thedrifter
12-24-06, 06:52 AM
The Draft As Deterrent
Hack always advocated the return of the military draft. It's a common thread in much of his writing. He believed that draftees had the guts to stand up and disagree with their superiors, since they weren't concerned with making the military their career.
Becoming a General (or Admiral) in the U.S. military often requires a series of obligatory assignments, alternating between combat duty and staff jobs. Back in the days of the Roman Republic, those who wished to attain the highest rank in society, that of Consul, did much the same; alternating between periods as military governors, leading campaigns against barbarians on the frontier, and as senators back in Rome.
Back then a successful leader always had extensive military experience, since generals and governors who had more talent - and, more importantly, brought more booty back to Rome - were always attempting to separate "the wheat from the chaff." A man could be the darling of the Senate one day, and unable to raise even a single legion the next. It was brutal, it was vicious, but it also produced some of the most cunning military minds of any age - Julius Caesar, Octavian, Marius, Pompey the Great...the list is almost endless.
The important difference between the Roman military and ours is that promotion was requisite on success. Now, many "Perfumed Princes" as Hack liked to call them, whose only asset is an influential patron, are given purview over large swaths of the military, like procurement or recruiting. In many cases these men and women have risen so high in the military solely because they haven't rocked the boat.
Other soldiers, not the least of which was Hack himself, have been cashiered for criticizing the military. Can you remember how the Pentagon went into damage-control mode when an Army soldier asked Donald Rumsfeld why there were so few armored Humvees deployed in Iraq? That's the kind of gumption Hack admired in his draftees during the Vietnam War, and he often lamented the lack of accountability in the modern Army since 1973, when it transitioned to an all-volunteer force.
Since the midterm election and Rumsfeld's resignation, rumors of reinstating the draft have surfaced again. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-NY, is planning on introducing legislation in 2007 to bring back the draft, according to CNN.com. Others, such as Sen. John McCain, R-AZ, and a coterie of retired Generals, have repeatedly called for increased troop strength in Iraq. However, they've been largely mum when asked where those troops will come from.
The draft has always been an issue I've disagreed with Hack on. Perhaps it's my youth coloring my opinions, but I think that if I or one of my friends were in a foxhole, I'd want the person next to me to want to be there, covering my back. Still, military recruitment levels remain high and the Democratic House is unlikely to pass an unpopular resolution like the return of the draft, but much of this debate depends on what happens in North Korea and Iran. It would obviously be impossible for the military to deal with Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, and Iran simultaneously.
Only time will tell whether we return to the draft.
Nathan Dorschner
Contributing Editor
-----
The Draft As Deterrent
By David H. Hackworth
Originally published March 18, 2003
If today's U.S. armed forces could count draftee airmen, sailors, soldiers and Marines among those who will soon be doing the dying during our second go at Saddam Hussein, you can bet good money that more American parents and grandparents would have been asking hard questions of their Washington pols long before the drumbeat of war became headline news. Important questions such as:
Is this war really necessary?
What national security threat does Iraq pose to the United States ?
Why can't we – with a united world behind us – disarm Iraq without war?
Why the unilateral intervention?
What are the projected costs and casualties, and is there an exit plan?
But at long last, the realities of war have been brought home by massive global peace marches, gas prices spiraling into the stratosphere, the economy tanking alongside the Titanic and tens of thousands of reserve soldiers from every city in this great land – neighbors, friends and workmates of the formerly disconnected – being called to arms. Finally, millions of Americans are listening more carefully to a chorus of world leaders and a few gutsy national politicians righteously concerned about the consequences of the shootout in the desert.
Except that with 230,000 of our warriors already staring down Saddam's cannons, this new consciousness might have come too late.
I believe it's been far too easy for the vast majority of Americans to pay little or no attention to George W. Bush's march to war, because most folks' pride and joy aren't prime candidates for body bags. And few average citizens have ongoing personal contact with a uniformed defender from the 1 million-plus regular warriors who make up our All-Volunteer Force (AVF). To them, our warriors are just uniforms they occasionally see floating around at airports or as background color in TV war dispatches.
