There’s a famous Jack Nicholson performance in the movie A Few Good Men where Colonel Jessep explains the mentality of a military officer charged with protecting the United States of America. Here’s the exchange as a refresher.
JESSEP: You want answers?
KAFFEE: I think I’m entitled to them.
JESSEP: You want answers?!
KAFFEE: I want the truth.
JESSEP: You can’t handle the truth!
JESSEP: (continuing) Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: That Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives.
You don’t want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You want me there. (boasting) We use words like honor, code,
loyalty…we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use ’em as a punchline. (beat) I have neither the time nor the
inclination to explain myself to a man who
rises and sleeps under the blanket of the
very freedom I provide, then questions the
manner in which I provide it. I’d prefer you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you’re entitled to.KAFFEE: (quietly) Did you order the code red?
JESSEP: (beat) I did the job you sent me to do.
KAFFEE: Did you order the code red?
JESSEP: (pause) You’re goddamn right I did.
I was born in 1969. I reached the age of thirty without there being even a chance of my being drafted. By the time I was six we were completely out Vietnam. By the time I was eight, there was no more conscription. While we were reminded that the Soviets could nuke us at any time, we faced no other existential threat. I grew up in a time when the country was learning the lessons of Vietnam and Watergate. I was not born, as my father was, in the midst of the Depression, and I did not spend my childhood, as my father did, charting on maps the progress of the allied armies. I never saw a civilized nation exterminate people in ovens or like, Stalin, starve millions of Ukranians to death. I was never, as my father was, drafted into the army and deployed to Europe. I had plenty of reason to respect their sacrifice and their accomplishments, but little cause to emulate the virtues and character traits that allowed them to stand up successfully to a totalitarian threat.
It was easy for me to take things for granted. It was easy for me to think that we no longer needed men on the walls to defend our freedoms. In fact, with a certainty, I knew that threats had been hyped and manufactured to justify putting people on those walls.
I am convinced that the all-volunteer army has been a mistake. I do not for a moment doubt that we have a more effective fighting force because the fighting force is self-selected. But the effectiveness of our fighting force is not the only, or most important factor. We have allowed our military to become culturally isolated from the mass culture. This is a grave danger and should never happen.
Removing the sense of shared investment and shared sacrifice in the defense of our nation has led to the corruption of both our civilian and our military lives. The goverment correctly believes that they can employ our military in massive operations without the vast consent and shared sacrifice of the nation. This leads to recklessness. At the same time, the civilian population has lost all empathy for and understanding of the need for military discipline, the chain of command, and military ethics in general.
We’ve lost the ability to communicate with each other.
Even worse, we no longer have the clout of the people, whose prior consent and sacrifice was needed, to restrain the government from using the military in irresponsible ways. It’s too easy to consent to the use of force in a far off land, when no one need do more than send their check to the IRS to do their patriotic duty.
The Bush administration has figured out that they can deploy our forces in any way they choose and maintain support for their mission so long as the bill is charged to the as yet unborn, who have no ability to protest.
We need mandatory service in this country. The service need not be military, as many, if not most, are not cut out for military service. But we will not rein in our government, nor teach them the risks of hubris, until we make sure that all military ventures are shared by the bulk of the American people. We will never shirk our duty when we truly face an existential threat. We know this. If you want peace…if you want the people to have a veto on reckless preemptive strikes in far-off lands…then you should support mandatory service.
In the meantime, our generation…my generation, should think three times before they take the sacrifice of our military for granted or heap abuse on the military and military families beacuse of the unwise, even immoral, orders they are given and asked to carry out. Martial virtues and values exist for a good reason. And all wars see disgraceful immorality. When we assure ourselves that we will not enter into war without absolute necessity, then we will not bicker among ourselves about culpability. We will know that the culpability lies with all of us.
Mandatory service is a progressive idea that will promote peace.
Mandatory service is a progressive idea that will serve peace? That ought to be reassuring to supporters of slavery, indentured servitude, serfdom, and chain gangs.
and also to your parents.
yes.
I don’t know when you were born, but from 1940-1977 there was mandatory service. I assume your parents experienced that. I doubt they saw it as serfdom. But I don’t envision a system that pushed everyone into the military. Americorp, peace corp, inner city teaching, reserve and guard, plus many other possibilities…
OK, sorry about the snark. Your intentions are good, but I think that mandatory service is corrosive to the human spirit and shouldn’t be implemented absent some incredible emergency.
In terms of socially useful work such as teaching or taking care of the elderly or disabled, we could get the same or better result with tuition waivers, loan forgiveness and such. We should not tell our youth that they MUST do such and such, that they have no choice, and they cannot leave.
In terms of the military, mandatory service would be an incredible windfall to the war-mongers because it would serve all their manpower needs. This windfall would more than offset whatever difficulties they might experience because of increased public attention to foreign affairs.
I am the same age as you and my father served in the military in 1956-57 (including service in Lebanon), when there was a peacetime draft. He thought that the military was ridiculous, that his service was useless, and he was glad when he got out to pursue his personal dreams of career and family.
mandatory service didn’t keep us out of Vietnam – it just couldn’t survive in the nation post-Vietnam. i agree in part with what you’re saying, though i think you oversimplify it. the end of mandatory service didn’t allow for something that hadn’t happened before; rather, it allowed what had been happening to continue under revised conditions.
the Rumsfeld military (were it fully realized) takes this revision to its logical conclusion: a force of highly trained, overwhelmingly equipped, mercenaries able to project devastating force in service to the unpopular agenda of a ruling cabal. and i think you’re right, the all-volunteer military limits the societal fallout of this plan. as Goebbels said, more or less: the State can only last for so long as people are sufficiently protected from the consequences of its actions.
they take an oath to protect the Constitution of the United States against enemies both foreign and domestic. Rumsfeld’s goal was never attainable and I’m pretty shocked he never realized that it could never have happened. I’m surprised he never knew the men around him that he served with, but he didn’t, well maybe he didn’t at first and then when he did he hired Custer Battles. Now the military is broken. It is broken far worse than the media is willing to report yet….it is broken and I’m not sure what is going to fix it but it is as broken right now as it was after the end of the Vietnam War, and something will have to happen to repair what the Democracy needs for a military that can serve and protect the nation. Maybe the whole volunteer service thing did succeed in the end…..it succeeded in exposing it’s irreparable faults and now they must be repaired.
Germany didn’t surrender under April 1945, after all but a few square blocks of its territory had been claimed by the invading US, British, and Russian forces.
The German people suffered terribly from 1943-1945, but the German Reich continued on to the bitter end.
Of course, Goebbels thought people were easily manipulated sheep. The founders of the American Republic were steeped in Enlightenment ideals and believed that people were capable of managing their own affairs. That’s why the United States is a republic and Hitler’s Germany was a fascist dictatorship. Republicans (not THOSE kind, the good kind) believe that people are reasonable creatures; fascists believe they’re sheep.
So you’re agreeing with Goebbels? Ok, then.
Damn, the official German surrender was 7 May 1945, NOT April. I hate it when I misremember basic facts!
awfully nice to get the ol’ aggression out on a strawman, isn’t it?
notice that you didn’t actually address what Goebbels said, but rather substituted your own scheme and then assigned me to the side you didn’t like. ok, then.
the quote of Goebbels that i referred to said nothing about people being sheep. in fact, as i read it it necessarily presumes that people are in fact reasonable (otherwise they wouldn’t need to be protected from the consequences of the Lie). Goebbels opinion on this was in part just a continuation of what had long been understood: namely, that it behooves a government to keep its people happy. his real innovation was in openly identifying the State with deception, acknowledging the great enemy of the state is, despite all propaganda to the contrary, Truth.
so, yeah, i was agreeing with Goebbels on that. now, as then, truth is the great enemy of the state. oh my god! does that make me a fascist?
Oh, unknot your panties.
You cited, with approval, Joseph Goebbels as an explainer of human behavior.
That suggests to me that you take a rather dim view of humanity in general and Americans in particular.
If you wanted to say that a government is wise to keep its people insulated from the bad effects of policy as much as possible, well then, why not just say it without attributing it to Goebbels? Why associate your remark with him? Surely you realize that the sentiment did not originate with Goebbels, who never had an original thought in his brain (or if he did, it died of loneliness)? The sentiment, in fact, was old when Machiavelli expressed it in a slightly different manner some five and a half centuries prior.
By using Goebbels, you suggest something altogether different. In fact, what you implied was not that people must be made “happy” but that they are ignorant and must be misled.
I look forward to receiving more insights into human behavior from Joseph Goebbels. As I’m not a student of his works, I will be entirely dependent on you in the matter.
let me assist in parsing for you what i’ve already written, though i doubt much will pursuade you from the fascinating trail you’ve picked up. will boldface help? let’s see:
i was approving not of Goebbels’ general view of humanity, but rather his specific view on the nature of the fascist state.
and – context! – not with the point of agreeing that States must be so or should be so; but rather with the point of saying that the sort of mercenary military envisioned by Rumsfeld is perfectly appropriate to a State that is a Lie.
did Goebbels really invent the notion of State as Lie? ah, you got me there (good work!). that’s way back in Plato’s Republic. still, Goebbels’ expression of the idea is more appropriate to this situation, and my intention.
That’s pretty self-evident.
Hey, I see you’ve picked up Thereisnospoon’s “lovely” habit of using boldface to emphasize that what you are saying must be true. Because everybody knows that when you put something in boldface, it HAS to be true.
I have no interest in arguing about the statements of a dead Nazi war criminal with you. I’m not one of your science fiction-reading, Dungeons and-Dragons game-playing buddies sitting around the corner coffee shop shooting the breeze with you. Everything you’ve just typed is nothing more than static to me. This isn’t a graduate student seminar, either.
i’ll take your descent into pure name-calling as the closest you can get to a graceful conceeding of the point.
during those years and considered it servitude.
Don’t they have mandatory service in Isreal?
of course.
Yes, and the Israeli people are massing in the streets right now to protest this new war in Lebanon.
Oh wait, they’re not.
I hate it when a theory gets slain by facts, don’t you?
for as long as I have known him. I have not agreed with him until perhaps lately Booman. I never understood why he believed such a thing until lately. I remember also at drinking liberally in Philly that a highly regarded feminist blogger also thought the same was needed, and that if people didn’t want to provide service to the military that there be options for social service that could be substituted for it. There was a very svelte sophisticated feminist liberal woman there also who agreed with her completely, while I took notes from the conversation to share with my husband who has echoed all of your sentiments from the moment that I first met him……..and I considered having to endure such sentiments a small price to pay for getting to enjoy having all of him in my life. In today’s light though maybe I ought not to endure those sentiments and maybe it’s time to embrace these ideas.
I don’t think so..
soon we’ll be discussint StormTroopers “gaining citizenship status after serving” ideas.
I’d rather die than “join” the military or any form of service to this administration. Because it’s no longer serving the country… it’s all about serving the regime.
PLus I think once you make things mandatory you take away choice.
How about we allow men to be discharged after each election with no penalties. They can rejoin after another election…
OR… how about allowing the military to have a voice.
when it comes to the military having a voice Janet, it has all been about stomping on the military because people are angry. The same thing that happened to the Vietnam soldiers is about to happen again only on a HUGE SCALE because the military is volunteer now. They are volunteer and they are broken and now angry people will storm them and trample them and treat them all like shit, even though when they left they didn’t really have much of a choice as to whether or not to go. Sorry, but Booman is right and it is the only way to stop this insanity that has now taken hold.
