Bring back the citizen-soldier

[Ordie]

Here's a column worth noting.
Given that most people are more tuned to American Idol than in the war in Iraq, its needless to say there's a growing military-civilian divide.



Bring back the citizen-soldier

H. Savala Nolan
SF Chronicle
Sunday, July 1, 2007

After hearing U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., explain his program to keep veterans off the streets, I couldn't help but think of Rome.
During the middle republic, military legions consisted of landowners, who, although required to supply their own equipment, weapons and armor, did not suffer the ravages of battle worrying about homelessness upon their return.
A recent Newsweek story puts the number of homeless Iraq war veterans between 500 and 1,000, a shameful, shocking red flag considering that, unlike the Vietnam era, the homelessness is taking root not just before the war ends, but in the midst of a surge. This wave of homelessness indicates many things -- misguided and myopic government spending, lack of insight among policymakers, decaying social infrastructure, toxic levels of a "suck-it-up" mind-set among soldiers -- but most of all, it indicates the extent to which civilians have grown divorced from the military. The days of military service as public service have largely ended, and our mentality is a far cry from Rome's plough-and-sword system.
Today, we non-military citizens tend to think of the military as "over there," a view that is inaccurate, dangerous and unkind. Inaccurate, because the military is not a monolith; it is people. Dangerous, because it encourages apathy among civilians, military disdain for civilians and a level of military autonomy that, history teaches, can lead to chaos. Unkind, because it allows us to look the other way when warriors come home emotionally, physically and spiritually scarred by acts carried out in our collective name.
Many Americans don't want anything to do with the military, and that is a problem. Mandatory conscription would quickly eliminate the "us versus them" gap, but any attempt at making service mandatory would probably incite outrage.
As part of a democratic society, the military population should reflect the overall population in socioeconomic, religious, cultural and political diversity. It should never be categorized as "those people" who get sent to do the dirty work. The populace should regard it as a righteous way to serve a greater good. More important, it should be a righteous way to serve a greater good, not the brawn so often abused by its government for the greater good of a select few.
After all, for the average person, enlisting is an act of idealism and trust. A soldier must learn the art of disassociation, to become a non-civilian so that they can kill and risk being killed. To succeed, the average soldier must put aside his or her most fundamental values (that human life matters) and instincts (self-preservation). They only do this, however, to affirm, on a different scale, that life and self-preservation matter above all else; to affirm that genocide and monstrous dictators are unacceptable, and that the voiceless deserve to be heard. If that isn't idealism, what is?
They enlist because they believe their government will not ask this great task of them unnecessarily or for reasons that are anything less than unimpeachably just. If that is not trust, what is?
Yet, multitudes of Americans regard the military with distrust and cynicism, and now more than ever, it represents a small slice of America. We should be bothered that this tiny population bears the burden of this long war, and that a very small percentage of this country is charged with its defense, offense and peace-keeping. We should examine any isolating, us-versus-them stance, because it belies a privileged attitude that sees the military as a lower class.
What might the war in Iraq look like if all citizens saw the military as a central member of the national family? Civilians would have a harder time putting the war out of their minds, and we would be better off for it. No rat-infested hospitals, no hundreds of thousands of veterans sleeping in cardboard boxes, no more illusions that this foreign war has no home-bound consequences.
The government might have to face larger issues, such as health care, child care and equality. It would have to strive for a higher degree of transparency and accountability regarding military action, because the larger and more diverse the group of people, the harder it is to control on trust alone.
Above all, this war might be over.
In a military that looks like the population, half of the soldiers would now oppose how this crisis is being handled, and of those, some would refuse to participate. The soldiers who defected and the ones who did not would both have parents, spiritual communities, friends or spouses with a truly vested interest in what we are doing, and in finding a plan with a better chance of success than surging our troops levels for more shock and awe or washing our hands of it all and getting out of Dodge City. Millions of families would demand to know "Why are my family members risking their lives? Why are they being sent to kill? What can we do to make this stop?" What kind of democratic government would refuse to answer?

[Hollis]

Where does this writer think we get our soldiers from. Foreign mercenaries?

