draft

I agree, essentially. And it is true, that the greater our military means, the more likely we'll use the military for unnecessary wars. However, it is also true, that the lack of a draft enabled the President and lawmakers to take us to war without risking their own family members. Ultimately, this war will end because we don't have a draft, therefore, we can't stay indefinitely. I also think it is immoral to have a war and put it on the credit card, saddling future generations with the financial burden for our war, whether the war is justifyable or not.

by Robert Sargent (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 24 diaries, 302 comments) on Friday, September 14, 2007 at 7:11:30 AM
 

I fought this madness since it all started

http: //www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mark_sas_061128_unfair_notes_on_the_.htm

Please, delete the space after http:

by Mark Sashine (47 articles, 19 quicklinks, 235 diaries, 3362 comments) on Friday, September 14, 2007 at 7:18:20 AM
 

The Draft in Context

I find the argument made against the draft sounding like one that is made by someone who is quite willing to let others fight and die but is not himself willing to make any such committment. As someone who lived during the last draft in the Vietnam war I can say that it was not the draft that caused the war or allowed it to continue. It was, in point of fact, the political structure that facilitated Presidential warmaking. It was the refusal of Congress to live up to its Constitutional obligations. And it was the participation and support of the American people that prolonged the war. Instead of reforming the political processes that get us into these wars, the writer believes that it is just a matter of "What if they gave a war and nobody came" politics. Meanwhile, those Marines he is so willing to look down on are the ones thrown into the abyss of destruction.

 This generation stands as the most singular model of self-gratification and self-indulgence of any generation on the face of the earth. The exemption from the draft has not really done them that much good in regards to their role as public citizens of the US. Let me make this clear though, I do not support the draft, but feel that Americans need to carry the weight of decisions together so that there is some shared experience in which we can express our experiences and formulate policies that effectively address the desires of all the people.

 At issue in my mind is "Why should we continue to depend on a model of the armed forces that draws from the state National Guards when there is effectively no empowerment of the people of the states to politically make those decisions themselves. They have neither the Constitutional authority nor the delegated powers to do so.  But the Guard is being thrown into the fires of war in Iraq. This deployment model was made to circumvent the political decision making body of the Congress. It has effectively done so. For the states, people should keep in mind that there are models for civilian emergency and natural disaster response. Deployments from the Guard demonstrate the need to define the role of states in a manner in which the people can decide. Referenda and legislation to form such civilian corps will inherently provide the political forum to do so.

As it stands now, there is NO draft, and no intention to implement one. Many of the debates formulated are created by writers who focus on scenarios that never take place. This is inevitable when political parties are not rooted in the mec hanisms of government but stand more as advocacy groups than as parties. This article only confirms what most ordinary Americans already feel about the various "left" groups, sects and parties- that they have no real personal stake in what they say, but merely present opposition without policy proposals.

The first step of political parties is to define its policies regarding the military: the first step is to re-define its mission and  re-establish its role in the world and within the UN and other institutions of nations. This would mean abolishing NATO, creating a Constitutional amendment regarding the power to deploy troops overseas and re-defining the states' role in meeting the needs of emergency responses. Our obligation is to change the world and not to sit back and watch others die. If we include them in our dailogue, we would go much further, in our base of support and our political relevancy within the US.

Don't set up the draft as a bogeyman when there is not a draft to begin with. Elect representatives that are capable of formulating legislation that will accomplish our real goals in preventing future deployments and practicing non-interventionism. But don't set up a straw man so that you can further debate yourself and win in your own little arena fighting your own private little war. Keep in mind politics is based on the support that you have and not simply the moral supremacy that you flaunt over others. There will be NO change without connecting our own banner with those whom we share this nation's destiny.

by Martin Zehr (36 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 77 comments) on Saturday, September 15, 2007 at 12:34:15 PM