Will the US bring in the draft in the next 12 months?

[PrinceToad]

If they tried to draft me I would turn up for the interview on PCP, and in the unlikely event I ended up being put in the military and given a weapon I would use it on my commanding officers, and I reckon there's enough people out there who feel the same way to make a draft in this country unfeasible at best.

Would be better to convert to extreme jihadi islam (if that is to be the current enemy-du-jour) and be very vocal about it? Or to Kim Jong-Il style Communism?

 

[PrinceToad]

Naaah. It would be better and cheaper to hire a completely private army to do the job, and hire mercenaries from all over the globe. Currently the US funds the war in Colombia through "outsourced" mercenary companies. Could do the same in Iraq / Korea / Iran / Syria / Qatar / latest-subject-of-GWB's-geography-class.

 

[DrRingDing]

To be honest I would prefer someone like myself or myself to be drafted and sent to Iraq than some junior bonehead voluntarily going out to "whack a few rag heads" for queen and country.

 

[Rentonite]

Draft? Mmmm let me see.....
Could it happen? shure

If the American people are pissed off and scared then expect it.
Dang near happend right after 9-11

We get another 9-11 or worse. then expect it
and all the complaining and predicting in the world will not have any bearing on the decision.
so sorry

 

[oi2002]

Not likely while Dubya is in office.

But there probably should have been a draft to provide strategic flexibility prior to the Iraqi invasion but that, like any sensible attempt to plan the occupation, would of led to the invasions cancellation. This was a country unprepared for any sacrifice; in debt up to its ears and demanding tax cuts as it stampeded towards Baghdad.

In reality a draft is almost politically impossible as US obsession with identity politics would dictate that girls would have to be drafted as well as boys.

Wilkerson, recently, did imply following a hasty withdrawal and catestrophic failure in Iraq would lead the US to put a 5 million man army in the ME to save the Saudi oil fields for democracy. A bit apocalyptic perhaps but that would certainly mean a draft.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I doubt it'd happen, takes around a year to make a soldier worth having around (very, very roughly) so even if the draft were to be introduced now and people were grabbed off the street it'd have a lag period of a year for them to hit the streets of iraq.

But it couldn't be done overnight, let's say it took six months to be initiated and then the first call ups sent out, that's a year and a half before any of the first draft would be useable.

In another year and a half the local iraqi forces should be able to take over some of the role, meaning that the US army will be able to scale back the commitment they have there, negating the need for drafted troops. I really doubt it'd be used to help with the iraq war for military reasons (including the moral and other problems of the draft mentioned by other posters).

Of course it might still happen, the US army is not designed as an occupational force, if anything like Iraq is in the pipeline then it would have to be examined as an option.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

lol You guys are making my arguments for me.

When I say a military made up of a good cross section of society is better than what we currently have, it includes officers. When a military is made up of people with no other motive than to serve the best interests of their country, the tendency to make war is greatly diminished. What you wind up with, at least in theory (and in practice, I maintain), is a military that will do just about anything to AVOID war ... except knuckle under to some shithead that is hellbent on war.

The Old Sarge

I was thinking about Starship Troopers reading this, rather predictably I'm afraid, which is a terrible book - Heinlein has the political sense of a garden snail - but does at least have a model of a citizen army in a state of perpetual war and "peacekeeping".

What they seem to do to achieve this is start the indoctrination in early. Schoolchildren are explicitly taught to believe in the ethos that justifies the use of force to benefit their society and the ruling classes, including rewriting history, dehumanising the subjects as dogs needing discipline (this is the human ones) and so on. By the time they get into the army it seems that they've already learnt the lessons and so willingly go along with it.

As I say, Heinlein analyses this as deeply as a puddle, but one does wonder - would it be theoretically possible to instill values beforehand and then conscript, criminalising those who go against them as antisocial deviants rather than criminalising them for refusing to join the army? The level to which it goes in the book is excessive but there's an element that already exists.

NB I'm not talking about the film. The film satirises the book, and is much better.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Draft = Political Suicide

Have to agree with this....the war in Iraq just doesn't have that kind of support.

 

[DrRingDing]

Have to agree with this....the war in Iraq just doesn't have that kind of support.