They are volunteer and they are broken and now angry people will storm them and trample them and treat them all like shit, even though when they left they didn’t really have much of a choice as to whether or not to go.
Due to angry people who criticize the military like this?
Wow, what a shining example of loving kindness this is, catnip. The Dalai Llama would be so proud of how you treat someone that you have repeatedly stated needs professional help.
Kudos. Now, what was your point with this comment?
Loving kindness involves holding up a mirror to people every now and then.
And I suggested that she seek professional help once in a diary that she has since deleted.
My point? Hypocrisy that ought to be met with humility. It’s that simple.
P.S. Nice attack on my religion there. What’s next? Or should I even ask?
I’m sorry that you interpreted it as an attack. I was merely trying to hold the mirror up to you, in the same spirit of loving kindness.
Namaste.
The only way your comment can be read is as an attempt to humiliate me for what you determined was my not practicing my religious beliefs. You can claim otherwise, but there is no doubt from your tone that it was meant as such.
My religious beliefs are insulted and that’s what you post? That’s what you condone on your blog? Thank you for showing me your true colours.
what?
I’m sorry I got to this thread so late, but when I saw this I wanted to throw up a little. Booman, this was so beneath you. You might have seen it as funny, or you just wanted to voice your annoyance, but as an impartial observer, it really bugged me and I thought it was childish (though I do admit to a fondness for the bunny).
All the parties have a good point and we should let them express them without resulting to insults.
At any rate, I don’t want to see manditory military service. I think that is a supremely bad idea. But, like others here, setting up community service (whether locally, nationally, or internationally) as a “rite of passage” is not a bad idea.
While I can completely understand your belief that mandatory service would have a positive impact on our military, I want to see us decrease our military, radically. I do like the reserves. I think the reserves have proven themselves again and again in helping our country in times of disaster. Using the reserves as a full on military force is just way wrong.
But, if the US set up a national organization like the Peace Corps. where we used our wealth and knowledge to help the world and our own nation, I might be convinced. Of course, it would be a cold day in hell before we would use our military dollars to cause peace instead of war. Nevertheless, I remain a strong proponent of teaching the value of community and cooperation.
had been radically downsized to only what we needed to protect ourselves……..that’s why the National Guard and Reserves are serving double duty in Iraq. We don’t have huge numbers of active duty military forces any longer…..that is a myth.
I do understand that. As a resident of California, I have seen the bases close.
We wouldn’t have needed to call up the reserves and the guard if we didn’t start an illegal war. That is what is so despicable about using them for this war, it was not a war that we should have started. If we used our soldiers for defence of our nation, we would be in good standing, though I really want a smaller army than we even have and lots less funding to new and more efficient ways of killing people. If we were ever invaded, I have no doubt that we would have plenty of “insurgents” of our own.
by us in the blogosphere and maybe a few other select places………the police officers who come and get you when you don’t show up for deployment though consider it a legal war. The illegal war argument holds no water until it holds water. It holds no weight in the real world yet.
It seems like you are trying to pick a fight here and I don’t want to go there. I am not against you MT, any more than I am against catnip, booman, cabingirl, DammitJanet, or any of the other participants here.
It is my opinion that invading a sovereign nation based on lies and propaganda is illegal. I base this on my interpretation of international and national law. I agree that the perpetrators are doing everything in their power to make this war appear legal, but it is not. It is an illegal and immoral war based on lies and deception.
That our soldiers would go to jail for refusing to participate in this illegal and immoral war is irrelevant to what I was saying, and I do not dispute that fact. That fact does not make the war either legal or moral, either.
does not help anything, solve anything, it doesn’t do anything in the real world. It is just an opinion that law enforcement does not recognize, in the fact the law of land says that you are wrong. You have the right to your opinion though.
I’m dubious, myself. Of course since I don’t like the idea of war at all most people don’t take my objections seriously.
BTW, I thought both Catnip and Boo were being harsh.
(Assuming you weren’t being snarky…)
Catnip is a Buddhist, and CabinGirl said “Wow, what a shining example of loving kindness this is, catnip. The Dalai Llama would be so proud…”
PS: CabinGirl:
Seems strange that Catnip doesn’t recall the blessed Lama’s words like: “If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion”
Um, Tracy, in the post Catnip linked to, you said:
“THESE FUCKERS ARE NOT NICE PEOPLE. I have a hard time feeling sorry for their families.”
I don’t think the above statement is too Buddhist like. I think we should feel for them and their families, and I think the Dalia Lama would at least try to see their humanity and try to get them to see it too.
I don’t see compassion from you right now. I see anger. Spiderleaf tried to reach out to you and you slammed her. It has been very sad to watch. You are pushing people away from this site because you speak in anger and pain and I am saddened. I will miss their voices and I hope they will return in time. I also hope that you will find peace and comfort and will once again be able to communicate your message of strength and perserverance once again. You, too, have a beautiful voice when you want, and you have taught me much.
Janet I love and respect all that you do with Code Pink, but on this I disagree. Right now, the military families are the only people in the US who are paying a personal price in this war. And you can bet that the vast majority of them are not the sons and daughters of our elected representatives who voted for the war. Or of the wealthy campaign contributors on either side of the aisle.
For the past few years, when I drop my son off at school in the morning, I always see young men driving to high school in their Jeeps with W stickers on the bumper. Every time, I wonder how supportive they (and their parents) would be of W if they didn’t live in a wealthy neighborhood where mommy and daddy could afford to buy them their own car and where they would never have to worry about fighting in W’s war, becaus they were going to be too busy going to college.
When it’s your own flesh and blood getting shipped off to war, I’m pretty sure it put things into a whole different light, and makes you care about ending the war in a big way. The wealthy parents of those kids might feel differently if the war affected their families too.
I’m just thinking outloud is all. But I think that several are paying for this war.
Schools
911 systems and other forms of “security”
I think maybe the best way to stop wars is to stop the war machine.
Let’s face it – the rich will never serve. Look at “W”. Technically her “served”.
I’d rather the money be spent elsewhere.
military families. I’m sort of insulted that you compare people that have to live with certain discomforts to people who are dead and people with PTSD so bad that they will never know any quality of life until their life is over.
YES. Military families have and always will pay more than the rest of us.
What I mean is that “W” is spending HOW MUCH on this war? And where else could that money be used.
Instead accidentally insulting a friend I adore… I’m going to go AWOL.
My sincere apologies. I did not mean to offend…
I simply was here to try and find some way to stop this war.
Bush has won.
though Janet because they have nothing precious on the line. That is what Booman is pointing out, if you have nothing precious at stake….if a bunch of Neocons take over your government it is easy for the population to sit at home in their lazyboys because it isn’t affecting them in any way directly painful. It is easy to armchair quarterback when you really aren’t in the game and taking any hits.
Nothing precious at stake?
Tracy, our children’s future is at stake. Each day something is taken from them. Each day the air they breathe is more toxic.
Okay.. so we’re not in the military anymore guess that means that this citizen can no longer have an opinion about the war, the military?? Is that what’s going on here? Because that is the same thing the WingNuts say on other boards. Like there’s some caste system.
I no longer can “agree” with our military being there, or even what they are doing here. Hell everything is militaristic nowadays.
Words fail me.
I guess all I’m good for in this movement is marching and having stuff thrown at me. Because my personal ass isn’t on the line. But everytime I do protest it’s with veterans. Every emotional issue I take is veteran related. But somehow I’m insulting??
I came to the blogs so I could learn and also so I could speak up. I didn’t come here to fight or insult people. Even if it was accidentally.
I love you very much Tracy. I know you need support and a safe place.
I don’t support the idea of giving any administration more children to add to the war machine. Sorry.
After the elections I felt very alone. Today… and this past week… I now know I am alone. I wish your husband returns safe. I wish even more he didn’t have to go. I wish none of them did.
Peace.
Oh dear. Two people I respect and care about, who really have the same goal (ending the war), are arguing about who is sacrificing more, instead of honoring each others efforts toward the same.
I haven’t seen anyone suggest this, but I was away from the computer all weekend.
Many of us never agreed in the first place. And again, I haven’t seen ANYONE who posts here advocating for staying in Iraq indefinitely.
You know, I always think of the Vietnam vets I got to know when they got their PTSD prescriptions from me every month, 20-30 years after that war was over, and think about what the situation in Iraq is doing to the people serving there, and that no one deserves to be put in that situation for a lie. So, I agree that there are many emotional issues related to veterans serving in any war, and that military personnel shouldn’t be treated the way they were when they came home from Vietnam. And I know from talking to Tracy that she feels the same way.
I agree. And I’ve learned a lot of different things from everyone here, even when I don’t agree with them. 🙂
Amen. Seems like there may be more points of agreement here than not, just different opinions on why we aren’t where we need to be.
By any chance are you from San Diego?
No, I’m from the east coast. I do like San Diego though.
I had this sudden weird notion that you might be a childhood friend who i found out later became a pharmacist, etc.
You might’ve missed some of the diaries and comments which were subsequently deleted, but there are still plenty where people have been accused of having worthless, or worse, traitorous, opinions while making points of generality about the state of the nation, the troops, the war and all its dimensions. People have been told they have no right to speak up. Lines have been drawn about whose voices are worth hearing, respecting, and considering. If you were away while that conversation was happening, you missed something significant.
If you were away while that conversation was happening, you missed something significant.
Not to mention something enormously depressing and discouraging.
Something hope-destroying.
Something, well, Hobbesian:
I keep fighting Hobbes, both “in theory” and “in practice”. The “in theory” part isn’t all that hard.
But experience — including my experiences reading here — seems stubbornly intent on corroborating Hobbes’s depressing analyses.
G’night. Pessimistically yours,
Glad I missed it.
I’m glad you did too, and I wish I had. But I expect that it will be “coming [again] to a theater near you.”
Probalby the Expanding Crusader Theater (see end of thread for locations nearest you).
and families that we know read my diaries. God forbid that any of them read the things that were suggested in that diary, I wouldn’t have any chance of any of them voting for any progressive if they read some of the things in that diary that were spat out about our military. In fact, they would most likely hate everybody who professed to be a “progressive” from that point on and I can’t say that I would blame them considering the sacrifice and abuse that they have put up with. The worst post was a suggestion that the troops in Iraq probably wouldn’t be able to return to civilized life in America after being exposed to that kind of combat and it would probably be best if the Iraqis were allowed to murder them. I have been asked to try to stay on here, but I won’t at the expense of failing the other military families trying to survive this right now and I will not have my name sullied as being a part of treating them like that or condoning anybody treating them like that!
The worst post was a suggestion that the troops in Iraq probably wouldn’t be able to return to civilized life in America after being exposed to that kind of combat and it would probably be best if the Iraqis were allowed to murder them.
No. I alluded, without specificity to what WILLIAM POLK discussed as part of the comments he made that Cspan filmed. A book discussion that ranged over 90 minutes.
Further, I was circumspect and I alluded to it. And I paraphrased how he discussed the effect of hand to hand killing, guerilla warfare and counter-insurgency war fare.
You have spelled it out and assigned blame for what POLK recounted from his own knowledge, having worked with the French government at the close of the French Algerian war.
I was in the process of answering your very unpleasant reply to me as you deleted the diary. Personlly I think you deleted it as comments in there were too pointed about you.
Write to Polk and try ot contain his own discussions, why don’t you.
You are seeking to limit free speech. With a lot of classic dodges.
I long ago stayed away from you in disucssions of the war as you made your personal emotional state an issue and thus automatically, to protect you over and over, the discussions were truncated.
You place the military above any other American citizen.
and finally that is just flat out offensive. And unnaceptable. This country still, at least nominally, demands civilian over sight of the military.
we are not full on fascistic yet, but the elevation of all things militaristic, and thus the downgrading of the American citizen who does not serve in the armed forces, is very dangerous.
citizen. It isn’t even possible to do, as a citizen you out rank every member of the military according to their own code and ethics. I’m sorry you feel that my “emotions” truncated discussion….I tend to feel that because I a human face of the military people tend to reconsider verbally beating me with their displaced anger. I am sorry that I deleted my diary as you were answering back, you did take an awfully long time to answer back though and you jumped immediately on this, seems odd.
I’m not arguing nor am I fighting. I’m just a bit flabbergasted by all this.
But yes I did sense alot of anger about anyone else voicing an opinion about “the troops” unless they had their own relative there.
And I might add… my nephew is in Iraq. Yanked out of nursing school at 19. But I never felt that should matter in my actions or thoughts about this illegal war.
I feel terribly that Tracy’s husband is going back. I laid awake last night wondering how I could even breathe knowing my husband would be going to a place I consider an absolute and needless hellhole. I no longer trust our administration and sadly… I no longer trust our military. We need an overhaul of both. Reduction in both.
And back to the topic: No, I don’t think mandatory enlistment would help. I think more of the same would happen. Bush types would “serve” but “not really serve”.
However I think a draft would make others more alert. You bet. There are people who only care about the troops on certain holidays or at protests. The number of people who say, “What war?” is unfuckingbelievable but in the end it doesn’t justify the means.
Please don’t think I’m mad at Tracy or anyone here. I’m not. I’m very sad… but not mad.
I was honestly just trying to point out some of the talking past each other that’s been going on, not trying to criticize people for arguing or fighting. I hope you didn’t take this that way. (((DJ)))
I think it’s good that we’re all discussing this. I’m curious: what do you think it would take to get people to be invested in ending this war, if not a draft?
I’m sorry that your nephew is in Iraq, and hope he returns safely.
Whew (((CabinGirl))) glad you didn’t think I was fighting. I’m truly just hear to try to make sense of what it is I need to do. It’s really a major personal growth journey this whole thing. You don’t want to do stuff wrong.. and you want to put as much energy in to the thing that would count the most… and being a newbie to it all… I look to others for experience and insight. But… that doesn’t mean I’m a doormat either. I have experience and some insight, too. 🙂
I just have been trying super hard to not get into the middle of these discussions that seem to tear people apart.
As to the draft. Yes I think it would cause alarm in the rightwing community, this is why they have screamed against it the loudest, they don’t want to sacrifice their own… blah blah
And also it would make people be “political” minded. So many aren’t even aware of any of this shit.
but… you don’t wake people up by throwing their bed out the window. You continually keep setting the alarm and hollering from the kitchen.
the draft would only be justifiable if it was EQUAL. and I doubt that could ever happen. Plus we are more than “consumers” or “cannon fodder”…
I think we need more education in this country. More civil rights classes, true history courses… I think we need a better idea of what “success” is to humankind. It sure isn’t money that makes a person a success. I dunno, CabinGirl, I’m just out here in the deep end trying to see how long I can hold my breath 🙂
He was happy to go. In fact he thinks I’m a traitor to this country. My in laws call me a radical.
He can’t see why I’m not happy for him because he (to paraphrase) has a chance to kill as many as those (expletives) and future (expletives) as he can.
Yes, my nephew was anxious to be able to shoot men, women and children because they “are the terrorists”. I don’t think he’ll question any order to commit a crime.
And this is someone who was headed for nursing school… a job about caring for others…
No, I don’t know where he is or how he is doing. The “family” doesn’t call us anymore. Only my husband can call. I fear that one day if we are told he is killed… that somehow I will be hated even more by them.
you, not only for myself, but I will be presumptuous enough to thank you on behalf of all the victims, the survivors of US activities in its various crusade theatres, the various land masses it considers its own, for all you do to communicate the simple, powerful and profound message of peace.
Peace is the opposite of money, in the “pragmatic universe,” but in the universal human universe of mothers and fathers and children and brothers and sisters, the unchanging universe of love between human beings, peace is both mother and child of human rights, peace is everything.
And to stand for peace, to march and openly call for peace, within the cultural context of the capital of money, as you do, requires a kind of courage that is perhaps best illustrated by the few people who do it.
You are one of those people, Janet, and today, when on another blog, someone posted the image below, referring to it as iconic, I thought of you, an icon in your own right, at least to this grizzled old terrorist 🙂
Here’s your All Purpose Ductape Fatwa blogpost/diary:
Americans are evil.
In case you missed it the first 4,018 times:
Americans are evil.
One more time, in case anybody missed it:
AMERICANS ARE EVIL.
Ok, now I need everybody to copy down that sentence, “Americans are evil.” Tape it on the wall by your computer monitor. Any time you see a diary by DuctapeFatwa, or a comment by him, save yourself a ton of time and read the sentence instead.
Hey, I’m here to help–if I can help you save valuable reading time, then I’ve done my good deed for the day.
And remember: AMERICANS ARE EVIL. If you see one on the street, do NOT approach him/her. Run to the nearest safe place and hide until the American has passed by. DO NOT SHOW FEAR. Americans may not have a soul, but they do have a brutish animal instinct and they smell fear! If you live in a place where there are a lot of Americans, stay indoors with your curtains drawn and your doors locked. AMERICANS ARE EVIL and if you come into contact with one, you, too, may be tainted by them. Do NOT attempt to sort out “good” Americans from “bad” Americans because the good Americans are so few in number that you could put them all in a rowboat and still have room for a picnic lunch.
p.s.–You may not want to trust what has just been written, because I wrote it, and I’m an American. And
that means I’m evil.
(p.s.s.–Did you know if you assign numbers to the letters that spell “United States” and then add them up, they equal “666”? That’s the sign of the anti-Christ! The number of the Beast! Ok, actually the numbers only total “661”, but I rounded up. Evil!)
To just let this photo stand as what it was, a tribute to Damnit Janet. Perhaps too simple when one is caught up in the throes of nationalistic fervor.
I (of course being the anti-American, pinko commie, socialist, feminist, peace believing leftist that I am) am at a loss to see what about this photo or the post is so offensive as to set off what is essentially the “USA! USA!” chant.
Is it because it’s a tribute to working for peace? Or to putting people above profits? Both sacrilegious, I know… but still, one tiny effort, in the midst of militarism, at praising such couldn’t possibly be seen as such a threat. Although she is indeed very passionate, caring, inspiring and impressive, and pink and thus might be more frightening than usual to some.
I suppose it is possible that some could look at that photo and see not someone standing courageously, no doubt gripped by stomach churning fear as Janet sometimes is when she goes to protests, against powerful forces, but instead see some fool daring to stand in the way of the nationalistic state.
Whichever, I’m sad that you decided that the best thing to do with such a tribute was to step all over it.
Yikes. I’m no icon and I don’t want to be… ever LOL.
I’ve been pouring over some archives of what happened here in Portland when Bush arrived. Riot police, womam with a baby pepper sprayed… it was truly an ugly scene.
It’s odd… the more I try to get involved with the peace community, the more I feel like … I dunno… a criminal. I have to check my car for flattened tires, nasty notes on my windshield. Why? because of a bumpersticker that reads CodePink Women for Peace. This causes many to flip me off, scream at me even if their window is closed. One guy looked like he was about to crawl out the passenger car window as he made extremely rude gestures as the car passed me.
I had nothing that said anything anti-American or anti-military or even anti-Bush. (I had to finaly remove the IMPEACH sticker because my children don’t need to hear people screaming at me while we find a parking spot..)
But one thing I am not.. is brave or special. I’m just one person who is trying to make some sense out of this. But really, none of it does. I try to find what message am I truly trying to make… because we always get blasted for having too many messages… but the messages isn’t to any media or military man or person around the globe. It’s really to myself and my kids. We must learn how to live in peace, which means we must learn how to live and let others live with dignity, diversity and … whatever it takes to live, love, learn and laugh.
I keep hearing “Imagine” and maybe I’m a stupid girl with a stupid hope… Yes war and fear is so profitable and but that only makes peace so much more priceless.
It’s HARD trying to rethink and re-live in a way of peace. I’m not perfect. I’m making mass mistakes because I think it’s so ingrained in us to do the easy things, to take the road more traveled. There are almost too many issues to take on and one wants to just bag it all in. And my g-d.. the judging and the criticizing within… it’s truly like herding cats sometimes. Or when you realize one aspect of how to live on this planet in a more sustainable, peaceful manner you REALIZE that there is more to re-do and re-learn… LOL (Plus I’m still eating meat! LOL) okay it’s co-op, non-toxic meat.. .but there are some circles within who would say I’m not really in the Peace movement. Yikes.
Tanks in the road? It might get to that.. but the biggest barrier in my road right now is seeing incredible people fight. The fighting from within. Seeing the energy just go “poof”. The peace movement is made of many voices, many messages, many actions and ideas. I truly beleive that the peace movement needs to use the diversity and remember the dignity.
Yes, America, my country, my government, is good and great. But yes.. it’s also bad.
Due to recent technological advances, your hope, and by extension you and your dedication to that hope, have been elevated from realms of sentiment or even morality to a pragmatism more pragmatic than today’s pragmatists recognize.
Without continuation of human life on earth, the future of profit, of commerce itself, business itself, is somewhat bleak.
On another blog, the blogger blogged, What One unnatural condition would you change? My answer: If I had a magic wand, I would start with human rights, because if the human rights of every human are respected, just about everything else falls into place. Into peace.
Benito Juarez said, Respeto al derecho ajeno es la paz. (Respect for the rights of others is peace).
You compare it to herding cats, it reminds me sometimes of a gaggle of small children running wild around a room, overturning things, scribbling on the walls, pulling down the draperies.
What is the way to return order to the room? The children must cease what they are doing.
Cease aggression and disarm.
Humans like to make simple things complicated. We see this especially in theology. Oh wait. I do not discuss theology on the internets, and never without good Burgundy and – never mind.
When the tanks arrive on your street, Janet, maybe you will stand in front of them, like the Martyr Rachel Corrie, but I hope that you will not. I hope that you will slip underneath that tank, let the air out of the tires, put sugar in the place it will be least helpful, quickly change your clothes and hair, and appear on the other side of the street entirely unrecognizable as anyone who was on the previous side, contentedly licking an ice cream cone.
Courage, like ice cream, comes in all flavors, and sizes, and whatever flavor yours turns out to be, we know it is SuperSize. 🙂
May all applicable deities, their affliliates and selected partners who may have products and services of interest to you bless you!
Thank you my friend. I have missed our chats. I think of you often marching with a baby in you arms…
Recently my daughter has asked about world war 3 and about our military… questions I have no answer for really.
Diversity without division. As well as respecting others… that is peace.
Cease the agression, yes. It’s hard to not get filled with hate. I do, I hate Bush and I hate this “war”. I hate the apathy. … but maybe it’s anger(?) Who knows… But it’s hard to walk the talk, I try though but there are times I stumble. I’m human. 🙂
One thing that I have figured out in all this “discussion” of late is that I can support the troops in the fashion I have been doing, without feeling like I’m being untrue to humanity and decency. Without being untrue to myself or my children. I support the troops by wanting them brought home NOW. I want to support the troops by making it so they never have to be killed or kill.
