Congressman wants to bring back the draft

[knapplc]

Every person in Israel serves two years in the military. It's not impossible, impractical, or illogical. It makes a LOT of sense to me. I just don't see it happening.

[SeaWolf]

There is no realistic way, to all of a sudden, make serving mandatory.

It would have to be a phased in policy... It couldn't be something that you applied immediately to everyone who was about to turn 18... You would have to set a date, and say, "Any able bodied male born after this date will be required to serve in the military from their 18th birthday until their 20th birthday."

I understand the phasing part, but I believe this Congressman wants anyone aged 18-42 to serve 2 years. Thats just a huge influx of people and the logistics and tracking of it all, would be extremely pricey

I do not support what this congressman wants. Most military people don't serve until they are 42, that's when you retire from the armed forces. As I seaid before it should be set up so that you either serve 2 years after high school or 2 years after you leave college.

[SeaWolf]

Requiring every person in the country to serve in the military is very unrealistic.... especially for two full years. Any idea what that would do to our defense budget? I don't think there's enough jobs to even go around. The reason why they have mandatory service in other countries is because they have a shortage of people. That's not a problem in the United States.

I'm sure there would be exceptions to the rule... For starters, I disagree with mandatory service for women... So, that eliminates about 52% of the eligible population... Then you would have to make exceptions for the disabled... That's another significant chunk of folks...

And, for the record, I think it would actually not have a huge impact on the defense budget... Right now, enlistment bonuses for new recruits are about $20,000 per recruit... Mandatory service would eliminate those... If service were mandatory from the time a person is 18 until they are 20, then we would also greatly reduce the money the military has to spend on caring for soldier's families, as most people do not have dependents when they're 18 years old...

Why not incude women? Just curious.

[Plindsey88]

Requiring every person in the country to serve in the military is very unrealistic.... especially for two full years. Any idea what that would do to our defense budget? I don't think there's enough jobs to even go around. The reason why they have mandatory service in other countries is because they have a shortage of people. That's not a problem in the United States.

I'm sure there would be exceptions to the rule... For starters, I disagree with mandatory service for women... So, that eliminates about 52% of the eligible population... Then you would have to make exceptions for the disabled... That's another significant chunk of folks...

And, for the record, I think it would actually not have a huge impact on the defense budget... Right now, enlistment bonuses for new recruits are about $20,000 per recruit... Mandatory service would eliminate those... If service were mandatory from the time a person is 18 until they are 20, then we would also greatly reduce the money the military has to spend on caring for soldier's families, as most people do not have dependents when they're 18 years old...

Why not incude women? Just curious.

It's a southern thing... You wouldn't understand...

[Redskins Win]

Question: those that will turn or have turned 18 recently or can remember, do you still have to register at the post office, in case of a draft?

[Plindsey88]

Question: those that will turn or have turned 18 recently or can remember, do you still have to register at the post office, in case of a draft?

Registering for selective service is still mandatory, but I think the days of going down to the Post Office have gone the way of the dinosaur... Like everything else, most people register online, now...

(I had to register in '95 at the Post Office, but my cousin just registered a few weeks ago, and he did it online.)

[josebach]

Every person in Israel serves two years in the military. It's not impossible, impractical, or illogical. It makes a LOT of sense to me. I just don't see it happening.

There are just over 6,000,000 people in Israel. There are 300,000,000 people in the United States. What percentage of the United States citizens serve in the military? What percentage of Israeli citizens serve in the miltary? By saying this Israeli's policy makes sense, you're implying that the percentages should be the same in both countries. How is this not impossible, impractical or illogical? How does it make a LOT of sense when our military's personnel requirements during non war times are for the most part already met?

[SeaWolf]

Every person in Israel serves two years in the military. It's not impossible, impractical, or illogical. It makes a LOT of sense to me. I just don't see it happening.

There are just over 6,000,000 people in Israel. There are 300,000,000 people in the United States. What percentage of the United States citizens serve in the military? What percentage of Israeli citizens serve in the miltary? By saying this Israeli's policy makes sense, you're implying that the percentages should be the same in both countries. How is this not impossible, impractical or illogical? How does it make a LOT of sense when our military's personnel requirements during non war times are for the most part already met?

We ARE at war with Terrorisim and don't forget Iraq.

[stomperrob]

From today's NY Times:

Editorial
Rejecting the Draft

Published: November 21, 2006
There are many reasons why we are distressed to hear that Representative Charles Rangel of New York plans to reintroduce his annual measure aimed at resurrecting the draft when the Democrats take control of the House in January. We don’t favor military conscription in general. And in this particular case, compelling military service won’t achieve the things Mr. Rangel says he wants, either.

Mr. Rangel wants to replenish an Army that is in critical condition, make the armed services more equitably representative of American society as a whole, and find a way to prevent future presidents from embarking on military misadventures. Those are laudable goals, but not ones the nation can achieve by bringing back the draft.

Even if the draft was a good idea, it would be politically impossible to achieve. Members of Congress are well aware that their constituents oppose it. This White House has never been willing to ask the American public to do anything but accept more tax cuts; it’s hardly going to embrace something as difficult and unpopular as military conscription.

But the idea is flawed as well. Because of the dire situation in Iraq, the Army is indeed having trouble meeting its yearly quota of 80,000 recruits. Yet military leaders nevertheless oppose a draft. They believe you don’t get a highly skilled Army by forcing people to serve against their will, and they are right.

The draft would not demonstrate to young people that everyone must do his or her fair share. It is more likely to convince them that the demand for sacrifice is made mainly on those too poor to avoid it. The volunteer force in Iraq has been a truer cross section of America than the force created under the last draft, which ended in 1973, before the end of the Vietnam War. The wealthy and well-connected could get deferments then or assignments to safe alternatives, and many did. While there are plenty of underprivileged in the current force, at least they are there by their own choosing.

The problem with the draft does not lie in the fact that it requires young people to spend some time contributing to the nation’s well-being before they embark on their life careers. We wish the president had called for such sacrifices after Sept. 11, 2001, when so many Americans were aching to contribute.

For those young people who do not feel moved by patriotism or propelled by economics to enlist in the military, there should be other options for national service — like AmeriCorps. These programs need money and attention. Some of the potential candidates for president in 2008 have said the United States should require all young people to devote a year or two to service after high school or college, and that idea should be debated during the upcoming campaign.

But the urgency of the Army’s current needs requires a different solution. There are many ways for the armed services to meet their recruitment goals outside of general conscription. After all, the Army’s annual quota of 80,000 recruits is barely a drop in the ocean of some 60 million Americans between 18 and 35. Forcing the issue, with a draft, is no solution.

[BlueBandit24]

Question: those that will turn or have turned 18 recently or can remember, do you still have to register at the post office, in case of a draft?

You get a draft card in the mail, and you are required to fill it out. If you don't, you forfeit your rights to things like financial aid and other things of the like.