Did Vietnam?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

You don't need to prepare people that much. You just need to be able to isolate a bunch of young men and use the tried and tested conditioning methods developed by cults (and militaries since Fredric the Great) Sure, they're going to get a few incorrigables who need to be weeded out (cf the military careers of the Kray twins) but the majority will turn out serviceable.

 

[PrinceToad]

I would still think outsourcing is the most likely way they'll go, as the main benefit of the war is the kickbacks to the presidents' chums.

 

[TAE]

Assuming a draft were instituted, why should any of that excuse you?

because of the principle of freedom, and the right of individuals not to be compelled to do something - any form of labour, but most of all soldiering - that I don't choose to do.

Absolutely right.

 

[The Old Sarge]

I agree in principle.

However, what's to be said for the sort that takes advantage of all the benefits of societ/country/etc. but does little or nothing to protect those benefits?

The "let George do it" attitude.

The Old Sarge

 

[Streathamite]

errr...you can contribute to society in ways other than soldiering, you know.
and not all of the benefits of a civil society/liberal democracy are best served or enhancecd by military action.
and if you work, you 'contribute' - you pay taxes.
If you buy stuff - you 'contribute', for same reason.
and you pay local/municipal taxes

 

[septic tank]

There's an election in 11 months

The GOP stands to lose both houses of congress over anti-war sentiment (unlikely, but possible). There's no way in hell they're bringing back the draft.

Congressional Republicans are in a panic and pushing for a pull-out as fast as possible. They probably won't get it, because the bubble around Bush is thicker than all of their heads put together. We'll go to November 2006 at something close to current troop levels, and then there'll be a draw-down -- but only just as much as necessitated by plummeting enrollments. Cheney and his boy in the bubble won't easily surrender their pet war.

 

[septic tank]

If they tried to draft me I would turn up for the interview on PCP, and in the unlikely event I ended up being put in the military and given a weapon I would use it on my commanding officers, and I reckon there's enough people out there who feel the same way to make a draft in this country unfeasible at best.

You could just sing "Alice's Restaurant."

Imagine if three people sang it. Well, okay, I imagine they'd all be peeling potatoes together in Mosul or something, but they'd be doing it in three-part harmony.

 

[pbman]

Please settle an argument I've been having with a friend. He says the strain of Iraq, plus the need to mobilise forces to take Iran will make the US government bring in conscription in the next 6-12 months.

What do youse all think? I'm especially interested to hear the views of our North American posters

No way.

They will lower standards and increase pay if they need more people.

Drafties don't make good soligers in todays modern high tech army.

In anyevent, check the numbers, they are extreamly close to their yearly goal this year, as it is.

 

[oi2002]

Those Commies at the US Army War College think a draft unlikely despite the paucity and dire quality of volunteers:

The Sustainability of U.S. Military Operations in Iraq.

A number of factors unrelated to progress in building a
functioning Iraqi state may also influence the debate on when and
how the United States will depart Iraq. Foremost is the willingness
of American society to provide a continuous stream of volunteers
to join the Army, Marine Corps, and their reserve components and
accept the likelihood of possible combat duty in Iraq. Should
the pool of military age volunteers permanently decline or even
evaporate, there is almost certainly no political will to restart
military conscription. Public opinion polls consistently demonstrate
overwhelming opposition to a draft. This opposition will almost
certainly become more intense should the prospect become more
likely. Politicians embracing the idea of restarting the draft would
be effectively ending their political careers. Furthermore, the process
of resolving draft-related controversies on such issues as conscripting
women, deciding what kinds of deferments to allow, and other such
matters would probably require a significant amount of debate prior
to congressional action. The Iraq situation may have fundamentally
changed by the time a draft is organized and implemented, and the
conscripted soldiers are trained and prepared for deployment.
U.S. public opinion about the Iraq War may also become an
important factor influencing the nature and timing of an exit strategy,
even without the possibility of a military draft. Most case studies of
U.S. public opinion behavior suggest that the American public will
endure ongoing military casualties and high monetary expenditures
in a sustained but limited war if they are able to see progress towards
military and political goals.133 Public support for the Iraq war peaked
when the Saddam Hussein regime fell in April 2003 when 76 percent
of those polled stated that the war was worth the sacrifice. By May
2005, a USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll indicated that only 41 percent
of the American public believed the war was worth the sacrifice; 57
percent said that it was not.134 Support rebounded in July 2005 when
53 percent of those surveyed by the same polling organization said
the war was not a mistake and only 46 percent believed it was an
error. Surprisingly, only 37 percent of those surveyed in the July
poll believed that it would be possible to create a stable, democratic
Iraq. It may also be significant that temporary spikes in public
approval for the Iraq operation have been produced by events
such as Saddam’s capture and the January 2005 elections, but these
improvements failed to last due to the continuation of the insurgency
and the inability of the United States to reduce its commitments in
troops and resources to Iraq.
Against this background, the U.S. public may see increased
casualties or any requirement to boost troop strength in Iraq as
indications of a faltering U.S. effort in meeting its goals. Increasing
U.S. financial expenditures for the war, in addition to the hundreds of
billions of dollars already spent, may also become a future problem
for U.S. public opinion. As noted, a policy of “staying the course” in