Most recruits in the AVF come from non-vocal, working-class families – a disproportionate number from the poor and from minority groups – while more privileged Americans are conspicuous by their absence. For example, the Congress that voted overwhelmingly for the military solution against Iraq includes only one member with a son who's an enlisted grunt. The rest, like the majority of Americans since the draft went south, no longer share directly in the sacrifice that comes with sending our youth to face the dragon.
The poor join up because the job prospects on the outside are marginal. By going into the military, they learn a skill, gain the benefits of the GI Bill and get a better shot at the American dream.
Meanwhile, teens from families with political punch – read cash and/or clout – are safely bunkered down at universities out of harm's way. And when asked: "Should we 'do' Iraq ?" their answer is often a roaring "Yes!" But ask those same young aristo-hawks: "Will you go and fight?" and rarely does a Tommy Hilfiger-clad arm shoot up. When it comes to blood sports, they don't need to be taught that the spectators have it cushier than the gladiators.
Just as if all Americans knew their kids would likely serve dead-center on the killing fields, there'd be far sharper focus on how our politicians are voting and a lot more calls for caution and careful consideration before we got out there in the sand and slapped leather. For sure, the draft would give us 20/20 vigilance.
As the father of a reservist now in Kuwait recently said: "I suspect once folks start thinking about their kids standing in the line of fire, they'll make a whole bunch of noise. When that happens, hopefully this insanity will stop."
History has taught us that draftees serve this country well. Not only are they natural-born whistle-blowers who keep both the war-makers and the brass honest, but because their service keeps all our citizens more closely involved and invested, they are our bottom-line deterrent to war.
Service in our country's ranks used to be widely accepted as the price of citizenship. So why not bring back the draft? Since so many of our leaders seem to be currently suffering from Empiritis, we'd all probably be better protected from this country-destroying disease if every American family shared the burden for defending our way of life.
Eilhys England contributed to this article.
Ellie
Hack always advocated the return of the military draft. It's a common thread in much of his writing. He believed that draftees had the guts to stand up and disagree with their superiors, since they weren't concerned with making the military their career.
Becoming a General (or Admiral) in the U.S. military often requires a series of obligatory assignments, alternating between combat duty and staff jobs. Back in the days of the Roman Republic, those who wished to attain the highest rank in society, that of Consul, did much the same; alternating between periods as military governors, leading campaigns against barbarians on the frontier, and as senators back in Rome.
Back then a successful leader always had extensive military experience, since generals and governors who had more talent - and, more importantly, brought more booty back to Rome - were always attempting to separate "the wheat from the chaff." A man could be the darling of the Senate one day, and unable to raise even a single legion the next. It was brutal, it was vicious, but it also produced some of the most cunning military minds of any age - Julius Caesar, Octavian, Marius, Pompey the Great...the list is almost endless.
The important difference between the Roman military and ours is that promotion was requisite on success. Now, many "Perfumed Princes" as Hack liked to call them, whose only asset is an influential patron, are given purview over large swaths of the military, like procurement or recruiting. In many cases these men and women have risen so high in the military solely because they haven't rocked the boat.
Other soldiers, not the least of which was Hack himself, have been cashiered for criticizing the military. Can you remember how the Pentagon went into damage-control mode when an Army soldier asked Donald Rumsfeld why there were so few armored Humvees deployed in Iraq? That's the kind of gumption Hack admired in his draftees during the Vietnam War, and he often lamented the lack of accountability in the modern Army since 1973, when it transitioned to an all-volunteer force.
Since the midterm election and Rumsfeld's resignation, rumors of reinstating the draft have surfaced again. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-NY, is planning on introducing legislation in 2007 to bring back the draft, according to CNN.com. Others, such as Sen. John McCain, R-AZ, and a coterie of retired Generals, have repeatedly called for increased troop strength in Iraq. However, they've been largely mum when asked where those troops will come from.