I wonder why the so-called "anti-war" people are pushing for the Draft? That probably would be this person only solution to our ALL VOLUNTEER CITIZEN MILITARY.


I bet this writer never served, would not serve and if there was a draft and they could not get a examption,. would moved to another country.

[AmpleSteve]

When I went to school after I got back, I saw a lot of the apathy, false sympathy and students thinking they know whats really going on that the writer brought up in the article. Conscription would change that, but in a really negative way I think. If there were no Exemptions maybe, but I doubt that would ever happen in this country.

Still, people really couldn't care less about the war, unless they had something emotionally invested in it.

[Hollis]

Ample, you have a point I was wondering about. I agree the draft would cause a more negative view of the military.

It is as thought the anti-war people want the draft so more people would become mobilized against the war.

Kind of like cutting your nose off to spite your face.

So now the biggest proponents of the draft is the Anti-war movement. The sad part their divisive scheme will probably work.

[shocker1]

I do not see very much apathy and lack of emotional investment in this part of the country. The Southeast is heavy on military ties and reminders of great loss are all around. I do think however other parts in this country could care less and are driven by the latest media hype.

It seems here everybody knows someone overseas or has been themselves, here I assume that is a big part of why the assumptions in the article do not apply to some regions. Would have been more informative if a little leg work was put in to gauge sections of the population but that would not jive with the writers end goals, would it?

[AmpleSteve]

From what I saw at school, maybe myself and one other people I met were veterans. I'm sure there are more but I haven't met them. Most of the people I've been exposed to since I got out of the army are students who only know about the war through what they see on t.v. and base their opinions off of that. My lit. class turned out to be nothing but a big political discussion where I had to listen to students talk about how the war should be fought. definitely different elsewhere, but thats the way I seen it.

[jdslow300]

a draft would bring about the negative realities that were seen in vietnam, but after a couple generations it would be seen as a civic duty,

todays generation needs something more than the tv and internet, and it needs something to bind people to the idea of service, something that i think has been all but lost

[AmpleSteve]

maybe if implemented as a reserve conscription at this point. I don't think it will ever work again for any active component. Some kind of civil service being mandatory would work, too, in my opinion. It would give those serving something more close to home to work for. But a full-blown draft would most likely alienate the country.

[Vorian]

to our ALL VOLUNTEER CITIZEN MILITARY.


An army made mostly by people from lower social standards. I don't think the upper-classes of American society are in Iraq right now..which is a shame because those men endure all this hell and return to a country that knows war through CNN and Hollywood movies, blaming them for everything while they were too busy making money and shopping in the mall.

[IraGlacialis]

I am a big opponent of the draft. From a practical standpoint, it is an idiotic move because there is a good chance that those who get drafted against their will won't perform their best, most likely endangering everyone. Plus, the last thing that is needed is to have thugs and gangbangers drafted into the army. Besides, no matter how many guidlines are in place, many of the corrupt politicians and people in hollywood will find a way to get their kid out of the draft.
On a personal standpoint, even though I got everything going for me (only child, horrible eyesight, going to get a good education), I think it is wrong to force someone to go out to fight. But just becaue I don't want to become a soldier doesn't mean I won't contribute to the effort. Hell I plan on making my contribution to the arm services by being an aerospace engineer.
I am in agreement if anything, there should be manditory civil service for youth such as community service and the like. Turn Boy and Girl Socuts into civil service organisations (or are they already)?

If the draft does get get reimposed, I say that females should ge drafted as well. Then there would be true equality.

[Hollis]

An army made mostly by people from lower social standards. I don't think the upper-classes of American society are in Iraq right now..which is a shame because those men endure all this hell and return to a country that knows war through CNN and Hollywood movies, blaming them for everything while they were too busy making money and shopping in the mall.


Vorian, When the US had the draft it was blamed for drafting only "poor folks". Todays pro draft arguments were the anti-draft arguements in the 60's.

