Comments on: Draft Offers US More Strategic Choices: Analyst http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/08/21/draft-offers-us-more-strategic-choices-analyst/ Online Defense and Acquisition Journal Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:35:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: pfcemhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/08/21/draft-offers-us-more-strategic-choices-analyst/#comment-1104 pfcem Mon, 25 Aug 2008 04:42:25 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=701#comment-1104 A draft would do no such thing. The reason why our forces are so comparatively "small" & stretched is because those in charge of the purse strings refuse to provide adequite funding for a larger force. A draft would do no such thing. The reason why our forces are so comparatively “small” & stretched is because those in charge of the purse strings refuse to provide adequite funding for a larger force.

]]> By: Leon Houstonhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/08/21/draft-offers-us-more-strategic-choices-analyst/#comment-1101 Leon Houston Sun, 24 Aug 2008 23:30:42 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=701#comment-1101 Can we make it retroactive to 2000? We need everyone that we can get. It takes years to get someone ready to get SOF skill levels. This is what it will take for our future wars at the doorstep. We need the women also. Bringing up their abilities from WWII to current needs makes them quite valuable. WPA was great, put the conscientious objectors to a 5 year stint. SOF should be volunteer only, no draftees. Is not the draft boards organized to do this in a relatively short period of time? What I mean by retro to 2000 is simply extend the maximum mandatory age to that year. All illegal aliens should be collected up and held until a choice is made, go to outdoor jail in the desert or serve in the military in a preliminary fashion with the option to go full after citizenship. College students have the option to finish in the service as reservists or defer college till fully drafted and take courses through the military education system. Can we make it retroactive to 2000? We need everyone that we can get. It takes years to get someone ready to get SOF skill levels. This is what it will take for our future wars at the doorstep. We need the women also. Bringing up their abilities from WWII to current needs makes them quite valuable.
WPA was great, put the conscientious objectors to a 5 year stint. SOF should be volunteer only, no draftees.
Is not the draft boards organized to do this in a relatively short period of time? What I mean by retro to 2000 is simply extend the maximum mandatory age to that year. All illegal aliens should be collected up and held until a choice is made, go to outdoor jail in the desert or serve in the military in a preliminary fashion with the option to go full after citizenship.
College students have the option to finish in the service as reservists or defer college till fully drafted and take courses through the military education system.

]]> By: twmhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/08/21/draft-offers-us-more-strategic-choices-analyst/#comment-1089 twm Sun, 24 Aug 2008 07:58:45 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=701#comment-1089 On the upside draftees would have far shorter terms of service and could perform a lot of the lower-level manual and repetitive work that takes up much of the time of professional forces. Infantry training isn't rocket science, and a draft would allow volunteers to be leaders rather than private/specialist workhorses. In all, with the generally higher level of knowledge in our society draftees would be more than capable of fulfilling limited roles in short-term situations.I volunteered, but it would have been nice to have more help doing our missions. And required service would create a whole new strata of youth who are both invested in our society and willing and able to ensure the right thing is done. A volunteer force tends towards the mercenary mindset while reluctant troopers serve as watchdogs against immoral and unethical behavior.Bottom line: a couple years in uniform would do everybody some good. Besides, the chances of conscripts actually seing combat are low provided volunteer pay and incentives remain, and the structure allowed for draftees to be employed in support roles generally. Even a small percentage of draftees will volunteer for airborne and/or combat arms anyway... On the upside draftees would have far shorter terms of service and could perform a lot of the lower-level manual and repetitive work that takes up much of the time of professional forces. Infantry training isn’t rocket science, and a draft would allow volunteers to be leaders rather than private/specialist workhorses. In all, with the generally higher level of knowledge in our society draftees would be more than capable of fulfilling limited roles in short-term situations.

I volunteered, but it would have been nice to have more help doing our missions. And required service would create a whole new strata of youth who are both invested in our society and willing and able to ensure the right thing is done. A volunteer force tends towards the mercenary mindset while reluctant troopers serve as watchdogs against immoral and unethical behavior.

Bottom line: a couple years in uniform would do everybody some good. Besides, the chances of conscripts actually seing combat are low provided volunteer pay and incentives remain, and the structure allowed for draftees to be employed in support roles generally. Even a small percentage of draftees will volunteer for airborne and/or combat arms anyway…

]]> By: Colehttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/08/21/draft-offers-us-more-strategic-choices-analyst/#comment-1085 Cole Sun, 24 Aug 2008 00:26:56 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=701#comment-1085 Got to admit I was somewhat impressed by arguments of Andrew Bacevich, a retired Army Colonel and professor at Boston U who has a new book out and several articles that propose a draft. His viewpoint, like some Democrats, appears to be that mandatory service would inhibit our willingness to go to war since the sons/daughters of the rich and upper middle class would be threatened in addition to the children of less affluent parents. His own son was killed last year, which certainly allows you to empathize with his point of view.The presumed counterargument would be that when you did go to war, there would be less incentive to end it due to ample troop availability. The other major counterargument is the pay cut that would be required. It's bad enough when you pay a security contractor or even the truck driver in Iraq so much more than the troops. What do you say to the poor conscript who is putting his life on the line for $15K instead of the current #20K while the contractor in theater is getting well over $100K. Got to admit I was somewhat impressed by arguments of Andrew Bacevich, a retired Army Colonel and professor at Boston U who has a new book out and several articles that propose a draft. His viewpoint, like some Democrats, appears to be that mandatory service would inhibit our willingness to go to war since the sons/daughters of the rich and upper middle class would be threatened in addition to the children of less affluent parents. His own son was killed last year, which certainly allows you to empathize with his point of view.

The presumed counterargument would be that when you did go to war, there would be less incentive to end it due to ample troop availability. The other major counterargument is the pay cut that would be required. It’s bad enough when you pay a security contractor or even the truck driver in Iraq so much more than the troops. What do you say to the poor conscript who is putting his life on the line for $15K instead of the current #20K while the contractor in theater is getting well over $100K.

]]> By: tipoverhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/08/21/draft-offers-us-more-strategic-choices-analyst/#comment-1056 tipover Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:07:16 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=701#comment-1056 Mr Watts seems to be working to disable our military. He recommends crippling our training in the other article and going back to the draft in this one. As a former member of the pre-"all volunteer" Army I am not impressed with his theories as I have seen the real thing. Not good.NOTE: Someone should check his bona fides as an "analyst" as he seems to be using his political leanings to influence his analysis. And who is this "Center for Strategy and Budgetary Assessment" that he works for and what are their goals? Mr Watts seems to be working to disable our military. He recommends crippling our training in the other article and going back to the draft in this one. As a former member of the pre-“all volunteer” Army I am not impressed with his theories as I have seen the real thing. Not good.

NOTE: Someone should check his bona fides as an “analyst” as he seems to be using his political leanings to influence his analysis. And who is this “Center for Strategy and Budgetary Assessment” that he works for and what are their goals?

]]>