PDA

View Full Version : New antiwar tactic: Bring back the draft



thedrifter
02-09-03, 08:52 AM
Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 3:44:28 AM MST



New antiwar tactic: Bring back the draft
Fremont's Pete Stark explains his switch in methods since the 60s
By Carl Hulse, New York Times


WASHINGTON -- Back in the late 1960s, Pete Stark was known as the hippie banker for installing a huge peace sign on his bank in the East Bay and counseling draftees on whether to flee to Canada.

Now, Stark, a pugnacious liberal House member from Northern California, is back in the antiwar movement. But he and some of his fellow Democrats are trying a new approach -- advocating a return of the draft.

"My constituents at home think I have lost my mind," Stark said. "They say, 'Why do you want to give the military more soldiers?' I am supporting the draft as a way to oppose the war."

Stark, D-Fremont, a veteran who said the chief danger he faced in the military was getting his tie caught in a typewriter, is co-sponsoring a proposal by Reps. Charles B. Rangel, D-N.Y., and John Conyers Jr., D-Mich.

Those two lawmakers, veterans and senior members of the Congressional Black Caucus, say the risks of combat losses should be spread more equitably among Americans.

They have a Senate ally, Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., who says he wants to give advocates of U.S. military action in Iraq and elsewhere a little something to chew over.

"One way to avoid a lot more wars to come is institute the draft," Hollings said. "You will find that this country will sober up, and its leadership, too."

While Democrats are climbing aboard the induction bandwagon, Republicans are dropping off. Rep. Nick Smith, R-Mich., who in the past had his own draft proposal, has no interest in helping Democrats with theirs, an aide said.

Republicans generally view the Rangel plan as a cynical effort to rouse antiwar sentiment.

"There is no serious discussion of it," Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, said about bringing back the draft.

Rangel, who was wounded in Korea and decorated for his efforts to evacuate the injured during a battle, makes no apologies for trying to score a political point.

"I hope I am saying that war is hell and if indeed our country's security is in jeopardy, then we must as a country be prepared to make sacrifice," Rangel said.

While few in Congress give the legislation any chance, it is reminding some of the days when the lottery they followed most closely was not Powerball but the one conducted by the Selective Service.

Rangel is scheduled to address students at Harvard University on Monday, a meeting that could illustrate whether the draft still has the capacity to stir crowds on college campuses.

It is already clear that the subject continues to elicit raw emotions.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was forced to apologize last month for saying that Vietnam draftees had added "no value" to the military, a comment that infuriated veterans groups.

Though Rumsfeld might have had to back down from his choice of words, the Pentagon is adamantly opposed to a return to the draft , saying its all-volunteer military is a superior fighting force.

"The all-volunteer force has served the nation for more than a quarter-century, providing a military that is experienced, smart, disciplined and representative of America," a recently circulated Pentagon position paper said.

The draft has had a long and troubled place in U.S. military history, from colonial conscripts through the riots of the Civil War to the draft-card burning of Vietnam. That was the last war in which some young American men were forced to serve. Faced with protests, President Richard M. Nixon abolished the draft in 1973.

Those advocating a return of the draft do not quarrel with the capabilities of the modern U.S. military. They argue that it is more of a fairness issue, that the weight of combat should not fall just on those who signed up, often to get ahead economically or educationally.

"In the event that we do find ourselves in a war," Rangel said, "those that have to go to fight should not be selected from those who volunteered because of economic circumstances."

Hollings said bringing back the draft might also ease the burden on National Guard and reserve personnel whose lives are disrupted by frequent deployments. .

Were the draft in place today, Rangel said, President Bush would be required to make a more forceful and detailed case about why intervention in Iraq is necessary. The draft, he said, "means that when you are selling war, you have to be good about it."


Sempers,

Roger

Marine-of-1861
02-09-03, 09:12 AM
No Draft Needed in todays military !

Our forces today is high speed and no room for loosers,
Our military today only needs people that want to be there,
Thats the way It Is. NO S**T BIRDS Allowed.

Then again anything is possilble

greybeard
02-09-03, 10:00 AM
Marine-of-1861
I have problems with your lumping draftees and sh*tbirds in one basket. I personally served with many fine Marines, who were draftees in Vietnam & they never shirked duty or responsibility.
I don't know anyone who really wants to be in combat, but it's sometimes necessary. Once there, most people, irregardless of how they got there, do what is required of them. I'm against re-instituting the draft right now, but I certainly won't call any draftee a shi*tbird just because he/she got drafted.
Don

Marine-of-1861
02-09-03, 10:14 AM
IF YOU NOTICED ! I SAID OUR MILITARY ONLY NEEDS PEOPLE
THAT WANT TO BE THERE ! Not that draft personell Is together
with S**T Birds, Sorry for the confushion.

This military Is a whole lotta different then 30 yrs ago or more. ITS A SMALLER FORCE AND IS STRONGER And Much Faster FORCE This Country has ever seen.....I belive that with our Force today would not be
A cause for Drafting......just to draft......Why Would We ?
Think about It ? The Marine corps never drafted, the Army did !
the Marine corps hand selected these individules out of the army lines.
I speak of the marine corps In different tune because we are The MARINES.

Sorry for the confushion.

Semper FI

donaldduct
02-09-03, 10:40 AM
Boy you don't know **** about the draft do you, Marines where chosen by counting off, every 4th man would be sent to the the Corps if needed

Marine-of-1861
02-09-03, 10:50 AM
Well Who are you calling a BOY !

YOu must of been that forth person !!!

USMC-FO
02-09-03, 10:52 AM
I for one think the a draft of some sort ought to be in place for both men and women. But I think that we need to dismiss the notion that a draft can be made completly fair for all--it can't, but there are ways to level the field somewhat.