[BloodyTalon]

An army made mostly by people from lower social standards. I don't think the upper-classes of American society are in Iraq right now..which is a shame because those men endure all this hell and return to a country that knows war through CNN and Hollywood movies, blaming them for everything while they were too busy making money and shopping in the mall.
Actually, that's a myth. A report was posted here that showed that the majority of US soldiers were white, from a middle-class background, and were mostly from the South. Also, the report showed that soldiers were on average smarter than civilians who went to work after high school

[Ordie]

One can make the argument of the correlation base closures and the geographic trends of people who join the military.

Public exposure to the military, airshows, open houses, port visits tend to promote recruitment and connectivity with ordinary Americans. Military families living among local civilians bridges the civilian-military divide.

An absence of a military base widens the divide between civilians and military societies. Moreover in the post 9/11 world, security not only deters terrorist actions but also civilian exposure to the military.

Traditionally, ordinary Americans lobbied for and achieved better conditions and services for active duty soldiers and veterans alike. Mainly on the premise that it directly benefits a family member.

In today's environment, there is a very good chance there is no active duty or veteran family member to lobby for. This absence encourages the servicemen and women to become more overtly political, lobbying directly to Congress because there's no one else to fight for thier interest in DC.

Looking at the map, the shaded areas are areas with a notable military presence. Especially in the Southeast where there is a cluster of large infantry bases coupled with a Southern Military tradition.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/images/figure5.gif (http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/upload/cda05-08_fig5.gif)

As for a solution?

The military should be more open and transparent to the civilian society it serves. The more exposure, the more people could put a face to the events overseas. Open houses, port visits, community involvement etc...
Be more open and inclusionary in recruitment to follow civilian norms that forbid discrimination based on race, gender, religion and ****** orientation.
Open military service prospects for people with disabilities. Perhaps they cannot run on two legs, but I'm sure they could fly a Predator drone, or do intelligence analysis.

[Ratamacue]

An army made mostly by people from lower social standards. I don't think the upper-classes of American society are in Iraq right now..which is a shame because those men endure all this hell and return to a country that knows war through CNN and Hollywood movies, blaming them for everything while they were too busy making money and shopping in the mall.Assuming that you're Greek, what exactly makes you an expert on the social demographics of the United States Military?

[Smersh]

Actually, that's a myth. A report was posted here that showed that the majority of US soldiers were white, from a middle-class background, and were mostly from the South. Also, the report showed that soldiers were on average smarter than civilians who went to work after high schoolI have some questions:
I would expect most would be white! But aren't hispanics and blacks over-represented? "from a middle-class background" What does middle-class background mean? "the report showed that soldiers were on average smarter than civilians" What does how smart someone is have to do if their in the "lower" part of society? "and were mostly from the South." relevance??

As far a my view on this. Yes, I definetly think the military should have a much closer relationship with the general public. There shouldn't be a disconnect. I think universal conscription is the best way to do that. But it will be probably be implemented in a way to keep the elites out anyway. :(

[Hollis]

Smersh. I think the relationship between the military and citizens is a simple one of logistics, Compare the total population of the country and then number of soldiers.

Also look at other groups, Fire fighters, EMT, Police, teacher, one can say they all have the same problem, they are not well known among the Masses of Americans.

There are also other solutions beside a military draft, one is national service. Example: Where young people could work for the Parks, Forest, Civil services, ect. On completion of that service they get education benefits.

The argument of integration is weak, IMHO. Because how are you going to place military bases everywhere. How big does the military have to be to fully "Mix" with other citizens.

We have a Citizen military now.

There is National Guard base in a town near me, Population of the town is about 16,000. The Guard is not the big. I one person who is a member. I have several friends who are active duty.

The other aspect, military people tend to hang with military people, same for any other vocation. Example, cops with cops, firefighters with firefighter, people who work together in other jobs, etc.

Compare that to a large employer in a area, the employees of that company are also not completely integrated as far Mixing with the complete population of that city.

I think this is one of those political argument where there is no solution, It is designed to be a smoke screen for something else. Because the major proponents for the Draft tend to come from the anti-war crowd, my guess would be the idea for the draft is ment to incite more people to oppose the war.

