in life. Why waste people's skills that could be put to better use than spending a few years in an army training camp or some other mandatory service?

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

Now don't get all logical here!

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

So, managing a military system and war efforts is easier than health care?

In the new term if NK acts up were going to have to.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

x2.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

We never really "have to". The only exception to that that I can think, at least as far as the last 100 years go, is the war against Japan in WWII since they initiated the aggression. I wish the US would stop policing the world and let countries defend themselves, including SK.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL