Reinstate the draft?

[Jack Mehoff]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5146.htm

http://www.vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2004/01/105146.php

[Trident-za]

This obviously doesn't affect me at all - but how do you guys feel about this?

[Sixgun Symphony]

No,

Most draftees have poor motivation. Better to have a professional/volunteer force.

[NcDeuce]

^

I agree. While some may excel in the military enviroment. Many will not. Unless we have a huge conflict like the WW's...it ain't gonna happen.

[Herrmannek]

^

I agree. While some may excel in the military enviroment. Many will not. Unless we have a huge conflict like the WW's...it ain't gonna happen.

I think that is keyword..Bush is preparing suprise for all of us...military geeks get ready :)

[Jack Mehoff]

I prefer a volunteer professional military only. The last thing I want to do is baby sit a cry baby doucebag while i'm trying to dodge bullets.

[Roger Rabbit]

I think this is highly unlikely to ever happen. Politically it would kill Bush.

[Jack Mehoff]

U.S. military=volunteer
Most Europe=conscript

And who say U.S. government is oppressing their own people?

[Schwabo Elite]

Most European Armies =/ conscript.

Most European armies go volunteer. Volunteer armies can have a great profit though. In germany the army is not very popular, but draft keeps (or better: kept) most families in touch with the army. The idea is that people don't tend to vote for a war that might be otherwise solvable if their army is made up of sons (and daughters) and not of "faceless mercaneries".
Nowadays it's a farce. They don't draft every one (of those that don't to civil service) and so the healthiest are the only ones taken and get a "setback" because of their "health".
Conscript amy has a tradition in Germany though and we don't like to break with that, we have only so few traditions left...

SE

[mustamato]

U.S. military=volunteer
Most Europe=conscript

And who say U.S. government is oppressing their own people?

Most Europe = don´t attack other countries, just have a military to defend
their freedom and independence. And if attacked, I don´t think there will
be any problems with motivation.

[Ratamacue]

Not just Bush, but ANY politician who would propose a draft reinstatement would be committing career suicide. As NcDeuce said, it's not going to happen unless World War III starts.

[Dennis G]

I prefer a volunteer professional military only. The last thing I want to do is baby sit a cry baby doucebag while i'm trying to dodge bullets.

There's some merit to that idea. I think it'd be great for all people, especially the young ones, to do some service to the country for at least a couple of years. If not militarily, there can be an option for civil service, like the Peace Corps or a national variant of it. The "draftees" can help quell wild fires, clean up national parks and wildlife preserves, clean up urban blight, etc. I think it'd reinforce a sense of national "ownership", if you will.

But over all I dont like the idea of the draft. I to prefer a volunteer military.


I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let the damned thing go down the drain!

Robert A. Heinlein

[Ratamacue]

Robert A. Heinlein is my hero.

[Uncle Sam]

Ate my words...

[Dennis G]

Robert A. Heinlein is my hero.

some very good quotes from the man :)

[Merik]

Although I wouldnt care if I got drafted, I would probably enlist instead. Besides if there was a draft lest just hope that I make 2nd Lt. before it happens ;)

[James]

No,

Most draftees have poor motivation. Better to have a professional/volunteer force.

The Americans who helped win World War Two might be offended by such a statement...

That said, I don't support a draft. I do support a better foreign policy that requires less U.S. Military presence overseas.

[admar2]

a drafted force would be counter-productive to our needs.


However I am of the opinion that DOD really needs to re-evaluate their manpower goals. probably need a few of those army divisions back we did away with at the end of the cold war.

along the lines of maybe 2 additional light infantry divisions would be a good start.

[EYE SPY]

the draft is still in effect. The Draft is still very much alive in America. Dont any of you notice on the application for your drivers license the little Conscription registration box. All American males above 18 have these cards, or should.

To bring back the draft all Congress needs to do is have the GAO allocate funds to get all the local draft committes within every county of the united states up and running.

That being said, draftee armys offer some advantages that a proffesional force does. Not all volunteer, volunteer means you dont get paid. American soldiers today are soldiers by profession, i.e. mercenaries. As such there is a natural drive within these sodliers not to make waves. As you can see by the atrophying of military aptitude among our Flag Officers.

a draftee army will be less inclined to put up with nonsense, since after all they are forced to be there. Commanders of draftee units have to be more upfront with their soldiers, these soldiers are less likely to follow stupid orders that will get them killed for no other reason than their CO's salad bar.

Statistically, it is very hard to find people who are motivated to be soliders, hell a good amount of youngsters enlisting in todays Army, or receiving their commission do it to learn a trade(air craft mechanics), pay back the army for their education (ROTC commisioned officers), or receive money for college afterward (Montgomery GI bill). Thus we still have an Army today with a unbalanced amount of actualy career minded soldiers.

In a draftee army, nobody cares about you learning a trade, getting money for college. you are there to do your duty, if you try to leave you get punished. a draftee army will on the whole be much more combat effective, and much more usable for large military campaigns.

The reason why there is a push for "all volunteers" or "professional" both PC euphemisms for Mercenary/hired gun/free booters. is that with these forces you can cut down manpower structure, freeing up funds for military technology that will be obsolecent by the time they are fielded. At the same time, congressman, presidents, defense secretaries, staff officers in procurment and doctrine at the pentagon are garunteed a votes, campaign fudning, consulting fees, positions on the board of directors on one of the many, defense, energy and information technology sectors of the Economy.

Also, having such a force makes the government less accountable to its population. Since the people within this military force join on their own, take thier life into thier own hands, thus its tough **** for thier family.
the familys of draftees would ask the hard questions to people like George Bush.

Why did you waste my sons life in Iraq, when he could have been in Afghanistan finding Osama, or fighitng our true enemies Pakistand and Saudi Arabia, or protecting our national borders ( which is a historical common duty for soldiers since the dawn of armies)?

a draftee soldiers mother will ask this, a merceneries mother cannot, and should not.

I would support the draft it was back, if at the very least it would show Americans the brutality of reality, and knock us out of our Idiot box induced haze. 9/11 gave americans a glimmer, but we allowed ourselves to be blinded by such nonsense like American Idol and Janet Jacksons Breasts.

rant over, time for sleep

[James]

Eye Spy,

Are you an American?

Just curious.

[Merik]

Good points on the blind sight of the American people now Eye Spy. p-)

[Royal]

Eye Spy,

Are you an American?

Just curious.

Eye Spy,

Are you on planet earth?

Just curious.

[Hullebullen]

As I have served in conscript army I will share some of my opinions.

The swedish military force has for a long time been a defense force against invasion. The conscript system has been an effecient system to educate a large portion of the (male) population in the use of arms and military skills. However, the cost of new weapon systems and the political climate has changed/will change the face of our military forces.

It has now been around six years since I completed my service. It was the last year that more than 50% of the men of the age group eligible for military training completed service. Most of my friends did not serve. Since then, the number of people completing service has been dwindling. Now, only around one-third enters military service.

The cost of new military systems takes a heavy toll on the military budget. New tanks cost as much as they do for a large country with a large budget or even more since the numbers ordered inevitably will be small.

The conscript system has been effecient in keeping personel costs down since those serving are only paid an symbolic sum for their service. A professional army would have to be paid at the very least a salary equivalent to that of other people working in public service. This system would lead to either a much smaller amount of people trained as soldiers or reduced military hardware purchases, most likely both.

However, as the military becomes more technologically intensive the idea of a conscript army gets more and more difficult. The notion that a conscript that most likely not serves more than a year will be sufficiently proficient at his military trade are unlikely. Coupled with the fact that refreshment courses has been dropped almost completly, the skills of those already trained are left to wither away.

This also affects our ability to send personel on peace-keeping and peace-enforcing missions. The government have stated that they are interrested in sending more personel on such missions. Due to the dwindling numbers of people schooled in the "art of war" there are less people who has the proper training and coupled with the fact that their skills are not refreshed from time to time they'll be less qualified for their task...

just my thoughts...

[admar2]

Eye Spy,

Are you an American?

Just curious.

Eye Spy,

Are you on planet earth?

Just curious.

my thoughts exactly. rofl

[Master_Gunner]

Great points brought up from everyone so far. I especially like Hullebullen's comment about the budget of smaller countries and the rising costs of weapons systems. I think the issue, however, is the US Army. In my humble opinion, a professional army is the way to go. Someone in the chow hall, however, brought up a pretty good point: why not offer to knock off a few years off the sentences of non-violent offenders in exchange for military service? We wouldn't have to put them in Combat Service and support jobs, but as "detail" guys, guarding, cleaning latrines, etc, so that the Combat Arms and Combat Service and support guys could do thier jobs? Food for thought.

[Uncle Sam]

the draft is still in effect. The Draft is still very much alive in America. Dont any of you notice on the application for your drivers license the little Conscription registration box. All American males above 18 have these cards, or should.

To bring back the draft all Congress needs to do is have the GAO allocate funds to get all the local draft committes within every county of the united states up and running.

That being said, draftee armys offer some advantages that a proffesional force does. Not all volunteer, volunteer means you dont get paid. American soldiers today are soldiers by profession, i.e. mercenaries. As such there is a natural drive within these sodliers not to make waves. As you can see by the atrophying of military aptitude among our Flag Officers.

a draftee army will be less inclined to put up with nonsense, since after all they are forced to be there. Commanders of draftee units have to be more upfront with their soldiers, these soldiers are less likely to follow stupid orders that will get them killed for no other reason than their CO's salad bar.

Statistically, it is very hard to find people who are motivated to be soliders, hell a good amount of youngsters enlisting in todays Army, or receiving their commission do it to learn a trade(air craft mechanics), pay back the army for their education (ROTC commisioned officers), or receive money for college afterward (Montgomery GI bill). Thus we still have an Army today with a unbalanced amount of actualy career minded soldiers.

In a draftee army, nobody cares about you learning a trade, getting money for college. you are there to do your duty, if you try to leave you get punished. a draftee army will on the whole be much more combat effective, and much more usable for large military campaigns.

The reason why there is a push for "all volunteers" or "professional" both PC euphemisms for Mercenary/hired gun/free booters. is that with these forces you can cut down manpower structure, freeing up funds for military technology that will be obsolecent by the time they are fielded. At the same time, congressman, presidents, defense secretaries, staff officers in procurment and doctrine at the pentagon are garunteed a votes, campaign fudning, consulting fees, positions on the board of directors on one of the many, defense, energy and information technology sectors of the Economy.