The anti-Draft people in the 60's also discussed alternative service, as I mentioned about some kind of national service that was not limited to only the military. It was never accepted.

When I was discharged from the Marines in 1970, I went back to college. I was elected Men's Student body president. One of the assigned duties was being the head of draft counseling on campus. The draft was a very heated topic at that time. I find it extremely funny that those who would have opposed that draft then, support it now.

[Vorian]

Assuming that you're Greek, what exactly makes you an expert on the social demographics of the United States Military?

Didn't claim to be an expert.

[joe mama]

...
It is as thought the anti-war people want the draft so more people would become mobilized against the war.
...

And with a thunderous kaboom, you hit the nail right on the head. The only pro draft arguments I've seen are from anti war people, and it's obvious they only want the draft to force people who don't directly deal with the impact of the war (ie no friends or family over there) to be impacted by it. If you're impacted by it, of course you will immediately oppose all war everybody will be as enlightened as them and say "war is icky" and immediately we'd have a world of rainbows and unicorns and frogs wearing funny little hats where children with gumdrop smiles play under lemon sun and cotton candy clouds.
If you don't see that this would happen, then obviously you're a red state, conservative, inbred, warmonger, gunowning redneck, and you need to let the liberal elite decide for you what's right and wrong.

[el borracho]

I'm a proponent of mandatory civil service. As for a draft, if it were to be reintroduced, there are plenty of REMF and non-combat jobs that a draftee can do. The military is already full of people who joined only to do those jobs, but can now take full advantage of the benefits. If these jobs were only open to draftees, or to those who have already completed "x" amount of years in the military, that would eliminate the fairweather enlistees. Have a draftee push paperwork for a year, then if they serve honorably, offer a small bonus (like a $500 college scholarship or something else useful, just handing them cash is the wrong way to go) or the opportunity to enlist and get full military benefits.

[Mu-Meson]

Simply put, the draft is not a good idea. You end up with a bunch of people who don't want to be there. My own view is in favor of a "Starship Troopers"-model system. And no, not the movie version, the book version. Read the book, and you'll see what I mean. Offering the franchise to people who have earned it through military service. Regardless of class, income or ability. If you serve your country, you get a vote. The point here is the intent and will to serve. Allow anyone who is sound of mind to volunteer of their own free will, and reward their fulfillment of their citizens responsibilities with the granting of their citizen rights. (sure it is rough on the retards but really, do they vote anyway?)
People must volunteer for full service (ie the sharp end of the stick) and if the military wants to make them an REMF then they can, but the point is the willingness of the citizen. People who are religious pacifists or conscientious objectors must still serve but only get 1/2 a vote or something.
Another suggestion is making only ex-service members who pay taxes eligible to vote. Way too many people who don't pay any taxes are able to vote for whoever will promise them the most. That is dumb. If you want a say in how the money is spent, then it needs to include YOUR money.

[I'mOnlyHalfPolish]

im curious if they were to enact a draft (unlikely but who knows) would they still use the same select service system? since im 23 id bet that i would be more than likely to go pretty quick (i believe im in that middle age range for the draft)

i agree with the above posters it seems most people supporting the draft a more than likely to be anti-war in some fashion or another...i just know i wouldnt want some goofball covering my ass underfire and there is already a rather large full time military presence, anyone expect a rift among the career guys and the draftees?

im against it, but if it comes about they know where to find me

[I'mOnlyHalfPolish]

also for us guys who already have our undergrad degrees maybe some commitment for help paying for advanced degrees would be a bonus to get some older college educated guys and obviously help with undergrads as well

im never sure what an avg. person can do to support the war...? i dont mean that in an asshole way ive just never quit understood that

[IraGlacialis]

