Why so much support for the draft?

Post Reply New Topic

I've presented an example of a human like species that didn't war and the problems that entailed but I often also wonder about a human like species that was had inherently more distributed governing systems and where the decision to go to war or not was more by collective autonomy than central rule...for example, like with ants and bees...at least as far as we know. Perhaps they are following centralized orders and we don't know it.

No, that's part of the definition of cowardice. But hey, what do I know? People who join the military should expect injury, disability, and even death as part of their service, and since the working definition of bravery is to carry on despite your greatest fears, then why not?While I am too old to serve, I did serve. Having served, I have no romanticized memories of shooting and being shot at, especially when young people are getting injured, disabled, and killed in the line of duty. So what is the difference between getting killed defending your country and getting killed defending your own home and family? Only a matter of magnitude -- the former is the greater cause, while the latter is the more noble cause.

It’s the same reason when the whole raise age to own guns to 21 is brought up and we say ok then raise everything to 21 and they say hell no. If 17-20 olds can’t join the military then old people lose their meat for the meat grinder. It’s 17-20 year olds who ar most sent off to die for old rich people’s desires and beliefs. You can’t even join the military past 34. It only wants young people to go die, usually young poor people. They also don’t want young women serving in combat (something I support, let women go fight and die if they want to) I support tasing min age to join military to 25. Lots of poor kids join after high school as it seems the only choice. Military is at schools once a week recruiting kids 16-18, yes I know they can’t join at 16 but if they start early then they more likely to sign up at 17/18, so they talk to the, give them free stuff, show the, videos about how amazing it is etc.
You won’t find many who support raising the age to join military or vote or go to college. If 18 olds are adult enough to own guns then they aren’t adult enough to vote, join the military or go to college. They shouldn’t be making any adult decisions. This is derailed cause both democrats and republicans need meat for the meat grinder

Perhaps I spoke too broadly. We scrapped "national service" in this country nearly 70 years ago, so almost nobody alive today has ever done it, but lots of people aged 40-85 think that it should be brought back to "install discipline". This is the only reason that a majority of people support it.

Personally, I think countries are phoney constructions that have been created primarily so that kings and rulers can convince their subjects to die for them. I don't think it's worth "defending your country"; if the American and Canadian governments went to war then the outcome of the war would have very little bearing on the quality of life of North Americans. It is, however, worth fighting to defend others who you don't personally know. It's just not right to force people to serve the abstract idea of a country.

I'd certainly support making it harder for the military to recruit. The only upside I see to draft-based system is that it stops exploiting desperate kids and is fair, at least in theory, although rich kids still seem to be able to find ways around the draft. Also women should have the same rights as men.

I do think voting is less of a responsibility and more of a right. We should extend it to all citizens and residents - no exceptions.

Draft excludes rich and those in college amongst other exclusions. Again the draft is set up to target poor kids. Send the poor off to fight and die is the general theme.
Though now pretty much anyone can go t college so I wonder how ineffective the draft would be today unless they cut offf everyone’s student grants.

I support the idea of non-military national service in today's society, not so much to instill discipline as to instill a sense of pride and ownership of this country. I mean, if it's you who is out there cleaning brush away from homes, if it's you who is installing new playground equipment, and if it's you teaching pre-schoolers to read, then you will likely develop some sense of propriety over the state of the environment, the state of our parks, and the state of our educational system -- am I right? (BTW: I'm using the pronoun 'you' in a general sense, not you specifically.)

But even if enlistment in the National Guard was mandatory for all able-bodied persons of sound mind between the ages of 18 and 26, that would still be a good thing, as it produces a large portion of the population that knows how to cooperate to get a task done, especially during a national disaster.

This is all my opinion of course, so what is it really worth in a society that values individual achievement over group endeavor?

That's probably what they would do.

Killing in its' name is a disservice.

They’d have to. Just about anyone can get loans or grants to go to college so it’d leave them with people like me who went and didn’t get rich from it.
But they would exclude me cause I’m defective

That makes two of us.

It seems like a lot of the draft talk, in the US, started after the Dept of Defense released some numbers a short while back.

They reported that 71% of American kids between the age of 17 to 24 are not qualified to join the armed services. Physical health issues, mental health issues, criminal records, etc.. Then the majority of the kids who can qualify are not interested. So that leaves them a very small pool of qualified and interested candidates. Estimated at 1% of people in that age range. So the Dept expressed their concerns and draft interest/rumors seems to have taken off from there.

There's a ton of articles on it out there. Here's Time's report: http://time.com/2938158/youth-fail-to-q ... ry-service.

If they did institute the draft, it seems most kids don't qualify anyways.

In actuality, there are many people who want to join the military because of their benefits, and a sort of a guarantee of a "future." And maybe they desire a sort of "discipline."

I don't believe a draft will be instituted in the very near future.

I see why that might appeal, but I'm not sure it's necessarily wise, particularly for eight years!

Our society relies on specialisation. It's practically impossible for someone to become a doctor, an electrician, an architect, a scientist, and a teacher, and perform them all to a high standard. These careers require years of dedicated training, which aren't particularly compatible with eight years of menial work, particularly as they are best carried out at a time when one isn't supporting a family or paying a mortgage...

Furthermore, there would be knock-on consequences to all this cheap or free labour. What is going to happen to all the people who work as gardeners or classroom assistants if they are undercut by national service?

There are plenty of ways to learn about the importance of team work - part-time jobs, sports, hobbies, and of course education. Likewise, there could be plenty of ways to come to appreciate local culture.

Just like they're doing right now, eh? They're not as effective, imho, since they are largely voluntary -- even mandatory public education allows for people to "drop out" of the program.

I have only heard two arguments in favor of a draft that I found to be the least bit compelling. The first is that it prevents war mongering, authoritarian personalities from monopolizing the armed forces. The second is that it ensures (if implemented without loopholes, which is a big ‘if’) that everyone has some “skin in the game.” As it stands now in the US, those with more money and education are largely exempted from experiencing the personal costs of military operations. It is much easier to support this and that peacekeeping mission (if you are liberal) or antiterrorism operation (if you are conservative) when you don’t have to worry that you or any of your immediate relatives will be the ones whose lives are sacrificed for the cause.

Both of these arguments give me pause, particularly the second one. But if I were ever put in a position to vote to reinstate a draft, I still don’t know that I would do it. As compelling as the second argument is, there is almost no way a draft would treat *everyone* equally. I am now in my mid-40s and well past the age when I had to register for selective service. Barring some extraordinary situation, I would almost certainly never be forced to serve were the draft reinstated. That means I would be voting to impose the obligation entirely on other people whose only difference from me is the decade in which they happened to be born. It would feel hypocritical for me to insist that they serve when I didn’t have to.