Support the troops by giving them something good to do. Dismantle the war machine. I don’t think that makes me anti-military… the whole idea of supporting arson in order to say you support fire fighters..
I’m not anti-anything really.. I think I’m trying to be pro-humanity.
How seldom we see them even mentioned. What an infrequent and miserly recognition is given to their sacrifice, their commitment to their courageous defense not only of their nation, but of their humanity, and our own, whether we are Americans or not.
While I am an unashamed lover of, yearner and striver for non-violent resolution of conflict, and I believe, more than believe, I know, that there is no conflict that our species is not capable of resolving without violence, at the same time, I recognize that people have the right, even the responsibility, to defend their loved ones, and even themselves, from immediate and unmistakable harm, such as the type we see in invasions, whether this means a common criminal, your own countryman, entering your home with a gun in hand, or an invasion of one’s homeland by many criminals, from wherever they may come, entering your home, your street, your town, your nation, armed and with the clear intent to do harm.
In such a case, we have no choice but to take up whatever we may have, and do our best to defend our loved ones, ourselves, our homes.
In the matter of those who take up arms in aggression, I am not able to dehumanize them by dismissing them as helpless moral cripples who do not know right from wrong, who are so simple-minded that they will believe anything, mindless automatons who have no free will, that they are the products of a culture so morally bankrupt, so bereft of social fabric, that to expect them to behave as humans is unrealistic and insensitive.
They have, in my opinion, the same personal moral responsibility as you or I, or those troops that could use some support. They are products of that same society, hearers of those same lies, and possessed of the same free will, the same capacity for personal choice as any other.
I make exception for those who are truly living with mental illness, emotional or developmental disorders, whose capacity to make rational judgments, moral or otherwise is either lacking or impaired. Those individuals should not be held responsible for their actions, and they have no place in any armed force, and I have been saddened and sickened to hear of those very people being singled out and “recruited” as well as allowed to continue to be in the possession of or proximity to weapons.
Regardless of the challenges and/or illnesses with which they live, these men and woman are also human, and they should be accorded the human right of a caring, nurturing environment, treatment for illness, and help to attain their full capacity in the case of developmental disorders. To place or keep them in any armed force, even a legitimate defensive force that is not committing any crimes, even a small town police force, is an atrocity unto itself, and the moral responsibility for same lies with those who place or keep them there, and upon a society that permits such an entity to exist.
On another blog, a very interesting discussion has sprung up, (props to Miss Nanette 🙂 ) of how easily we have come to accept the unnatural as natural, how we do not question why there is a need for organizations dedicated to respect and recognition of human rights, in a world, in an age, when no one goes hungry save for the will and desire of another human being that it should be so, why is it that we accept inhumanity as the expected condition and behavior of humans, and the perpetual need for organizations to beg and plead for these things, that the hungry be fed, that our brothers not be tortured, our women not raped?
While the species unquestionably has the capacity, even a tendency, a base urge, for violence, in all these millions of years, are we to conform ourselves to the belief that violence and atrocity are the primary characteristic of our species, and refraining from it the anomaly?
Is such a notion one of sociology, or those who profit from violence between one man and another, one tribe, one nation, and another, or within itself?
If I may quote from a recent rant:
A capacity for, the occasional urge to violence, does not mean that violence constitutes the nature of man, and when we accept this as absolute truth, when we “weaponize” it, when we claim it as justification for dehumanizing our brother, “troop” or not, we are violating our own human rights, and those of all humans.
We are, as a species, better than that, though certain rich men may not be.
You bet! I rarely see support for them in fact I’ve seen more violence and hatred at those events, fund raisers and vigils than anything in my life.
Speaking of Lt. Watada it makes me sick that he and others are going to be incarcerated and yet we have whole units assisting in the rapes of little girls in Iraq.
As to defense. My thoughts on that have changed to. I won’t harm someone over a car or my home. If they need it that badly they can have it. I will protect my children and but I will try everything to do it with words first rather than weapons. Actually I don’t have any weapons except for Judo/Jujistu. I’m still dealing with this one though… I can’t for sure say how I’d react or resort to if it happened. But I sure wouldn’t want a damn parade or a badge for hurting or killing someone in the line of defending anything.
Killing for anything… just creates more killing.
Thanks for the links. I was honored to have met Watada and Jeff Patterson. Mejia writes in CodePink’s Stop the next war” Effective Responses to violence and terrorism.
My is signed by Medea Benjamin to me and Danni. “may we build a world of peace and love” it reads.
but even with a draft, it took many years and 10’s of thousands of deaths before we got out.
People always buy their way out, but the draft does bring it home to a lot of people for whom it’s only the nightly news
Tracy,
There are “people out there” trying to stop the war; their inability to do so is largely due to people who believe and who behave exactly like you.
You want to stop the war? Help them, then. Help them instead of talking about how no one has any choice in this: it’s either do this filthy killing job or go to prison.
Help them instead of burying yourself in your denial about the monstrosity which the United States–and its people –have allowed themselves to become.
We’re nothing like the Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers would be risking their lives to destroy what are the United States of today, and to replace it with something that better resembles a democracy.
As long as you remain lost in the idea that we’re still a freedom-loving people, fair, decent, honorable, that we are devoted to justice and freedom in principle rather than merely for our selfish purposes, then you are doing Bush and Cheney’s work for them.
As long as you remain lost in the idea that we’re still a freedom-loving people, fair, decent, honorable, that we are devoted to justice and freedom in principle rather than merely for our selfish purposes, then you are doing Bush and Cheney’s work for them.
I think people everywhere are basically freedom-loving, fair, decent, and honorable, etc. It’s neither exclusive to Americans nor is it something we lack. If you walk out your front door and just start talking to people you will find at least every other person you talk to is a treasure (if you look in the right way). The real mystery is why, in a nation filled with decent people, do we let people who aren’t decent get away with so much crap.
my cheap answer is that we confuse ourselves into thinking that horrible ideas are good ideas, we let fear guide us into reacting instead of acting positively, we don’t think at all and let others do our work, and since we are all basically innocent..some might say naive.. we let people who are unbalanced but driven run our lives for us.
At any rate, I don’t think the real answers lay in claiming that Americans (or anyone else) are merely selfish. Selfishness may be a part of it but it’s too easy to assume it lay behind the real causes.
What?!?
“Selfishness may be a part of it but it’s too easy to assume it lay behind the real causes.”
No, it’s anything but “easy”. Haven’t you been paying attention?
No one said selfishness is the sole motive; it’s a major one but there are other very important contributing factors.
“The real mystery is why, in a nation filled with decent people, do we let people who aren’t decent get away with so much crap.”
That isn’t such a “mystery“. All it takes is very clever people who are willing and able to promote
confusion:
* “…we confuse ourselves into thinking that horrible ideas are good ideas…”
fear:
* “…we let fear guide us…”
and authority:
* “…we let people who are unbalanced but driven run our lives for us.”
When they do this, the results are predictably absurd:
* “I think people everywhere are basically freedom-loving, fair, decent, and honorable, etc.”
Unfortunately, they’re not. But nothing helps them so much as for people to fail to understand that they are not.
I have a relative in this war. And my heart is with anyone who does. But it simply wasn’t true that families supported ending the Vietnam war because family members were in it. Some did, and a lot didn’t.
The critique of the war is the key, not who is involved. Do people believe the war is wrong, strongly enough to overcome their patriotic feelings about defending their country, whether or not that’s really what’s happening?
I’m very sure that having someone in the war makes it personally more important to end it, if you believe it should end, rather than be fought until “victory.” But too many parents didn’t come to that conclusion until they lost their children.
The polls tell us that two-thirds of Americans don’t support this war. Giving these armchair warmongers control over more lives is not the answer to anything. People around here have been warning that BushCheney want to increase their power, and use the military in Iran and in “emergencies” in America. The last time we had a draft, draftees were fighting to free up National Guard to control protestors. It’s not going to work.
I think that Booman would argue that, with mandatory service, there would be no need for anyone to serve this regime, because we wouldn’t have a regime like this, at least where military policy is concerned.
Would i be alright in saying that a draft may not be a bad thing – after we’re out of Iraq first? I have no desire to give our current administration any more human lives to play with.
I am generally a pacifist and I don’t believe in spending that much effort in gearing up for war at all but hopefully we can all agree to the above.
This is a difficult subject but one that addresses a basic problem in our country. There are lots of good reasons to support it as well.
Just off the cuff, for example:
-Increased sense of collective action, ability.
-Increased exposure to people of different social origins.
-Increased ability of federal government to address social concerns such as urban or rural infrastructural renewal.
-Possibly could be set up so that children of very wealthy would have to participate (always tricky, though..)
-Would provide to participants a time where they would be exposed to types of work that otherwise they would not, with benefits in terms of their ability to make life decisions based on real experience rather than imagined concepts or family pressures.
The military end of things is kind of counter-intuitive to a peacenik, but believe it or not, a familiarity with military procedures and values would increase citizens’ ability to interpret and relate to current events. The fact that the average (and better off!) householders will know that their children or neices and nephews or those of their neighbors will be affected will also provide a serious incentive to keep gov’t policy makers in check.
As to the Isreal ?, yes, they do have mandatory service, as does France and Switzerland and many other European nations. Because the IDF is crazy and there is mandatory service does NOT automatically imply that mandatory service leads to a crazy military.
In this case, what Booman points out about values is actually of very great importance. Right now the Officer Corps of our all volunteer armed forces has become increasingly “Born Again” Christian and right wing. We in the civilian population rarely see the reality of this, and unless you take special notice of the news stories detailing discrimination lawsuits at the AF Academy you might neveer know at all.
For those who still have doubts about this, research what happened a few years ago when John Conyers (D-Mich) proposed reinstating the draft. Check out who argued against it. Sure, other liberals were made uncomfortable, but the “cultural conservatives” realized that something they have come to consider their special province (and a big source of cred in the wider national awareness) was being threatened.
We might not want to impose on people, but considering that we have become more and more a country of unconsciously Ayn Randian values, it seems more and more a step that would strengthen collective identity.
I agree.
Think about your high school…the jocks, the punks, the nerds, the deadheads, the goths, the preps, the disabled, and so on.
Only a few of them would opt for military service, active or reserve. Many would opt to help out with public works, public education, the peace corp, border patrol, who knows?
But one thing would be obvious. Dan Quayle is going to serve somewhere.
We thought getting rid of mandatory service would DE-militarize our society. It’s had the opposite effect. Liberals that want total freedom from any obligation to the government? I sympathize, believe me. I would have resented it. I am a person of my generation. But if you want to know why there are no butts in the streets today? It’s because no one is paying for this war in any tangible way, except the volunteer military. That’s wrong, and it would not be possible with mandatory service.
It was the draft that ended Vietnam. We took the wrong lesson from that. The draft kept us grounded and kept a check on the military.
The draft did not end Vietnam.
What ended Vietnam was defeat on the battlefield.
When President Nixon was elected, it was with a promise to gradually withdraw from Vietnam. A land war in Asia is unwinnable and Nixon knew it.