Also, having such a force makes the government less accountable to its population. Since the people within this military force join on their own, take thier life into thier own hands, thus its tough **** for thier family.
the familys of draftees would ask the hard questions to people like George Bush.

Why did you waste my sons life in Iraq, when he could have been in Afghanistan finding Osama, or fighitng our true enemies Pakistand and Saudi Arabia, or protecting our national borders ( which is a historical common duty for soldiers since the dawn of armies)?

a draftee soldiers mother will ask this, a merceneries mother cannot, and should not.

I would support the draft it was back, if at the very least it would show Americans the brutality of reality, and knock us out of our Idiot box induced haze. 9/11 gave americans a glimmer, but we allowed ourselves to be blinded by such nonsense like American Idol and Janet Jacksons Breasts.

rant over, time for sleep

I did some looking, and learned a few things...

http://www.sss.gov/Default.htm

Everything you ever wanted to know about the "Military Selective Service Act"
http://www.sss.gov/PDFs/MSSA-2003.pdf


Although I don't agree with what he wrote, I do agree about this...
...When you turn 18 you have to sign up for "selective service" aka "the draft". The "Draft" is not gone, but in hybernation...It is important to keep in mind that only Congress can authorize a draft - And they can at any time.
The Federal law under which the agency operates is the Military Selective Service Act. Under this law, the mission of the Selective Service System is to provide the numbers of men needed by the Armed Forces, within the time required, should Congress and the President decide to return to a draft, in the event of a national emergency.

[Hullebullen]

Well, I don't know I know if have enough know-how to say how it should be done in US but I'll give it a go anyway! ;)

As it seems it would not be necessary for the US to train it's entire male population. As with Sweden it would probably mean that only a slight number would be trained. As it is for the moment, if you do not wish to serve, you almost certainly won't have to. The army wants motivated people and I don't think this is different from the US. I'm starting to lose my point here but...as long as the US has such an active role in the world a standing professional army is the way to go, I think...

...as for minor criminals getting a choice to serve. Well, wasn't that possible "in the old days". I remember reading "Bogeys & Bandits" by Robert Gandt, an ex-marine aviator talking about how people could either choose to do time behind bars or go to the army and straighten their lifes out...

[EYE SPY]

Yes I am an American, i dont see how my post would make you think otherwise, or let alone think that i am not based in reality. I stand by my statements, and if you are so inclined to disagree, you should at least explain why.

If it is in the character of certain individuals to label others as Un-American or a crackpot because your opinions dont gel with thiers, then that itself is Un-American.

[EYE SPY]

Who are these non-violent felons that can be used as Combat Services Support personnel?

[Jack Mehoff]

Well, I don't know I know if have enough know-how to say how it should be done in US but I'll give it a go anyway! ;)

As it seems it would not be necessary for the US to train it's entire male population. As with Sweden it would probably mean that only a slight number would be trained. As it is for the moment, if you do not wish to serve, you almost certainly won't have to. The army wants motivated people and I don't think this is different from the US. I'm starting to lose my point here but...as long as the US has such an active role in the world a standing professional army is the way to go, I think...

...as for minor criminals getting a choice to serve. Well, wasn't that possible "in the old days". I remember reading "Bogeys & Bandits" by Robert Gandt, an ex-marine aviator talking about how people could either choose to do time behind bars or go to the army and straighten their lifes out...

I'm curious. How long do you have to serve in a conscript Army? 1 year, correct? I think it's a total waste of money if people only serve in the military for 1 year.

In the US, most volunteer on the average serve 4 years. I was consider as an FNG in my first year in the service.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

U.S. military=volunteer
Most Europe=conscript

And who say U.S. government is oppressing their own people?

Most Europe = don´t attack other countries, just have a military to defend
their freedom and independence. And if attacked, I don´t think there will
be any problems with motivation.

That's the funniest thing I've read in a long time. European armies don't attack each other. Who are the armies supposed to defend against? Each other - so obviously they're aware of Europe's history.

[Jack Mehoff]

U.S. military=volunteer
Most Europe=conscript

And who say U.S. government is oppressing their own people?

Most Europe = don´t attack other countries, just have a military to defend
their freedom and independence. And if attacked, I don´t think there will
be any problems with motivation.

That's the funniest thing I've read in a long time. European armies don't attack each other. Who are the armies supposed to defend against? Each other - so obviously they're aware of Europe's history.

um...noob. It's call Mars invasion :-*$

[FallenAngel]

my $.02 for what they're worth.

The US Army shouldn't go conscript unless WWIII starts. There is no need. We are not in a situation like Israel requiring the conscription of everyone 18 years old. The Roman Legions were all volunteer and they pwned all for centuries :)

Whether or not the US Army need to re-evaluate itself is a seperate topic IMO.

However, Robert Heinlein is on to something. Making people do SOME form of civil service does seem like a good idea. Of course, the Military is an option. But I think it'll whip some of these brat kids into shape real quick...make them appreciate their country a little bit.

[11F5S]

the draft is still in effect. The Draft is still very much alive in America. Dont any of you notice on the application for your drivers license the little Conscription registration box. All American males above 18 have these cards, or should.

Wrong! The draft hasn't been alive for 30 years in the United States of America. What we have is registration with the Selective Service System.
To reinstate the draft would recuire an act of Congress....it would be prudent to learn the facts before engaging your keyboard.

http://www.sss.gov/Fast%20Facts%20Table.htm



That being said, draftee armys offer some advantages that a proffesional force does. Not all volunteer, volunteer means you dont get paid.