Simply put, the draft is not a good idea. You end up with a bunch of people who don't want to be there. My own view is in favor of a "Starship Troopers"-model system. And no, not the movie version, the book version. Read the book, and you'll see what I mean. Offering the franchise to people who have earned it through military service. Regardless of class, income or ability. If you serve your country, you get a vote. The point here is the intent and will to serve. Allow anyone who is sound of mind to volunteer of their own free will, and reward their fulfillment of their citizens responsibilities with the granting of their citizen rights. (sure it is rough on the retards but really, do they vote anyway?)
People must volunteer for full service (ie the sharp end of the stick) and if the military wants to make them an REMF then they can, but the point is the willingness of the citizen. People who are religious pacifists or conscientious objectors must still serve but only get 1/2 a vote or something.
Another suggestion is making only ex-service members who pay taxes eligible to vote. Way too many people who don't pay any taxes are able to vote for whoever will promise them the most. That is dumb. If you want a say in how the money is spent, then it needs to include YOUR money.
I don't really support having to serve in the military to be able to get a full vote. Possibly at least be in school or have a job, but having to be in military is a bit harsh.
I do feel however that there needs to be a small current events and basic goverment knowlage (how many braches are there?) quiz before earning the ability to vote.

[BloodyTalon]

I don't really support having to serve in the military to be able to get a full vote. Possibly at least be in school or have a job, but having to be in military is a bit harsh.
I do feel however that there needs to be a small current events and basic goverment knowlage (how many braches are there?) quiz before earning the ability to vote.
How about having voting be in conjuction with civil service. After serving a mandatory year working for a part of the government (it doesn't have to be military service) or taking required government classes in college, then you get the right to vote.

[IraGlacialis]

How about having voting be in conjuction with civil service. After serving a mandatory year working for a part of the government (it doesn't have to be military service) or taking required government classes in college, then you get the right to vote.
I'm in agreement with that.

[Ordie]

I'm in agreement with that.

X2

How about requiring everyone take the same Citizenship Test for Naturalized Citizens.

or

Mandatory voting or face fine for not voting.

[IraGlacialis]

Mandatory voting or face fine for not voting.
Personally, I'd rather have a few well-informed people voting rather than a bunch of idiots who were forced in and will probably vote for a canidate because he has good hair (I know, harsh accusation).
Hence the voting test beforehand. I think that the citizenship test, with possibly a few current event questions, is good enough of a test to allow voting for a citizen.

[snoddy]

I always wanted to be a Soldier, for some reason it always got to me when i saw that commercial of the soldier coming home, either getting off that bus and walking down the street with his duffel swung over his shoulder or walking into the house surprising everyone and putting that duffel bag down to hug his family.

Citizen Soldiers are different and more closer to home then active duty soldiers.

we live next door to you, we work with you, we go shopping with you, we have parties and BBQ's with you.

you never know any of this usually till a war is going on and flags come out with yellow ribbons wrapped around telephone poles or trees next to our families house's.

should the US have a draft, not really no, we have a all volunteer military.

should there be some kind of civil service? maybe, it would be nice of our high school grads did some kind of service to their community before going off to col. so they could feel better about themselves knowing they gave a piece back to the community they grew up in.
Does that mean getting trained for war to protect it? i dont know but theres always something to do to help out. like hang out with local firefighters, wash the trucks or police cars, do ride alongs, help out with natural disasters or even clean up the neighborhood park, anything like that would be fine.

i just started going to the VA, its a long process to do it alone, they just sent me a flier talking about monthly benefits,
10% disabled $115
20% disabled $225
30% disabled $348 w/dependents $389
40% disabled $501 $556
50% disabled $712 $781
60% disabled $901 $984
70% disabled $1,135 $1,232
80% disabled $1,319 $1,430
90% disabled $1,483 $1,608
100% disabled $2,471 $2,610
now if youre going to stay in the service, you need to be aware of your % of being disabled, you get a rating and depending on what MOS you have in the service it could mean the end of your career. You get a Med. discharge with some kind of severance pay (so ive heard??? not too sure on that, havent checked that out).

i posted this to show that with help most vets dont have to be homeless,
but i think the US needs to re-evaluate what we hold dear to us and thats are freedom to live the way we want and who it is that protects that.