The draft made Vietnam possible, because the ability to conscript mass numbers of troops made it possible for President Johnson to undertake a massive escalation of the war effort in Vietnam. If there’d been an all-volunteer army, Johnson would have been out of luck. The instrument of the draft enabled Johnson to field 400,000 troops in Vietnam; with an all-volunteer army, Bush has only been able to field about 150,000. If Bush had 400,000 troops at his disposal, we’d be in Iran and Syria right now. A total of 2,590,000 soldiers served in the Vietnamese conflict–Bush could never get that large an all-volunteer army, but imagine if he COULD draft troops.
What history books have you been reading?
(Also, the massacre at My Lai was carried out largely by draftees–so there goes the theory that draftees are going to be less prone to war crimes, if that’s what anybody was thinking.)
There was a troop shortage in 1968. Know what the Selective Service did? That’s right, it held a draft lottery that enabled the war effort to get all the warm bodies it needed:
Booman, you also have committed a major logical error in reasoning that a draftee army would make us less likely to go to war.
The draft did not demonstrably turn public opinion against the Vietnam War. A majority of the public didn’t turn against the Vietnam War until after the Tet Offensive in 1968. Over 32,000 American soldiers were dead by the time public opinion turned against the Vietnam war effort. By contrast, even though we have an all-volunteer army, a majority of the American public have now turned against the Iraq War, even though we are only 3 years into it and have taken just over 2,500 combat deaths.
You can make many arguements for national service, but making the nation less likely to go to war, or to be able to prosecute a war, is NOT one of them. The United States invaded and occupied Iraq because its political system is broken, not because it has an all-volunteer army.
your argument has a valid structure, but it is based on anachronisms in my opinion.
This war would have not be opposed as strongly as it has been without Vietnam an object lesson. And it is not being opposed with any strength or depth BECAUSE there is no draft.
Imagine if Bush had called for a draft after 9/11.
12 September 2001, Bush calls for Congress to pass a new conscription law.
He would have gotten it.
That would have gotten Bush all the troops he needed for Iraq, Iran, Syria, and any other damn place he wanted to invade and occupy.
A military draft is Bush’s wet dream. And with all those troops, Bush could have blitzkrieged through the Arabian Peninsula and we’d be in even deeper shit than we are now.
Sure, eventually people would turn against the war…but the Iraq War is failing because we don’t have enough troops. If we had 400,000 troops in country, Iraq’d be a whole different story. 400,000 troops is 2.67 times the number of troops we have there right now.
267% more troops means Bush could have crushed the Iraqi resistance fighters with overwhelming force.
267% more troops means the Iraq occupation would be a success in relative terms and thus, the American people (who supported the war for the first couple of years) would STILL be supporting it.
That’s my point. A draft makes a larger military possible. A draft makes it more likely that the imperialists will be successful in their schemes. Bush would give up his cocaine stash (well, not all of it) to get the draft.
I don’t expect to put out a controversial idea and have people agree with it. All I ask is that you weigh the pros and cons.
There are a lot of pros. Think about them. In the end, you might consider that that are more cons. But it warrants consideration.
What, you think I came up with those arguments in five minutes? Been pondering this issue since Gulf War I, when it was quite clear we had an insufficient number of troops to knock back Saddam on our own (yes, it’s true…if not for the Brits and their Challenger tanks, we’d have been in some deep trouble against the Republican Guard at one point). And yes, that’s the way they teach it at West Point–without Poppy’s international coalition, we’d have been in deep doo-doo. As we are, in fact, now in deep doo-doo in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Not only that, but at the tail end of my military service, which coincided with the first two years of Clinton’s presidency, I became increasingly concerned about the Republicanization of the military. There were openly disrespectful and disobedient officers during Clinton’s presidency, from the junior grades on up, and if Clinton had any stones at all, he would have court-martialed half a dozen of them to make an example of them.
I’ve read books on this issue, talked with professors at military colleges, and kicked the idea around with other vets, too. Most of us who came up in the all-volunteer military agreed that we wouldn’t have wanted to command a bunch of disgruntled draftees.
Today’s military is different, you know, from the one that fought the Vietnam War. I don’t mean just the people, I mean the skills required. You need computer skills, you need prolonged training on high-tech weapons systems. It’s a job for professional soldiers, not a bunch of short-timers.
as i said, a mandatory conscription is not efficient. I know that.
I’ve frequently criticized Booman’s arguments on similar issues, but for what it’s worth, here I think he’s correct. He’s not talking about universal mandatory military service–he’s talking about universal mandatory service. I have always thought that was a necessary idea. It is certainly common in many or most other nations. It’s not Starship Troopers. It’s common sacrifice.
There was a lot of lip service paid to this idea during the early years of the Clinton administration, if I remember correctly. What was it called? “AmericaCorps?” Is that still cooking in some small measure?
My plan: everybody gets a free education, as far as they can go; and everybody gets lifetime free health care; and everybody spends four consecutive years at some time between ages 18 and 30 serving the country. EVERYBODY.
…and who gets to change bedpans at the old folks’ home?
If I were a young man, eligible for this plan, I’d choose changing bedpans at the old folks’ home. I’ll bet almost everybody else, would.
So you still have a troop shortage. NOW what?
No amount of troops would have made this war successful. A draft would have made people quicker to turn against the war when it started going south.
I think you would have a hard time proving that. Both wars, the Vietnam and Iraq war, have negative public opinion.
This war may not be quite as unpopular but if anything I think it’s the lack of ‘on the ground’ press coverage that we see every night. In Vietnam we saw flag covered coffins coming back in steady streams. That was the reason why the pentagon refused to let the press cover that for this war.
I don’t know if they still have a muzzle on showing them btu I do know that this admin has a history of effectively silencing press coverage of certain events.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, Boo. I think yours is a valid opinion but i can’t see it as provable.
…the US was defeated militarily in Vietnam, despite the fact that the US never “lost” a battle, here’s how:
The US suffered over 58,000 combat deaths in Vietnam. (Actually, there’s new evidence that the combat deaths were drastically undercounted, and there may have been close to 80,000 combat deaths).
But even worse than that, the US suffered over 350,000 battlefield casualties (injuries not resulting in death) in Vietnam. Vietnam was a meat grinder of young men, and the US Army and Marine Corps were breaking apart under the strain of such a high casualty rate.
2,590,000 US service personnel served in the Vietnam War from start to finish. That means that 13.5% of those serving were wounded.
The Vietnamese suffered over 2 million dead, but they just kept coming.
Jim McDermott and other progressives are authors of a Congressional bill for the draft for the reasons Booman espouses.
If EVERYONE has to go, it’s no longer “cheap” in human terms to fight a war.
I think defeat AND public outrage at home led to the end of the war.
But not everybody has to go. Look at all the deferments that Cheney had. Each one of those my own father could have had. But he didn’t he went.
A draft would wake everyone up…that’s for sure… but it wouldn’t equal out the bloodbath.
But thanks for the food for thought. I always enjoyed your views and posts.
…World War I.
World War II.
Korean War (my Dad’s war).
Vietnam War.
You misunderestimate the strength of the propaganda machine. You can ALWAYS whip up some cause that we means we just HAVE to fight.
Wars are always popular in the beginning, you know.
It’s a few years in that they become unpopular. Did you know there were protests against World War II?
My central point remains: giving the President and the Congress the ability to draft masses of young people into the military makes war more likely, not less. In the long run, it MIGHT make resistance deeper and more widespread, but by then, a whole bunch of draftees will be dead.
You’re approaching the problem of unnecessary wars with the wrong solution. The solution isn’t to tamper with the military, it’s to fix the political system. We could start with the Democratic Party actually acting like an opposition party and throwing a monkey wrench in the works of the war machine BEFORE the President sent the troops to Iraq. And it’d be nice to have a mainstream media that asked some hard questions BEFORE the invasion, such as, “Why the hell are we invading Iraq?”
I’m just not convinced that a draft will make things better and I am convinced that in some ways, it will make things worse.
along with BooMan’s hypothesis.
In our conversations with friends, we have said many times that a draft would wake up the country, but as pointed out, it would provide a lot of soldiers. We may now be in a “starve the beast” situation, in that we don’t have enough troops for more adventures. I think that’s good. The social aspects of an all volunteer army are not good.
is that the gap between rich and poor is a lot wider.
So even if we accept, just for the sake of argument, the notions that 1) US discontinued activities in VietNam because people were in the streets, and 2) that those people in the streets because their relatives and friends were being drafted
today would be very different. The underclass would be dramatically over-represented in the “draftees” who lacked the resources to avoid being sent into the theatres, and the social divides, even though US in the 1960s had just ended legal apartheid, are more marked and more extreme than then.
In the 60s, the baby boom, the largest chunk of the population, was concerned also about poverty in much larger numbers, and much more actively, than their kids are, even than they are, today in their middle age.
Even as the underclass grows, the political-social zeitgeist of the US mainstream, those political classes that would presumably form the engine for getting those people in the streets, is less and less sympathetic to the plight of the poor.
In fact, about the only possible positive about BooMan’s argument is that it might get the underclass into the streets – and I don’t think any of the political parties – or the warlords themselves – would want that!
Thanks, DJ. And I’m not a fan of the idea of the draft, but I can understand the argument, and why some of the most progressive are making it. But yes – it wouldn’t really work because the people who need to be tapped won’t go, one way or another. It’s a very unfair world, any way we slice it. And I do think things need to get a lot worse before they can get better, because most people are still relatively comfortable, even as their wages, in purchasing terms, are shrinking….
I was thinking that last night. I drove to a hockey game crying. I was late because I didn’t want to leave this discussion… I felt like… well I felt horrible… but I realized something.
I was driving to a hockey game… where others were. They were laughing. Drinking. No one mentioned the war/wars. No one mentioned the troops.
It’s as if there are two different realities.
It’s like living in an alcoholics home… no one wants to dare mention anything or make waves… just pretend nothing’s happening. My country is completely dysfunctional it seems.
The only real rage or anger I see about this “war” is when there are peaceful people out in the street trying to raise some level of awareness.. that’s when you’ll hear about the war. Is when others are spitting on you for not supporting it and for not just going about your life.
I mentioned briefly to my spouse the idea of a draft as a way of waking people up. He remembers the draft from Viet Nam. He was too young. But he saw his brothers friends go off. He saw some return. He still remembers the unfairness of the draft. If there was any good from Viet Nam… it was that it killed any support for a draft.
My kids may or may not go to college… but over my dead body that they be sent packing to “serve” some government.
Janet-
As terribly as the government has been behaving, it is still yourgovernment. And it is your country. And you and me and your kids all have a responsibility to this country. You are doing your best to carry out that responsibility. Others are running for office to try to carry our their responsibility. Someday, this country might actually face a real grave and gathering threat and we will all have our roles to play in addressing that threat.
As alienated as you feel from the government and the military, that is a large part of why I am calling for a compulsory service initiative.
First, the military is already people by the underclass. A CSI will actually improve the situation, as it will invite a more diverse armed forces.
Take a poor kid in the ghetto. Right now he may need to join the army to find a way out. Under s CSI, he could get the same benefits and training without learning to be a killer.
My biggest concern about a CSI is that it is compulsory. I have a strong libertarian streak, which you can see when it comes to domestic surveillance. But, I think the upside outweighs the downside.
The upside is that we will offer training to every person that fails to get it right now in our failing schools. That we will diversify and redemocratize the military, that we will make it more painful to use the military unless it is truly needed, and that we can bridge some of the divide in the country. I see plenty of faults with the left in this country that are being disguised by the atrocious way the right is doing things.
Thanks Booman, we won’t change minds in a day via one thread. This will take much discussion.