Wrong again!

Your grasp of the English languge as it pertains to the military leaves much to be desired.

Volunteer:
"2. (Mil.) One who enters into service voluntarily, but who, when in service, is subject to discipline and regulations like other soldiers; -- opposed to conscript; specifically, a voluntary member of the organized militia of a country as distinguished from the standing army."
Source: Miriam Webster Dictionary of Law

Volunteer:
"adj : without payment; "the soup kitchen was prmarily by unpaid helpers"; "a volunteer fire department" [syn: unpaid, volunteer(a)] n 1: a person who freely enlist for military service [syn: military volunteer, voluntary] [ant: draftee] 2: a person who performs voluntary work [syn: unpaid worker] v 1: tell voluntarily; "He volunteered the information" 2: agree freely; "She volunteered to drive the old lady home"; "I offered to help with the dishes but the hostess would not hear of it" [syn: offer] 3: do volunteer work"

Source: Websters Unabridged Dictionary



American soldiers today are soldiers by profession, i.e. mercenaries.

Wrong again! American soldiers are professional soldiers but they are not mercenaries. Try using a dictionary....

mercenary

adj 1: marked by materialism [syn: materialistic, worldly-minded] 2: used of soldiers hired by a foreign army [syn: mercenary(a), freelance(a)] 3: profit oriented; "a commercial book"; "preached a mercantile and militant patriotism"- John Buchan; "a mercenary enterprise"; "a moneymaking business" [syn: mercantile, moneymaking(a)] n : a person hired to fight for another country than their own [syn: soldier of fortune]


Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University





As such there is a natural drive within these sodliers not to make waves. As you can see by the atrophying of military aptitude among our Flag Officers.

What do you know about military aptitude? Have you ever served a day in the the US military or are you a couch potato commando?

I'd love to see you debate with General Peter Schoomaker and a host of others about the atrophying of military aptitudes in the officers of todays military.


a draftee army will be less inclined to put up with nonsense, since after all they are forced to be there. Commanders of draftee units have to be more upfront with their soldiers, these soldiers are less likely to follow stupid orders that will get them killed for no other reason than their CO's salad bar.

What Army did you serve in and what was your rank?


statistically, it is very hard to find people who are motivated to be soliders, hell a good amount of youngsters enlisting in todays Army, or receiving their commission do it to learn a trade(air craft mechanics), pay back the army for their education (ROTC commisioned officers), or receive money for college afterward (Montgomery GI bill). Thus we still have an Army today with a unbalanced amount of actualy career minded soldiers

What is the source of your statistics?


In a draftee army, nobody cares about you learning a trade, getting money for college. you are there to do your duty, if you try to leave you get punished. a draftee army will on the whole be much more combat effective, and much more usable for large military campaigns.

How did you come to form your opinion on this? Did you serve in Army while the draft was being used?

[Jack Mehoff]

Just for fun

http://upload.serverseed.com/images/967-sss.jpg

[11F5S]

Who are these non-violent felons that can be used as Combat Services Support personnel?

Pretty much anything, including was enough to cancel your enlistment even before you sign up.

You are talking out of your ass!

Since when and in what juridiction are jaywalking and having your dog crap on the sidewalk felonies.

[11F5S]

Yes I am an American, i dont see how my post would make you think otherwise, or let alone think that i am not based in reality. I stand by my statements, and if you are so inclined to disagree, you should at least explain why.

Much of what you expressed in your original rant (your words not mine) is not based on FACT as I pointed out above.

[11F5S]

...as for minor criminals getting a choice to serve. Well, wasn't that possible "in the old days". I remember reading "Bogeys & Bandits" by Robert Gandt, an ex-marine aviator talking about how people could either choose to do time behind bars or go to the army and straighten their lifes out...

Yes...it was done frequently....many were sent to the USMC.

When we (USA) were using the draft, draftees served 2 year hitches.

Total service obligation was 8 years. IE: 2 years active duty + 6 years reserve (standby). People who enlisted in Reserve Componets typically served 6 yrs Active Res. duty + 2 years standby reserve

[Maj C]

I don't consider myself to be a merc - I'm a professional soldier fighting for my country whenever or whereever it calls. A draftee is only useful for a crusade - a professional follows the flag regardless of reason - he fights because it is his job. But believe me, my mother can bitch at the government for sending me someplace just as much as any conscripts - and would at the drop of a hat - to suggest she doesn't have that right is asinine.

using minor criminals for menial tasks is almost as stupid as McNamara's project 10000 that forced Cat 4 retards on the military. we don't have penal battalions like the Germans did - if tasks are so menial we'll contract them out. (not that same as corrective custody which comes and goes depending on CG's attitudes - that's more of a moto platoon) we don't want criminals. hell, I kicked out tons of kids for popping positive for weed at boot camp so what makes you think we'd want someone who's done something more serious? I had to tell a lot of parents of kids we were sending home that we weren't a reform school - we were there to make Marines - they kept on saying can't you fix him? Like I was supposed to correct 18 years of their deficient parenting...

[gilgoul]

U.S. military=volunteer
Most Europe=conscript

And who say U.S. government is oppressing their own people?