The draft has always been an issue I've disagreed with Hack on. Perhaps it's my youth coloring my opinions, but I think that if I or one of my friends were in a foxhole, I'd want the person next to me to want to be there, covering my back. Still, military recruitment levels remain high and the Democratic House is unlikely to pass an unpopular resolution like the return of the draft, but much of this debate depends on what happens in North Korea and Iran. It would obviously be impossible for the military to deal with Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, and Iran simultaneously.
Only time will tell whether we return to the draft.
Nathan Dorschner
Contributing Editor
-----
The Draft As Deterrent
By David H. Hackworth
Originally published March 18, 2003
If today's U.S. armed forces could count draftee airmen, sailors, soldiers and Marines among those who will soon be doing the dying during our second go at Saddam Hussein, you can bet good money that more American parents and grandparents would have been asking hard questions of their Washington pols long before the drumbeat of war became headline news. Important questions such as:
Is this war really necessary?
What national security threat does Iraq pose to the United States ?
Why can't we – with a united world behind us – disarm Iraq without war?
Why the unilateral intervention?
What are the projected costs and casualties, and is there an exit plan?
But at long last, the realities of war have been brought home by massive global peace marches, gas prices spiraling into the stratosphere, the economy tanking alongside the Titanic and tens of thousands of reserve soldiers from every city in this great land – neighbors, friends and workmates of the formerly disconnected – being called to arms. Finally, millions of Americans are listening more carefully to a chorus of world leaders and a few gutsy national politicians righteously concerned about the consequences of the shootout in the desert.
Except that with 230,000 of our warriors already staring down Saddam's cannons, this new consciousness might have come too late.
I believe it's been far too easy for the vast majority of Americans to pay little or no attention to George W. Bush's march to war, because most folks' pride and joy aren't prime candidates for body bags. And few average citizens have ongoing personal contact with a uniformed defender from the 1 million-plus regular warriors who make up our All-Volunteer Force (AVF). To them, our warriors are just uniforms they occasionally see floating around at airports or as background color in TV war dispatches.
Most recruits in the AVF come from non-vocal, working-class families – a disproportionate number from the poor and from minority groups – while more privileged Americans are conspicuous by their absence. For example, the Congress that voted overwhelmingly for the military solution against Iraq includes only one member with a son who's an enlisted grunt. The rest, like the majority of Americans since the draft went south, no longer share directly in the sacrifice that comes with sending our youth to face the dragon.
The poor join up because the job prospects on the outside are marginal. By going into the military, they learn a skill, gain the benefits of the GI Bill and get a better shot at the American dream.
Meanwhile, teens from families with political punch – read cash and/or clout – are safely bunkered down at universities out of harm's way. And when asked: "Should we 'do' Iraq ?" their answer is often a roaring "Yes!" But ask those same young aristo-hawks: "Will you go and fight?" and rarely does a Tommy Hilfiger-clad arm shoot up. When it comes to blood sports, they don't need to be taught that the spectators have it cushier than the gladiators.
Just as if all Americans knew their kids would likely serve dead-center on the killing fields, there'd be far sharper focus on how our politicians are voting and a lot more calls for caution and careful consideration before we got out there in the sand and slapped leather. For sure, the draft would give us 20/20 vigilance.
As the father of a reservist now in Kuwait recently said: "I suspect once folks start thinking about their kids standing in the line of fire, they'll make a whole bunch of noise. When that happens, hopefully this insanity will stop."
History has taught us that draftees serve this country well. Not only are they natural-born whistle-blowers who keep both the war-makers and the brass honest, but because their service keeps all our citizens more closely involved and invested, they are our bottom-line deterrent to war.
Service in our country's ranks used to be widely accepted as the price of citizenship. So why not bring back the draft? Since so many of our leaders seem to be currently suffering from Empiritis, we'd all probably be better protected from this country-destroying disease if every American family shared the burden for defending our way of life.
Eilhys England contributed to this article.
Ellie