Yes, this is my country but my government is not mine. It’s changed – drastically. So many of us are trying to get it back in our own ways.
But I fear that my views on the military have changed drastically. I see it as a war machine now. I think the best line of defense… is not a military. I’ve heard over and over how more and more refugee camps are being trained and cared for by terrorists groups because America refuses aid. A child doesn’t care who is giving him food, shelter, an education.. he only cares that he is being cared for. Right now… that is not the USA.
The cost of this war would have made refugee tent cities into actual towns, with clinics and schools and food and water. That’s how you stop wars and violence and terrorism. With food, shelter and water. With peace.
Peace doesn’t come at the end of a gun. I no longer can believe that a gun or a missile will protect me. Being a good neighbor to the rest of the planet might protect me as well as the rest of the people living on it.
Call me silly call me gullible… but I think feeding people is far more better than shooting them.
Let’s make teachers, doctors, instead of soldiers.
Please don’t think I’m arguing with you or anyone here. My words sometimes fail me and there just aren’t the personal nuances to show that I’m here to learn. But… I’m also here to share. And I think that it would be wonderful if people could work things out rather than soldiers.
Instead of making everyone pick up a gun, let’s try asking that they put them down.
Personally, I think a CSI would be a great way to boost America’s role in providing food and comfort to refugees around the world.
The idea is not to expand the military, but to expand a whole host of goverment efforts, both domestic and international, while diversifying the military and making America reembrace the idea of service to the nation.
Then how about expanding the Peace Corps? Totally take the military machine out of it.
I think mostly what we need are “OPTIONS” there aren’t many for our kids or for us nowadays. And it’s hard to go out and try to make your own. I know many artists who plug away at trying to make a small living while making things, beautiful things – but they haven’t any isnurance. For many education is not an option, hell high school is falling out now because so many kids are having to go to work to help their parents out.
The land of opportunity… what happened to that?
I don’t think we need mandatory service… we need more options in America. Instead, we just are exhisting to pay bills. That sucks.
Also let’s make education and healthcare not luxuries but rights. Let’s bring back manufacturing and creation to the States.
I’m trying hard to find a job that is progressive. One that helps the community, the planet, raise awareness. I’ts hard to find.
Just my two cents plus… tax and hopefully maybe a little more left over for the next dude 🙂
I’d like to find a nice progressive non-profit that needs a full-time Linux system administrator, preferably within about a half mile from my house so I can walk to work, and oh while we’re taking an excursion to Fantasyland it should pay $100,000 a year.
Actually if I could find such a job I would take a lot less money than I’m used to, just because the commute would be a lot easier. But I’ll probably end up working for some commercial software outfit again.
I just read in the Oregonian of a man who is an engineer but he takes a cut in hours so he can be a “storyteller” to children. Seems he plays guitar or banjo and makes up stories.
Made me think of you and how much better off this place might be if people were able to find a place in this world doing what they do best.
I’m not sure it’s a fantasy… when you take the money out of it.. it does seem possible…
Well, lemme tell ya. If money were out of the equation, I would love to do something like that. I live two blocks from a library that does story time for kids. I have a friend who plays guitar, he’s recently retired, and if I had my druthers we’d get a couple of like-minded souls, put a jug band together and go off and play corny songs and just have a good time on a more or less full time basis. I’d spread peace, love and Linux around.
Unfortunately I’m going to have to work for The Man as long as I’m paying rent and have a granddaughter to raise. *sigh*
Imagine 🙂 my dear friend… imagine.
When I was little and would go hiking in the national forests… there were trails and bridges with “CCC” on it some type of Corps if I recall. Park service.
Nowadays I think alot of that is done by “chain gangs” isn’t it?
There just seemed to be alot more jobs with good benefits where people actually DID stuff or CREATED things. I don’t see much of that anymore.
it’s really different listening to kids nowadays talking about “what they want to be/or do” when they grow up. They don’t talk about jobs… or skills… they speak of how they will earn money to pay bills.
My friend worried over the fact that her bright, brilliant child was probably going to grow up to be an artist… And this to her was upsetting because there’d be no work for him. Which is so wrong.
Our children… they don’t even try to live their dreams anymore do they?
It’s tough. My poor son (the one going through the nasty split with his ex) is having to work at a job that pays squat to keep him and his kids’ heads above water while he lives with his aunt and they try to get things straightened out. There’s really not much chance for anything better given the way things are going; as the old saying goes, when you’re up to your ass in alligators it’s hard to remember that your primary objective was to drain the swamp.
Personally I wish more people would see the old Kaufman and Hart play, You Can’t Take It With You. Grandpa Vanderhof’s philosophy hit me like a ton of bricks the first time I met up with the play, and I wish more people would heed it. It’s hard to sum up in a couple of sentences, but Grandpa was on his way up to his office in Wall Street one day about thirty-five years before the start of the play and realized that he had more than enough money, he couldn’t take it with him, and he didn’t really enjoy his work, so he turned around and never went back to the office again. At the climax of the play he’s speaking to a Republican type (Mr. Kirby) who he suspects is similarly unenamored of Wall Street, but hasn’t managed to convince himself yet, just after Kirby’s son Tony has decided to quit the family firm:
Go see the play if you ever get a chance. Frank Capra directed a version of it that starred Lionel Barrymore and Jimmy Stewart, but it isn’t quite as good as the stage play, in my humble opinion.
” yes, they do have mandatory service, as does France and Switzerland and many other European nations.”…
Just a note to bring you up-to-date:
France has ended its mandatory military service–which permitted much-used alternatives to direct military service, such as public-service duty in humanitarian operations, for example; the change came about in the last two years or so. It is now fully phased out and an all-volunteer military.
However, one candidate for the Parti Socialist’s presidential nomination, Ségolène Royal, has been advocating a form of “universal national service” modelled on boot camp training followed by a stint of some sort of national service. No one yet knows how much support that shall draw.
…if it has an Elite Clause.
The Elite Clause of the new law states:
All eligible sons and daughters of the President, Vice-President, Senators, and Representatives will be automatically selected for mandatory service.
My son’s not going to do any mandatory service for this country unless Bush’s kids, nieces, and nephews, not to mention Cheney’s, et al, do it as well. In fact, they will be guaranteed to be chosen.
Is that unfair to Jenna and Barbara Bush? Aw, cry me a river.
that goes without saying.
They would not be obligated to go into specific branch, but a branch. And no deferments.
Yeah and what are the chances that’s going to happen?
Same chances as me dancing lead in “Swan Lake” with the Bolshoi Ballet.
Hell, I don’t even own a pink leotard.
to start adding to the debate, and since the volunteer forces idea has failed so badly I think that in the end it stands a chance of actually happening. When the total loss within the volunteer forces is realized also we may have no choice.
I can solve the recruitment crisis in the all-volunteer army tomorrow.
Getting us involved in horror? Your ideas are very swell, but still leaves the poor doing the bidding of the elite officials and nobody caring what happens to them in the short term or even caring enough to relate to anything that they may be going through and the whole time they have no civil rights….signed those away to serve.
Which President got us into a batshit crazy major war we couldn’t handle?
Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton…frm 1975 to 2000, no major wars (other than Gulf War I, and that was in defense of Kuwait, had a very limited purpose, and all the troops came home six months after we kicked Saddams’ butt).
You want to set up a fool-proof system? Hah! You “misunderestimate” the ingenuity of fools!
I like this! Doubt it could ever happen, but one can fantasize. I WISH this could be the case!
‘Ipheginea’ is definitely a Greek play everyone should have to read or see concerning this.
Agamemnon has to sacrifice his daughter before launching the fleet for Troy. He doesn’t want to, but if he doesn’t his men wont go because 1. he has to show his willingness to sacrifice something of himself 2. the God’s demand it.
I don’t like the idea of literally sacrificing kin, daughters OR sons, but the idea of the play is that the leaders must sacrifice also. They can’t just send their troops in with impunity.
If the Boo is suggesting that a draft will in some way create a ” Balance” in the military, all I can say Mighty Boo is — pie in the sky. Politics is a Real game and if you or anyone out there thinks that this admin is willing to give up it force tool- forget it. Alway remember, these pieces of shit are so scared that they will lose control of even one branch of the gov and all that that will mean in terms of subpena power, Nothing and I mean nothing is outside their frame of action. We have already seen what they are capable of doing: Plame,WMD,donut holes- and thats just a mere scratch of the vast surface of their corruption so never forget for one second that the US that we thought we were living in no longer exists. And- it aint gonna get any better.
billjpa
Oh Canada!
I am convinced that the all-volunteer army has been a mistake. I do not for a moment doubt that we have a more effective fighting force because the fighting force is self-selected. But the effectiveness of our fighting force is not the only, or most important factor. We have allowed our military to become culturally isolated from the mass culture. This is a grave danger and should never happen.
I wrote the below paragraph yesterday in response to someone’s post:
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am becoming that a fair draft may be this country’s only way to get enough people to open up their minds to some logic again!
Therefore, I am happy to see Booman write on this very subject today, and I agree with him. Nobody likes war, but if you are going to learn from history, you will learn that humans get in arguments and societies sometimes ARE threatened from without. When such threats happen, it is not a progressive idea to reject any military defense because if outside societies wishing us harm were to win a war of aggression, the ability to even have progressive ideas may be gone.
The danger isn’t that we defend ourselves, but that we become aggressors unnecessarily, as may well be happening unchecked under this volunteer military. I agree with Booman that a major barometer of when military action is warranted versus not has been lost by separating the majority of American voters from the pain of war. After Vietnam and now Iraq, bringing back that strong relationship between the horror-suffering of war to all the American public, may well make it political suicide to take America to a war which is not strongly supported by most voters who will them have a real stake in their vote decision unlike now! I think we had learned this from Vietnam, but the conservatives saw that without a fair draft, they could still have their way with our military apparatus.
If a mandatory FAIR draft was the law of the land immediately post Vietnam through Bush’s election, I can almost guarantee that Bush would NOT have gotten the green light from Congress to go into Iraq so haphazardly and on so little hard evidence!
Never again.
There was never a fair draft in this country, certainly not in Bushamerica in the Vietnam era, and there never will be. There will never be a draft that allows anyone who chooses to opt for non-military service. Not in our lifetimes.
You want to give Cheney and GW Bush an entire generation to kill? Over my dead body.
Draft resistance and draft evasion was a moral imperative in my generation. I don’t want to see any more lives ruined because of the draft. It’s bad enough how kids are getting suckered into the military now with lies and false promises. How can you even think of giving these liars, thieves and killers any more power over lives?
I don’t condemn people in the military. I marched with many Vietnam vets, and veterans of the services in many antiwar, peace and Civil Rights protests. I don’t for a moment believe I am of better character or higher morality. There are many honorable people in the military who do their best. I would say “honorable men and women”, except that a lot of them are children. It’s heartbreaking to see how young the faces are of the children in uniform killed and maimed in Iraq.
I don’t want to see more victims. Enslaving children and sending them to kill others and be killed and maimed is not the answer. I respect your arguments, and those that others make, but this is a very bad idea.
that nobody will protest to stop? How can you be okay with that and not okay with a Draft ruining anybody’s life. Soldiers didn’t volunteer to be abused because they believed that “never again” thing……but it has happened again and nobody gives a shit to fight for them because everybody is so comfortable.
lately for my family’s military service. Where were you in the middle of all that?
There is only one reason that our campuses are not shut down and our streets are not on fire, and that is the lack of any draft or any tax for this war.