Most Europe = don´t attack other countries, just have a military to defend
their freedom and independence. And if attacked, I don´t think there will
be any problems with motivation.

You mean, when an operation is needed, europe suddenly remembers it`s a "member" of the NATO, and ask the US to provide troops and support, when it`s not the US that comes to solve your problems with strong decisions, like in Bosnia.

[EYE SPY]

EYE SPY wrote:
the draft is still in effect. The Draft is still very much alive in America. Dont any of you notice on the application for your drivers license the little Conscription registration box. All American males above 18 have these cards, or should.


Wrong! The draft hasn't been alive for 30 years in the United States of America. What we have is registration with the Selective Service System.
To reinstate the draft would recuire an act of Congress....it would be prudent to learn the facts before engaging your keyboard.

http://www.sss.gov/Fast%20Facts%20Table.htm

I am not disagreeing with what you are saying, you may use different terminology here, but this act of congress is , in short, instructing the GAO to allocate funds for each county draft board. You make it sound as if Congress Must pass a new law to get the draft going again, Not true!


EYE SPY wrote:

That being said, draftee armys offer some advantages that a proffesional force does. Not all volunteer, volunteer means you dont get paid.


Wrong again!

Your grasp of the English languge as it pertains to the military leaves much to be desired.

Volunteer:
"2. (Mil.) One who enters into service voluntarily, but who, when in service, is subject to discipline and regulations like other soldiers; -- opposed to conscript; specifically, a voluntary member of the organized militia of a country as distinguished from the standing army."
Source: Miriam Webster Dictionary of Law

Volunteer:
"adj : without payment; "the soup kitchen was prmarily by unpaid helpers"; "a volunteer fire department" [syn: unpaid, volunteer(a)] n 1: a person who freely enlist for military service [syn: military volunteer, voluntary] [ant: draftee] 2: a person who performs voluntary work [syn: unpaid worker] v 1: tell voluntarily; "He volunteered the information" 2: agree freely; "She volunteered to drive the old lady home"; "I offered to help with the dishes but the hostess would not hear of it" [syn: offer] 3: do volunteer work"

Source: Websters Unabridged Dictionary

Now you are arguing semantics, if you go search further on the merriam webster dictionary site, you will be linked to the Encyclopedia Britannica site which has this to say:

hired professional soldier who fights for any state or nation without regard to political interests or issues. From the earliest days of organized warfare until the development of political standing armies in the mid-17th century, governments frequently supplemented their military forces with mercenaries.

Employment of mercenaries could be politically dangerous…
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=53387&tocid=0&query=mercenary&ct=

Volunteer

adj : without payment; "the soup kitchen was prmarily by unpaid helpers"; "a volunteer fire department" [syn: unpaid, volunteer(a)] n 1: a person who freely enlist for military service [syn: military volunteer, voluntary] [ant: draftee] 2: a person who performs voluntary work [syn: unpaid worker] v 1: tell voluntarily; "He volunteered the information" 2: agree freely; "She volunteered to drive the old lady home"; "I offered to help with the dishes but the hostess would not hear of it" [syn: offer] 3: do volunteer work


Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University


unpaid worker

n : a person who performs voluntary work [syn: volunteer]


Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University


See, if you want to argue semantics, go ahead. Every source has some way of defining these words. And dont pretend that Miriam Webster is the end all and be all. Mind you this Dictionary, made publicity by including words such as Metro****** into its volume.


EYE SPY wrote:
American soldiers today are soldiers by profession, i.e. mercenaries.


Wrong again! American soldiers are professional soldiers but they are not mercenaries. Try using a dictionary....

mercenary

adj 1: marked by materialism [syn: materialistic, worldly-minded] 2: used of soldiers hired by a foreign army [syn: mercenary(a), freelance(a)] 3: profit oriented; "a commercial book"; "preached a mercantile and militant patriotism"- John Buchan; "a mercenary enterprise"; "a moneymaking business" [syn: mercantile, moneymaking(a)] n : a person hired to fight for another country than their own [syn: soldier of fortune]


Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University

arguing semantics, again


EYE SPY wrote:


As such there is a natural drive within these sodliers not to make waves. As you can see by the atrophying of military aptitude among our Flag Officers.


What do you know about military aptitude? Have you ever served a day in the the US military or are you a couch potato commando?

I'd love to see you debate with General Peter Schoomaker and a host of others about the atrophying of military aptitudes in the officers of todays military.


You know damn well what i am talking about, we have many career minded officers within the senior leadership of this nation, many embedded in the Pentagon pushing papers, engaging in office politics without regard for the training needs of the average GI joe out there.

I think General Schoomaker is a damn fine Officer, But ask yourself this, why is that a General who has been retired for some number of years is recalled to service instead of any one of countless flag officers in the Pentagon. I am sure that General Schoomaker has a fine staff around him, show me please where i said anything about that particular officer. My comments are directed at the Senior commanders who do not have the qualities as General Schoomaker.


EYE SPY wrote:
a draftee army will be less inclined to put up with nonsense, since after all they are forced to be there. Commanders of draftee units have to be more upfront with their soldiers, these soldiers are less likely to follow stupid orders that will get them killed for no other reason than their CO's salad bar.


What Army did you serve in and what was your rank?