Consider that there are hundreds, if not thousands of MOS slots that are not combat related and do not necessaryly require the long training times of many combat slots. Admin posts, cooks, logistics etc. Filling out these ranks with draftee's as needed could well move more motivated troops to a front line combat position.

The draft does not need to be seen in the same form as previously consistuted. Terms could be perhaps only 18 months. Postions in homeland security, border security, and even social assistance could be considered. Full educational benefits might be there for draftees to use upon competion of a tour.

Why don't we consider drafting into reserve units too, again as needed.

What troubles me about the Armed Forces all volunteer method is that is does draw disproportionatly from the more stressed sectors of society and is under represented by the upper classes. Why ? If you're well off educated, and mostly white should you by dint of your birth be exempted? I don't think so.

If a draft is re instituted start by pulling the draftees from gradutes of our better colleges and universities.

Also let's be clear here; I don't think we're talking about Marines here. Our enlistments and forces levels are more than served by our current pool of volunteers and I would not expect to see that change. We're talking the Army for the most part and perhaps the Air Force.

The single bigglest problem I have with the absense of a draft is that I feel for the last thirty years we have fostered in this county an attitude of take take take....with very little given back to our nation. Where I live I see very few active military about. I do see many pampered over fed"nasty" civilians who to me live in an entitled state of mind. If a draft at the upper edges of our society kicks some of that "gimme gimme gimme" attitude out of this group and improves balance to our general society for the armed forces then, I for one think, it would be worthwhile.

Just my opinion !

Semper Fi !!

MillRatUSMC
02-09-03, 01:19 PM
I detect a certain mind-set, but we've taken words out of context.
"Losers and Shxtbirds".
History will record that much of the arm forces in Vietnam, were volunteers with a mix of draftees.
It was the leadership, that held the enemy in comtempt.
So they had no clue on the way to defeat that enemy.
He was all but finished after Tet of 68.
Yet our leadership had no clue to that fact.
LBJ;
"Those boys out in Vietnam, can't bomb an outhouse without my permission!"
Sad to say, there wasn't an outhouse in all of Vietnam.
General Westmoreland thought that a war of attitiron was the answer.
They had more coming on line every year than we could killed or wound.
Add to mix bag Rules Of engagement (ROE), that made a difficult task almost an impossibility.
Yet for ten years many answered the call.
On reading "Goodbye Darkness" by William Lancaster Jr.
He brings out the point that death shadows had fallen on every man in combat.
It was luck on who died or who survived.
That would be a fair estimate of what war is really like.
You couldn't plan for the future.
War had a strange way of ending all those plans.
Those who survived suffered from suvivor guilt.
But it was the lyuck of draw that you survived the hades we name WAR.
Many more have the same mind-set as Marine-of-1861, but as we said in Vietnam;
"It don't mean nothing!"
My thought;
It WWI the British had a professional army who the named "The Old Comptemtables" soon that army was no more dued to the war of attitiron being waged.
It took over a year to train another army of volunteers and conscripts.
We should learn from that, our enemies learned a great deal during Desert Storm much as the Vietnamese during the Battle of La Drang.
They made adjustments, because they knew that they wouldn't last very long fighting us in big units.
But they too made errors, which our leadership never exploited.
Much of this was dued to our leadership contempt for an enemy, which we in the field called a worthy advisory.

Semper Fidelis
Ricardo

Marine-of-1861
02-09-03, 01:44 PM
The horrors of VNM and the way the VNM vets were treated returning home from their duty--WHY IS THAT ?

After I graduated there was no line to stand in. I went straight to the recruiters office and enlisted in the Marine Corps, even though
Nam Vets were treated as such, although I know Marines were suppose to be a band of brothers from all peace and war time conflicts.

I by passed all other branches of service and was not in there to see what my country offered as a token, college, money, or anything that pertained to "CANDY." Not even the rank, rank just came with the responsibility as we grew as Marines.
I was happy at the rank of Pvt. or L/cpl. or Cpl. Sgt rank did not mean power, it meant "responsibility"

I believed it was my duty to serve my country as soon as I was able and I did just like all the rest have done--drafted or hand picked, or volunteered.

What I said was taken out of context. Even if a person was picked during the draft for the Corps "one should feel priviliged" serving as a US MARINE like many have before you or I.
I know I feel that it was a privilige for myself to serve this country
and to top it off as a US MARINE !

It is everybody's obligation and duty to serve his country without being drafted--war time or peace time. Yes the Marine Corps is for the few and the proud. It is not for everyone. However, there are other branches of service to serve in to fill the obligation and duty. Everyone makes his/her own decision. I made mine.

I am not preaching to the choir.

SEMPER FI

:Marine:

greensideout
02-09-03, 05:02 PM
WW II and Korea were fought for the very most part by draftees.
Yes, even Nam.

This new war on terror, I feel will be too large to be contained by the all volunteer force that we now have. The war is much larger then just Iraq.

I believe that the draft will be necessary!

New rules for the draft have made it equitable and the responsibility will be shared across all of american society.
(I here "incoming" on this statement but I was trained on the draft while serving active duty with the National Guard. Check the facts.)

I servied in the Corps with all volunteers. Not once with a draftee, so I'll leave those comments to those that did.

Semper Fi

wrbones
02-09-03, 05:07 PM
I served with a few draftees who'd re-enlisted. Seemed like good folks to me fer the most part.

I agree, this could get outta hand, but that's what happens when the government allowed it to get outta control years ago. Those folks in the middle east figure us fer bein' weak and cowardly because we didn't take them to task long ago over what they've done to us and to others.

greensideout
02-09-03, 05:31 PM
I totally agree Bones.

Takes a lot of cleaning up when you let things go for so long.

The task is large, it will take a lot of time and a lot of men.

I hope our nation has the courage to go the long haul.