And I do not want our campuses shut down and I do not want any fire in our streets. But if an administration is going to learn the lessons of Vietnam, they need to know that conditions withh repeat. They will not repeat with an all volunteer force. Your family will pay and pay and pay and pay, and be called war criminals if things go wrong, and we will sit back, pay our taxes, and act outraged.
Bullshit. Let’s all contribute, and then we will hold people responsible in a much more timely manner.
So the argument is that we need a draft to increase the number of people at antiwar demonstrations?
We had a draft during the height of antiwar protests of 1965-1971. Buildings were blown up, people were killed, National Guard troops shot protestors at Kent State and Jackson State, and the war went on.
There were massive worldwide protests against the Iraq invasion before it happened, and several times since. That war goes on.
I don’t see the evidence that reinstating the draft will end the war in Iraq. I think we can do better than sacrificing more lives.
Do you really believe that a draft will affect in any way soldiers “being called war criminals”? Soldiers were unjustifiably called that during Vietnam, with a red hot draft. It had nothing to do with the draft.
Some draftees were put in the position of becoming war criminals, just as volunteer soldiers are. Some draftees and some volunteers by their own testimony did commit war crimes, to their infinite regret, and their shattered lives. We need more of this?
We had a draft during the height of antiwar protests of 1965-1971. Buildings were blown up, people were killed, National Guard troops shot protestors at Kent State and Jackson State, and the war went on.
These Vietnam related events taught the American public that their government was fallible at times in its decisions to go to war, and that the military would lie for propaganda reasons. Before this Vietnam period, all our wars were mostly popular and perceived as needed! Vietnam ended that trust, and the main reason why the draft ended was not because people wouldn’t stand for it anymore. The reason it ended was because the ruling class, especially the conservatives, could see that after Vietnam, they would no longer be able to have their way with the military apparatus in America because of all the reasons Booman and others are stating here. The conservative hawks could see that a tax funded mercenary “volunteer” army would take apart the Vietnam lessons in the public eyes over time. And they were 100% correct as the Bush sorry saga is showing very clearly.
I think many of you here are minimizing the lessons of Vietnam, but you have no acceptable alternative to prevent the re-emergence of irresponsible use of military power that we see under Bush. Just how do you all propose to wake the stupid friggin apethic public up when they pay no price for this unwarranted kind of aggression?? Considering that we may actually need a legitimate armed campaign in the future someday, what social barometer will be there to prevent what you hated about this Iraq situation from happening again?? What??? Try to be logical and listen to yourselves!
I’m sorry but I wasn’t among the bashers. And I believe I was one of the first to reccommend your latest diary on the subject of the military.
This topic taps into heavy emotions. But the existence of the draft did not diminish criticism of the military or the people in it. I don’t see how giving Cheney and Bush easier access to deforming and ending more lives will improve yours.
keep an open mind. I think it will have precisely that effect and that their success so far is almost entirely dependent on the lack of civic engagement and cost.
I won’t sacrifice people on a theory with no visible support on how to end a war. Even if a draft could be passed and signed in the foreseeable future. Even if it would be equitable, people could choose alternate service freely, the children of the powerful would be included– all of which has never happened and certainly isn’t going to happen in the near future. Even if you could guarantee that draftees wouldn’t be patrolling American streets to enforce the unitary executive, or fighting a several front war in the Middle East against the evildoers of the week.
I don’t buy the argument from the negative: even if it were true that because there is no draft, there isn’t enough cost to Americans to stop the war, this doesn’t then prove that instituting a draft would hasten the end of this war. The logic doesn’t hold up, there are too many other variables.
Did Nixon ending the draft help him continue the Vietnam war? It may have had some effect, and a draft today may well increase the violence of opposition of two-thirds of the American people, but would that end the war? It didn’t last time, and I don’t see that it would this time. That’s all an academic exercise, because it’s not going to happen. Maybe we should be talking about something that could happen to end this war.
But what about next time? I don’t see it working then either, not without major changes in poltics and the culture that adding a draft will not help, but will hinder.
And now I’ll shut up on the subject. Goodnight.
Did Nixon ending the draft help him continue the Vietnam war?
I’m assuming you mean the actual call-up of troops and not just the registration for the draft?
If memory serves me correctly, the last high school class that had to register for the Vietnam-era draft was 1976. And the current draft registration picked up with the high school class of 1978. Since I was in the class of 1977, I think I remember that part correctly, LOL.
Wasn’t universal mandatory registration brought in with the same legislation that ended the actual call-ups? That is, the law ended the formal draft at about the same time that it said, “Okay, now everybody has to register, war or no war.” ? Right ?
Yes, but there was a brief gap that meant some kids didn’t have to register. The new (current) draft law mandates registration if you were born after December 1959, which (for some reason I don’t know – am I the same age as a powerful congressman’s son?) didn’t quite mesh evenly with the end of the previous draft.
“am I the same age as a powerful congressman’s son?)”
My guess is that wasn’t it; the congressman’s son shouldn’t have had to worry about dangerous duty, if, indeed, he’d even have to face a call up.
Your reasoning is rather sharp, all the same. That’s often the motive of otherwise bizarre exceptions.
I have often thought about a two or three year stint of required service to the country at let’s say 18 years of age or so would be a good thing for our country, our democracy, and the young people involved. I am so impressed with the Pro and Con arguments here on this topic tonight. Both “sides” present powerful arguments. It gives me pause, and causes me to examine my particular point of view. BooMan sees the draft as a way to control the executive branch, but left unchecked, the executive branch with a draft is that much more capable of abusing its power.
What it comes down to in my mind is this. Living in a democracy requires much from its citizens. I am doubtful that our generation has to date lived up to the challenge. If this were a healthy democracy, Booman has the right idea. The key is a “universal and fair draft”.
BTW, threads like this one, where the ideas expressed are in such obvious conflict with one another, but where the conversation remains respectful and civil, is why I choose to spend my blog time here rather than elsewhere.
Wouldn’t national conscription mean having a larger military; and, if so, might this not end up emboldening the adventurism of the war fetishists?
Not disagreeing, Boo; just thought it might be worth thinking about.
I know that Vietnam would have ended quicker if Quayle and Bush had had to fight in it. I also know that campuses erupted because of the draft. So, yes, I think mandatory service will bring more engagement from the monied classes and more reluctance to resort first to violence.
In principle, I agree with you. But this nation has a long history of allowing the monied class to escape mandatory service — from the purchase of deferments during the Civil War, through to the cushy TANG posting the Dolt-in-Chief received during Vietnam.
Why would it be any different this time? Or do you have any ideas on how to ensure that those who control the levers don’t misuse their power and abuse the system?
I don’t see a son or daughter of a member of Congress serving anywhere but exactly where they want to serve. Mommy or daddy will pull the strings, as necessary, to make sure little Biff, and or Muffy, never see combat — or even get their patrician hands dirty.
But maybe I’m too cynical.
you will have an unfair draft.
The draft cannot be made into this perfectly egalitarian lottery. The world just doesn’t work that way.
Special people have special privileges.
Our entire social and political system is set up to protect and further the interests of the rich. Do you REALLY think that the Snottingtons and Van Der Snoots are going to let Chip and Buffy be used as cannon fodder? That’s why God created poor kids, right?
Oh, but we’ll INSIST on a perfectly fair draft.
Yeah, just like we’ve insisted on a perfectly fair health care system, perfectly fair tax system, perfectly fair criminal justice system, and a perfectly fair school system.
Saying you support a completely fair draft is saying you live in a fantasy world. Wake up, people.
So you like what you see/have now better??
I was in the all-volunteer army.
There’s nothing wrong with it.
It’s the political system of the US that’s broken.
It’s the political system of the country–the government, the media, and yes, the people–who sent the troops into Iraq. Lots of military and civilian planners warned it was a bad idea, but they were shouted down and shoved aside.
If the Congress had listened to General Eric Shinseki when he warned them it would take 300,000+ troops to pacify Iraq, we wouldn’t be in this shit now, and nobody would be talking about reinstituting the draft.
If the Congress had listened to General Eric Shinseki when he warned them it would take 300,000+ troops to pacify Iraq, we wouldn’t be in this shit now, and nobody would be talking about reinstituting the draft.
Listen to yourself, will you. Who does Congress respond to, Generals??? Come on. You are missing the exact point of Booman and others. Congress will not shot their political futures/fortunes in the foot by committing political suicide and sending little Johnnies and Jannies off to an arbitrary unnecessary war. They can now because the vast majority of Johnnies and Jannies and their parents pay no obvious price for our mercenary army of immature GI Joe wannabies. Institute an even semi-fair draft, and they cannot do this as easily anymore, and won’t as long as the semi-fair draft stays in place!!
The last thing we need to be doing is to put more power in the hands of the government, any government (not just BushCo) in the form of a draft.
A draft is the national equivalent of the argument that the way to fight crime is train everyone to use guns.
If we want to be safe and secure we need to start acting differently on the world stage – less like Imperial Rome or England, more like Sweden or Canada or New Zealand.
Unfortunately, that will not happen without a major collapse of some sort, because there is too much money to be made by those in power. I don’t see how giving them additional power will improve the situation.
Let’s not kid ourselves – there will only be a tiny number of non-combat positions made available, and those will be converted into combat roles when “the need arises” as it inevitably will, because the ambitions of our leaders will swell to match the capacities they have at hand, and then a bit more.
The military-industrial complex makes much more money by fighting for cheap oil than for teaching slow learners in an inner city school or working on affordable housing for the poor. Those in power have not shown they have the wisdom to be allowed the right to conscribe my kids. They will try and get away with as much as they can, and a draft is just enabling them.
A draft is the equivalent of saying let’s infect everyone with some disease so it’s fair. The answer is to cure the disease, not spread the pain as fairly as possible. The disease is our national hubris, our green, our sense of national exceptionalism. When the fever of this disease rises high enough we have a war – there always is some slight somewhere in the world to take offense at, someplace that also offers a money-making or power-enhancing opportunity to those in power. And they can always be entrusted to try and grab it. Power corrupts. But I do not see that giving them more power is the answer. Because it will make the streets and our college campuses run red with blood again? So, the answer to an unfair war is to tear apart the nation at home? I don’t see this as a solution at all. It is a failure of imagination.
In one of his few wise pronouncements, Pope Paul VI said “If you want peace, work for justice.” Justice is a nation that walks humbly among its peers, not one looking for an opportunity to rip off yet another third-world backwater country of its resources and people.
Think of the question we asked ourselves after 9-11: “Why do they hate us?” We know the reason – the way we act in the world. The answer to the problem is not to construct a more fair and efficient machine of mass destruction. The answer is to devolve the government so it lacks the capacity to behave imperially.
PS – Tracy: This is not in any way meant to disrespect your husband or any of our other military personnel. You all have been screwed royally in exchange for your acting in good faith out of the noblest of human impulses. Which is precisely why I do not trust those in power to give them an even more reliable source of warm bodies. For their greed and ambition will expand to the limits of the capacities we give them.