EYE SPY wrote:
statistically, it is very hard to find people who are motivated to be soliders, hell a good amount of youngsters enlisting in todays Army, or receiving their commission do it to learn a trade(air craft mechanics), pay back the army for their education (ROTC commisioned officers), or receive money for college afterward (Montgomery GI bill). Thus we still have an Army today with a unbalanced amount of actualy career minded soldiers


What is the source of your statistics?

EYE SPY wrote:
In a draftee army, nobody cares about you learning a trade, getting money for college. you are there to do your duty, if you try to leave you get punished. a draftee army will on the whole be much more combat effective, and much more usable for large military campaigns.


How did you come to form your opinion on this? Did you serve in Army while the draft was being used?


To answer your questions,

US Army,

i did not post any statistics, but you cant honestly believe a majority of the troops that enlist are in it for the PT and lovely army girls.

My opinion about conscripts is from Common knowledge througout history about what it means to be a conscript. On a personal level, my father, uncle, grandfather, cousins, brother and a few in-laws have served in the Conscription based Military's of Yugoslavia and the Turkish Republic. Father and Uncle were both Mountain Commandos, my cousins and eldest brother served during the recent counter insurgency warfare against the PKK throughout the 80s and 90s. My grandfather, served during the Turkish War of independence of 1919-22

Through my interaction with them i understand a great deal about what it means to be conscript, or draftee. If you want to get into semantics again go for it. I will not entertain your personal questions any longer.

[California Joe]

Just run up the white flag now. 11 is never wrong about this **** and now you've annoyed Maj C too. Maybe you should make fun of Tane and piss off Argyll and say something about Royal's mom. Then you should call Marines pussies while TriggerPuller is here and you'll have won the lottery. But that's just an observation.

Carrion.

[James]

Yes I am an American, i dont see how my post would make you think otherwise, or let alone think that i am not based in reality. I stand by my statements, and if you are so inclined to disagree, you should at least explain why.

If it is in the character of certain individuals to label others as Un-American or a crackpot because your opinions dont gel with thiers, then that itself is Un-American.

All I did was ask a simple question, so take the chip off your shoulder.

Have you served in the military? Anywhere or in the U.S.? I ask because much of what you wrote in your first long post made little sense to me, and because your use of English appears to me as though it is your second language (that is just an observation).


Statistically, it is very hard to find people who are motivated to be soliders

Not recently, not in the U.S., and that's with two wars in less than two years.


a draftee army will on the whole be much more combat effective, and much more usable for large military campaigns.


Last March and April, 150,000 U.S. and 40,000 British (??? Royal! Argyll! Help me out here...) soldiers took an entire nation in just a few weeks. I'd call it a large military campaign. Our militaries, especially since they have become all volunteer, are unparalelled in their combat effectiveness.


a draftee army will be less inclined to put up with nonsense, since after all they are forced to be there. Commanders of draftee units have to be more upfront with their soldiers, these soldiers are less likely to follow stupid orders that will get them killed for no other reason than their CO's salad bar.


I can't think of anything farther from the truth. In my brief experience as a USMC infantryman, and as a squad leader, there was little if any hesitation to tell an officer that a plan could use improvement. We were, of course, always respectful when addressing said officer. ;)

Anyway, those were just some thoughts and observations.[/b]

[Tommy Gunn]

As I have served in conscript army I will share some of my opinions.

The swedish military force has for a long time been a defense force against invasion. The conscript system has been an effecient system to educate a large portion of the (male) population in the use of arms and military skills. However, the cost of new weapon systems and the political climate has changed/will change the face of our military forces.

It has now been around six years since I completed my service. It was the last year that more than 50% of the men of the age group eligible for military training completed service. Most of my friends did not serve. Since then, the number of people completing service has been dwindling. Now, only around one-third enters military service.


It would be cost beneficial for your government to start up a Civilian Marksmanship Program. Schools should have air rifle and small bore rifle teams. Encourage target shooting and hunting for recreation and you will be a nation of riflemen.

Admiral Yamamoto: "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." Advising Japan's military leaders of the futility of an invasion of the mainland United States because of the widespread availability of guns. It has been theorized that this was a major contributing factor in Japan's decision not to land on North America early in the war when they had vastly superior military strength. This delay gave our industrial infrastructure time to gear up for the conflict and was decisive in our later victory.

[Jack Mehoff]

As I have served in conscript army I will share some of my opinions.

The swedish military force has for a long time been a defense force against invasion. The conscript system has been an effecient system to educate a large portion of the (male) population in the use of arms and military skills. However, the cost of new weapon systems and the political climate has changed/will change the face of our military forces.

It has now been around six years since I completed my service. It was the last year that more than 50% of the men of the age group eligible for military training completed service. Most of my friends did not serve. Since then, the number of people completing service has been dwindling. Now, only around one-third enters military service.


It would be cost beneficial for your government to start up a Civilian Marksmanship Program. Schools should have air rifle and small bore rifle teams. Encourage target shooting and hunting for recreation and you will be a nation of riflemen.

Admiral Yamamoto: "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." Advising Japan's military leaders of the futility of an invasion of the mainland United States because of the widespread availability of guns. It has been theorized that this was a major contributing factor in Japan's decision not to land on North America early in the war when they had vastly superior military strength. This delay gave our industrial infrastructure time to gear up for the conflict and was decisive in our later victory.
God damn liberals trying to take our guns away

[Vance]

No,

Most draftees have poor motivation. Better to have a professional/volunteer force.