a democratic society is most effective when the public can see clear
progress towards an acceptable result. If the public views the Iraq
conflict as showing little or no progress, the conflict may become
redefined by many U.S. citizens as a quagmire, and pressure to
withdraw would become nearly irresistible. Moreover, while many
hopeful signs of progress exist in Iraq, it is not clear that the public
will find them compelling if such progress does not lead to a situation
where the United States can begin withdrawing troops.
It has already been noted that a serious decline or even a
collapse in recruiting and retention for the U.S. Army and Marine
Corps could eventually influence the U.S. ability to sustain a large
military presence in Iraq.136 A series of problems in recruiting (but
not retention) started to appear in 2004 with the Army Reserve
and National Guard and later spread to the regular Army.137 The
most immediate impact of these problems involves a shortfall of
newly enlisted recruits, but there are other less visible and longerterm
effects should the United States accept large numbers of only
marginally qualified applicants, and these individuals remain in the
military as professional soldiers.138 Moreover, various journalists
have stated that strong opposition to the Iraq war among some
minority groups, and particularly African-Americans, has begun to
influence the Army’s ability to recruit minority soldiers.139 Since a
military draft appears politically unsustainable, it is not clear what
will be done if the Iraq war becomes increasingly unpopular, and
military enlistments take an even more dramatic fall. In response to
these types of concerns, Army Vice Chief of Staff General Richard A.
Cody has stated, “What keeps me awake at night is what will this all
volunteer force look like in 2007?”140
Recruiting problems nevertheless may be at least partially
reversible even under contemporary circumstances. In the face of
current problems, the military recruiting system has expanded,
and new methods to attract recruits have been implemented. Nearterm
solutions currently being pursued have involved increasing
enlistment and reenlistment incentives, making limited reductions
on educational requirements to enter the Army or Army Reserve,
seeking transfers from the Navy and Air Force, creating 15-month
terms of enlistment, and raising the maximum age for U.S. Army
Reserve recruits.

U.S. Army retention (reenlistment, rather than first-time
enlistment) is currently not a major problem when considering overall
numbers, although there are shortfalls in various important military
occupational specialties (MOS).142 Retention rates may remain high
so long as troops and their families feel that their sacrifice is serving a
long-term good. Nevertheless, some individuals may now be opting
to leave military service after 20 years with the minimum retirement
benefits, despite the fact that they had previously planned to stay
in the service longer. On an even more threatening level, retention
could collapse if a belief that the war is futile begins to dominate the
society, and this outlook then begins to influence troops who might
otherwise reenlist. Additionally, there are some disadvantages
today’s troops have when compared to soldiers fighting in earlier
wars. In Vietnam, for example, only those who volunteered to do
so served a second tour in combat, except in rare instances involving
career officers and soldiers. In Iraq (and Afghanistan), many troops
are required to perform a second or even a third combat tour as part
of normal unit rotations. These requirements increasingly could
cause soldiers to rethink the disproportionate burden that society is
placing on them, while the bulk of the population remains sheltered
and in some cases indifferent to the war.