[I'mOnlyHalfPolish]

I don't really support having to serve in the military to be able to get a full vote. Possibly at least be in school or have a job, but having to be in military is a bit harsh.
I do feel however that there needs to be a small current events and basic goverment knowlage (how many braches are there?) quiz before earning the ability to vote.

haha sorry i had too, but i think its not a bad idea to at least ask some simple questions about gov't whether local or national...people are wholly uninformed about things but especially local politics (which effect them most)

i also think that civil service out of h.s. seems to be a good idea, don't some countries have it or something similar to it?

[AmpleSteve]

with Med. discharge, If you get over 30% or over, you get monthly comp from the army, and with anything below you get a severance package based on time in service. I got the severance from the army which apparently you have to pay back when you get comp from the VA.

As far as civil services, there is already a couple out there like the CCC (not sure if they're still around or not) which do large community service projects. For instance, the CCC built most of the State and Natl. Parks, as far as I know. I'm sure if you made these mandatory as an alternate choice to military service, Conscription could go over a lot better with the general populace.

[Calanen]

X2

How about requiring everyone take the same Citizenship Test for Naturalized Citizens.

or

Mandatory voting or face fine for not voting.

Fines for voting are bs - we have them here in Australia. They should be abolished. If you dont care - why should you be made to.

[Hollis]

Fines for voting are bs - we have them here in Australia. They should be abolished. If you dont care - why should you be made to.


I was joking with a friend, I told him, there are no gods, but two ducks a white one and a black one. That is why everything is a paraducks in life.

We live between two extremes, you can not force freedom or the maintenance of freedom or you have tyranny, the opposite of freedom, but with out the maintenance of freedom we have tyranny. That is where the paradox, oooops paraducks come in.

[vryhpyammoadded]

I for one find it astounding that the anti war crowed can get away with publicly arguing the point of “forcefully spreading the risk via draft will cause dissention among the ranks”. So, have we come so far as to accept such sedition?
Why these traitorous punks are not whipped out there governmental office doors by there constituents is dumbfounding. Then there is the leftist intelligentsia who preach the very same crap who deserve a good beating and deportation to someplace more suited to there thinking; disgusting, disgusting!

If my son is in a war, placing his life on the line for this buddies and his country, I would sure as hell expect he and every single soldier with him to watch each others back, follow orders and accomplish there mission no matter what BS everyone is arguing about concerning if the war is right or wrong.
To purposefully sabotage troop moral for the greater goal of partisan politics or “world peace, wuv, kumbyah and the collectivist nibbling of freedoms” by diffusing esprit décor with some winy a*s anti war draftee sh*theads is ultimately immoral and illegal and should result in prosecution and very sever, example making, punishments.
Gosh, if we are stupid enough to swallow this load we might as well just back the inane concept of a unionized enlisted again like was flirted with during the Carter years.

This sort of seditious thinking is yet another attempt at diffusing sovereign power, the erosion of the American will. Its poison.

After thinking about it for awhile, I would say I’m in favor of military service being an all or nothing affair. Either service is totally voluntary or totally mandatory for “all”. No half as*ed in between garbage like a draft, especially these days when you have so many individuals without a proper sense of civics, duty, right or wrong. At least one way you are assured a good solid military and the other citizens with a potintially more cohesive sense of nationalism.

[Ordie]

In my lifetime I have met and talked with three WW1, hundreds of WW2, dozen of Korean and countless Vietnam Veterans during my military career and civilian life.

I even met a sailor on Teddy Roosevelt's Great White Fleet.

I have yet to meet a Iraqi/Afghanistan veteran.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Fines for voting are bs - we have them here in Australia. They should be abolished. If you dont care - why should you be made to.

Are somebody hates and voting and hates paying the fine. :)

Compulsory voting gives us the "swinging" voter. It causes the part of society that are not really effected either way to take notice and say "Hang on a minute if vote for this guy he will do this.........I better vote for the other guy"

It causes society to be better informed and holds politicians to account.

[Noble713]

As part of a democratic society, the military population should reflect the overall population in socioeconomic, religious, cultural and political diversity.

Ugh, the military should have whatever composition is most effective at accomplishing the missions assigned to it by the State, not this multicultural BS.