The Americans who helped win World War Two might be offended by such a statement...

That said, I don't support a draft. I do support a better foreign policy that requires less U.S. Military presence overseas.
Well James, I'm pretty sure the American boys that went to war during WWII had great motivation. They were fighting for a just cause, and for freedom.

[Durandal]

Robert A. Heinlein is my hero.

Too true...

[California Joe]

Stephen King is my hero. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

[ibstolidude]

IB****VITAL (close to Vitale) here with the play by play:



Ohh look at me, I'm important and I know stuff, listen to my rant! I am all full of "facts"


huh? what, why and from where do you do post this


I pitty da foo who asks me questions!!


(in robot voice) Danger, Will Robinson, Danger!!"


:bash:




* Note announcer is not held liable for accuracy in reposts and quotes.

[BlackRain]

This whole thread is about a red herring a joke. There will be no draft anytime soon.

The H. R. 163 billl in question was introduced on January 7, 2003 by Mr. RANGEL, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE. The bill is dead and its companion S.89 are going no where.

Remember, Mr. McDermott? He was a critic of Bush while touring Bagdad on a peace mission.

These members of Congress wanted this bill to be a shot across the bow to the Bush administration and to anger the hippy generation about the coming war in Iraq with the catch word "draft".

Now, morons at those left wingnut sites believe they have found a "secret" to be foisted upon the US public in the spring of 2005.

[California Joe]

Very succinct stoli. Kudos.

[EYE SPY]

EYE SPY wrote:
Yes I am an American, i dont see how my post would make you think otherwise, or let alone think that i am not based in reality. I stand by my statements, and if you are so inclined to disagree, you should at least explain why.

If it is in the character of certain individuals to label others as Un-American or a crackpot because your opinions dont gel with thiers, then that itself is Un-American.


All I did was ask a simple question, so take the chip off your shoulder.

Have you served in the military? Anywhere or in the U.S.? I ask because much of what you wrote in your first long post made little sense to me, and because your use of English appears to me as though it is your second language (that is just an observation).

Quote:
Statistically, it is very hard to find people who are motivated to be soliders


Not recently, not in the U.S., and that's with two wars in less than two years.

Quote:
a draftee army will on the whole be much more combat effective, and much more usable for large military campaigns.



Last March and April, 150,000 U.S. and 40,000 British (??? Royal! Argyll! Help me out here...) soldiers took an entire nation in just a few weeks. I'd call it a large military campaign. Our militaries, especially since they have become all volunteer, are unparalelled in their combat effectiveness.

Quote:
a draftee army will be less inclined to put up with nonsense, since after all they are forced to be there. Commanders of draftee units have to be more upfront with their soldiers, these soldiers are less likely to follow stupid orders that will get them killed for no other reason than their CO's salad bar.



I can't think of anything farther from the truth. In my brief experience as a USMC infantryman, and as a squad leader, there was little if any hesitation to tell an officer that a plan could use improvement. We were, of course, always respectful when addressing said officer.

Anyway, those were just some thoughts and observations.[/b]




Just run up the white flag now. 11 is never wrong about this **** and now you've annoyed Maj C too. Maybe you should make fun of Tane and piss off Argyll and say something about Royal's mom. Then you should call Marines pussies while TriggerPuller is here and you'll have won the lottery. But that's just an observation.

Carrion.


My response to all of this, I have not made any personal attacks toward anyone on this site, please quote a passage where i insulted anyone personally here.

My grasp of the english language is quite well thank you, i didnt realize that the rules of Modern English Grammer were in effect on this website.

I do not have a chip on my shoulder, and that remark i made was not directed at you James, im sorry if you felt that was a personal attack.

I dont deny that there are many quality officers in the the lower ranks, 2nd LT especially if former NCOs, 1st lieutanents, and Captains. Many here realize that the transition from Captain to Major is where it begins to fall off. After this point many officers become risk averse since any failure will wind op on thier record, which can make or break your career. Furthermore this leads more risk averse officers the higher up you go in the chain of command.

It is true that the US Army along with the Brits has invaded and occupied a Iraq in a very short time. But with most of the active force in transition, along with some units reorganizing and converting to the IBCT units, there are few combat assets beyond two MEFs and a brigade or two for other contingencies.

How can u say that it is not hard to find motivated soldiers. The soldiers who fought in Afghanistan and Iraq joined the military long before those campaigns were even in the works. Do you think the United States will be able to recruit more teenagers if we go to war again, somewhere else. I dont know, but i doubt it will be enough .

I dont know why i bother anyway. hopefully this thread will die

[California Joe]

I unlike many of the new arrivals was joking. From what I've seen you write very well. Whether I always agree with you who cares. Nothing personal.

[haze99]

well, to address the topic at hand, this is a politicans "brilliant" idea. Most likly from one who never served!
If they insist on this as the standard for the USA. They had better shot themselves in the face. Because, if not, some disgruntled youth will!

Bad idea. Didn't work in the 1960's and WILL not work know!

[haze99]

No, you cannot compare Western Europe and their system of conscription. They have a different society and smaller population. (As for population, I refer to individual countries, not the entire continent!)
The USA has an appropriate set-up now. To change it would be disasterous!

[ibstolidude]

How can u say that it is not hard to find motivated soldiers. The soldiers who fought in Afghanistan and Iraq joined the military long before those campaigns were even in the works. Do you think the United States will be able to recruit more teenagers if we go to war again, somewhere else. I dont know, but i doubt it will be enough .

I dont know why i bother anyway. hopefully this thread will die
Check current recruitment numbers.

[11F5S]

My opinion about conscripts is from Common knowledge througout history about what it means to be a conscript. On a personal level, my father, uncle, grandfather, cousins, brother and a few in-laws have served in the Conscription based Military's of Yugoslavia and the Turkish Republic. Father and Uncle were both Mountain Commandos, my cousins and eldest brother served during the recent counter insurgency warfare against the PKK throughout the 80s and 90s. My grandfather, served during the Turkish War of independence of 1919-22

Through my interaction with them i understand a great deal about what it means to be conscript, or draftee. If you want to get into semantics again go for it. I will not entertain your personal questions any longer.

It's great that your family has such a rich military background, but this thread is about the US Military not Yugolsavia's, Turkey's or any other for that matter.

In my opinion your opinion of the US Military is what I might expect from someone who is talking out of his ass. Semantics are very important here.....because you are flat out ignorant about the meaning of words like "volunteer and mercenaries" as they pertain to the militay.


Ever hear of the Geneva Conventions?

PROTOCOL ADDITIONAL TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS OF 12 AUGUST 1949, AND RELATING TO THE PROTECTION OF VICTIMS OF INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICTS
(PROTOCOL I)

"Article 47 - Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.

2. A mercenary is any person who:

(a) is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;

(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;

(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;

(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;

(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and

(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces."

Soldiers in the US Army are not by any stretch of the imagination mercenaries.

Unlike you, my opinions are based on personal experience (and fact) from having served in the US Army(PVT - SGM)) for more than two decades during time which the draft was being used.

By the way, ROTC is a fine program (BTDT)and has produced some of the finest officers ever to have served.

For a guy who has never served a single day in the US military it's really stupid to judge the military aptitude of anyone and certainly not the officers in the US military.

[Jack Mehoff]

the draft is still in effect. The Draft is still very much alive in America. Dont any of you notice on the application for your drivers license the little Conscription registration box. All American males above 18 have these cards, or should.

To bring back the draft all Congress needs to do is have the GAO allocate funds to get all the local draft committes within every county of the united states up and running.

That being said, draftee armys offer some advantages that a proffesional force does. Not all volunteer, volunteer means you dont get paid. American soldiers today are soldiers by profession, i.e. mercenaries. As such there is a natural drive within these sodliers not to make waves. As you can see by the atrophying of military aptitude among our Flag Officers.

a draftee army will be less inclined to put up with nonsense, since after all they are forced to be there. Commanders of draftee units have to be more upfront with their soldiers, these soldiers are less likely to follow stupid orders that will get them killed for no other reason than their CO's salad bar.

Statistically, it is very hard to find people who are motivated to be soliders, hell a good amount of youngsters enlisting in todays Army, or receiving their commission do it to learn a trade(air craft mechanics), pay back the army for their education (ROTC commisioned officers), or receive money for college afterward (Montgomery GI bill). Thus we still have an Army today with a unbalanced amount of actualy career minded soldiers.

In a draftee army, nobody cares about you learning a trade, getting money for college. you are there to do your duty, if you try to leave you get punished. a draftee army will on the whole be much more combat effective, and much more usable for large military campaigns.

The reason why there is a push for "all volunteers" or "professional" both PC euphemisms for Mercenary/hired gun/free booters. is that with these forces you can cut down manpower structure, freeing up funds for military technology that will be obsolecent by the time they are fielded. At the same time, congressman, presidents, defense secretaries, staff officers in procurment and doctrine at the pentagon are garunteed a votes, campaign fudning, consulting fees, positions on the board of directors on one of the many, defense, energy and information technology sectors of the Economy.

Also, having such a force makes the government less accountable to its population. Since the people within this military force join on their own, take thier life into thier own hands, thus its tough **** for thier family.
the familys of draftees would ask the hard questions to people like George Bush.

Why did you waste my sons life in Iraq, when he could have been in Afghanistan finding Osama, or fighitng our true enemies Pakistand and Saudi Arabia, or protecting our national borders ( which is a historical common duty for soldiers since the dawn of armies)?

a draftee soldiers mother will ask this, a merceneries mother cannot, and should not.

I would support the draft it was back, if at the very least it would show Americans the brutality of reality, and knock us out of our Idiot box induced haze. 9/11 gave americans a glimmer, but we allowed ourselves to be blinded by such nonsense like American Idol and Janet Jacksons Breasts.

rant over, time for sleep



That being said, draftee armys offer some advantages that a proffesional force does. Not all volunteer, volunteer means you dont get paid. American soldiers today are soldiers by profession, i.e. mercenaries. As such there is a natural drive within these sodliers not to make waves. As you can see by the atrophying of military aptitude among our Flag Officers.

WTF?! Volunteer don't get pay? rofl Seriously, where are you from? Mars?

Maybe you should pull out a dictionary and look for the word "mercenaries"

[n] a person hired to fight for another country than their own
[adj] profit oriented; "a commercial book"; "preached a mercantile and militant patriotism"- John Buchan; "a mercenary enterprise"; "a moneymaking business"
[adj] marked by materialism