I deeply deeply appreciate the P.S….I know you would fight for us, I know you will fight for us, I know that you will vote for us and for the what is really best for the nation. I don’t want to give any more power to these madmen, on the other hand how do we make the people in general care when their military is being abused? Why don’t they care right now? Why are they hanging these people out to dry doing two and three times the length of time in a combat zone as Vietnam Vets did and they have no “rear” to spend any down time in. I think they are coming home with 4 to 6 six times the PTSD we saw in Vietnam Vets and who cares? Who cares this very minute about it? Nobody, and nobody will care until these soldiers start doing horrible things
I think the difference between this time and Vietnam, as Boo indicated, is that with most folks not under immediate threat they are not at a “mad as hell, takin’ it to the street” level, but I do sense that there is a general – and increasing, and increasingly open – disgust with what Bush and Co. have done in Iraq (and elsewhere).
This time, the emotion isn’t so much fear and anger as a quiet embarrassment or shame on the part of folks who were Kool-Aid intoxicated as they, one by one, wake up from their bender. They feel like “America is supposed to be better than this,” both in how we are treating our own and in how we’re treating our captives. My sense is that they’ve quietly, one by one, reached personal tipping points where they’ve decided they’ve had quite enough, thank you of the current regime, which is why both Bush’s poll numbers and the poll numbers for the congressional elections look like they do, why listenership for conservative talk radio is off, why Fox News is in retreat, why the NY Times and WaPo are starting to develop a spine. They’re quietly angry, (but maybe not ready to openly offend everyone else at Church, where they think Bush is still popular) and we’ll see it this fall, in the privacy of the voting booth.
It’s a slow process, like turning a supertanker around, but when the moodshift is complete it’s going to go in our direction for a decade or more; quite possibly 25 years (the 2006 elections will be 26 years from Reagan’s coming to power in 1980 and the conservative movement began its ascent into dominance).
The lack of unfiltered news coverage from the front – or even images of returning coffins – is another reason that the public is not as aroused as during Vietnam. Without the steady drumbeat of those images, it is much easier to keep the Kool-Aid high going a bit longer, “la la la la la I’m not listening…” That’s starting to change as the press is less afraid of the Republicans than they were…
At least that’s my take from East Tennessee, where it’s deep red territory and the rah-rah for Bush has grown increasingly muted in recent months.
I’m sure this seems pretty vaporous and hypothetical as you deal with the gut-wrenching issues you have to live with, but hopefully it’s some ground for hope and a small comfort. Take care and best wishes. (((MT)))
I’m not opposed to the idea of mandatory national service as such, just so long as there are useful and honorable modes of service other than the military. In the absence of a direct invasion of the homeland by a repressive power, I’m simply not willing to serve in the military.
My refusal to serve is not, incidentally, rooted in any unwillingness to die. (Judging from the hundreds of millions of have walked willingly into the maw of war over the past few centuries, willingness to die is not especially hard to come by, especially in the easily manipulated age group from which armies are drawn.) It is because I don’t consider the military to be all that important in terms of safeguarding our freedoms. A well-educated, rational electorate imbued with democratic and communitarian principles is at least ten times as important as the army, especially for an effectively invasion-proof country like the United States.
There are occasions when the force of arms is indisputably necessary, though for the United States, that has only happened twice, in 1776 and 1940. The perfect example of the supremacy of the democratic process, on the other hand, is in the Civil War. All that ended in 1865 was pro forma slavery, which was replaced by a sharecropping system that amounted to serfdom. It was nearly a century before the electorate found within itself the basic human decency to take real steps towards enfranchising the descendants of slaves. And the few dramatic scenes with the national guard should not obscure that it was the courage of the entirely non-violent civil rights movement that shamed the nation into acting, not the barrel of a gun.
America’s enemies are mostly internal, not foreign powers and terrorist organization. We are our own worst enemy. I do not think that the tremendous diversion of attention away from our internal problems that always goes with military action will serve us well. The enemy is the Rush Limbaughs and Ann Coulters of the country. It is also the unexamined biases and blindesses that each of us bears. Learning how to take an M-16 apart blindfolded is not going to help us with those threats.
Judging from the hundreds of millions of have walked willingly into the maw of war over the past few centuries, willingness to die is not especially hard to come by, especially in the easily manipulated age group from which armies are drawn.
The average age for Vietnam troops was 19.
The current situation, where large numbers of troops have family ties, jobs at home, etc. is rather unprecedented – you’d probably have to go back to the Civil War to find such a large percentage of older troops with the kinds of ties to home we see this time.
My understanding is that the “conventional wisdom” in the military was against using older troops for this very reason: 19-year-olds are still young enough to have that teenage “attitude of indestructability,” to be more easily whipped into a gung-ho attitude before battle, are more likely to obey orders, and have less to lose than a soldier with a wife and kids.
I agree that there is a problem with citizenship in our modern world. I disagree that mandatory service is the answer. I think that serving your country should be encouraged in all manner of capacities. Had it been simpler to sign up for, I would have definately joined a public service organization and spend 12 months building houses for the homeless or helping kids in Africa after I left school. I know many people would jump to that opportunity. When I was 17, I was too lazy to seek out a opportunity like that, but had it been a well-publicized option where you simply had to go to a recruiting office and join up, I would have been far more likely to do it. But to make it mandatory seems too authoritarian for my tastes.
I think what would make even more impact would be to teach people from a young age about the Constitution. I mean really teach people about it, teach everyone what their rights and freedoms are under the Constitution. People will easily cede rights they do not believe they have. I spent over a month in an American classroom as a 12 year old and I was amazed that I (a Canadian) knew more about American history and government than the American students did. I was and still am an avid reader, but there is no excuse for me knowing more about a country than it’s future citizens.
A sneak preview of my article on the subject is up at Pen and Sword. I’ll have it on the rest of the sphere tomorrow morning.
care about, think rationally about, and have any respect for the sacrifice that their soldiers make? Hatred toward the United States military has gotten venomous lately, so how are military families supposed to survive this when angry people rub it into our faces that “we volunteered” and act as if we deserve to be abused because we were stupid enough to volunteer to serve and protect the nation?
…comes only from a few people in the blogosphere.
It doesn’t exist in the real world.
I live in a very liberal area (compared to the rest of the country), and while I see “US Out of Iraq NOW” bumper stickers and “Support the Troops” yellow magnet stickers, I do NOT see “Fuck the Troops” bumper stickers.
Yes, people are appalled at the reports of war crimes by our troops–as they ought to be. As I am. As you are. But I find that people are quite intelligent enough to separate the good from the bad in any group of people, and the troops are no exception.
I suggest to you that you have let your involvement in this blog distort your view of reality. In the real world, away from a few cranks and obsessive anti-American haters, most people honestly don’t feel that way.
Ask yourself, how many people have you heard say the things that have been written on this blog about American troops? I haven’t heard ONE WORD, and I associate with some very far-left people.
When I was at Crawford I didn’t even face the venom that I have faced on here being a military family member…..it has been venomous on here to the point of insanity! I spend a lot of time here…..or I used to. I wanted to leave but some people asked me not to. I want to stay but Christ almighty things have gotten 1000% twisted lately, and I’m embarrassed as hell to have any of our fellow military members or families witness what has happened around here. People have completely lost all objectivity and their minds. My husband read the last diary I wrote before I deleted it and he said, “Jesus, they have become the exact opposite of the Neocons and just as crazy nuts and just as dangerous!” He has asked me to stop having anything to do with the site, I’m here against his wishes I guess you could say. I told him that maybe things will get better…….perhaps….who knows.
this.
I can imagine how some people might feel so angry over a soldier being tortured/killed, mostly here we are just sad and pray for a speedy end, but that won’t come without a plan. Didn’t I just see on the news tonight too that DICK Cheney refused to give any dates concerning withdrawl? I believe that there are a total of 12 different MRE’s, after awhile I am told if that is what you have to eat it really sucks. They usually constipate my husband because moisture is a little short in the food in them…….they are calorie packed in an attempt to fuel the people who are living on them in a war zone but I think all of them over there lose their appetites. My husband came home 30 lbs thinner, he gained some of it back but when they had to put him on Zoloft he lost it all again (I told him to never tell women that he lost 20 lbs taking Zoloft because they would chase him down the street trying to beat him since every woman I have ever known who has taken it seemed to gain weight and didn’t enjoy it). My husband was at Al Asad which is now one of the cushy bases, but wasn’t so when he was there. They did get a chow hall eventually. There are many smaller pockets of soldiers though with no chow hall and I’m sure that your care packages are so so so precious! My husband told me a story that is black comedy funny….but when they finally got a chow hall set up on Al Asad and meals began to crank out, brownies also showed up. At first if a soldier wanted two he’d take two, maybe he would take another back to his quarters with him also. One day they show up for lunch and in front of the brownies is a little sign that reads please only take one brownie. He said that for about a week all the soldiers grudgingly only took one brownie until one lunch a soldier looked at the sign and looked at the cooks and said, “I am here getting shot at every day and this could be my last day on earth and I believe that if I want two brownies I’ll have two brownies God Damn It!” The brownie sign went away…..shocking though that we pay what we do to feed our soldiers over there and there even was a brownie sign for a week.
to make the damned things palatable.
Heh, I included high-fiber crackers!
…I don’t recommend it. Every soldier loses weight in the field. Bad food, lack of sleep, heat, and stress will all do it to you. I was thin as a rail after I got back from Gulf War I. Took me nearly two years to get back to my “fighting weight”. I wouldn’t worry about his weight, the “American lifestyle” will put that back on soon enough.
Being on Zoloft because you’re struggling with depression–well, that’s no picnic, either. Lack of appetite, sleeplessness, or sleeping too much, having your energy sapped…depression’s a bitch. It’s also a normal reaction to intense stress. Fortunately, we have medications that are more effective in short-term treatment than we’ve had in the past.
The depression does get better, but it takes a long time. Wars are hard not only on the soldiers who fight them, but on their families, too. I think some would-be “saintly figures” on this blog would do well to remember that.
The exposure to small-arms fire in the Iraq theatre is very high–92% of all soldiers deployed there have come under fire. It’s not surprising that so many soldiers are suffering post-traumatic stress.
Know something? I just realized I’m sick of this blog. I’m sick of listening to the anti-American blather of non-Americans and the self-hating rants of Americans. It turns my stomach. I don’t know about you, Tracy, but I’m taking a break. Because quite frankly, I’m completely disgusted with some of the people on this site.
Oh please, I am really tired of this Anti-American bullshit…as if we don’t get enough of that from the right. Sheesh.
I saw more anti-american sentiments in one day in the 80’s both here and in Europe than I see in a year now. The left is not anti-american. Dissent and questioning the status quo is what helps us grow, not putting silly pro-military magnets on our car. Sorry, but I’ve always hated Kool-Aid.
If you’re tired of us, try http://www.freerepublic.com. They are 100% pro-USA.
In the same statement, Kamawhatsitsface says, “Hey, we can say anything we want here and if you don’t like it, go to FreeRepublic.”
Booman Tribune, love it or leave it.
Fucking priceless.
That’s exactly the attitude of the right-wingers. “If you don’t like it, leave!”
Fuck you, Kamakhya.
You are such a hypocrite on this topic. You couldn’t even respond coherently. Instead you troll rated me. I’ve been an active member of this site for over a year and have never been troll rated. You are a newbie and it shows.
You call yourself a progressive, but can’t take even the slightest criticism of America. You called me and my people anti-american. You are the one telling us tribbers to get lost because we are too anti-american for your taste. I merely pointed you to a website that might be more to your taste because you are obviously not a true progressive.
I’m not going to curse you or troll rate you because we don’t do that here. I don’t think that behavior is productive.
OK, so you hit 18 and you’re drafted. Everybody, no exceptions.
But what about the 18-year-olds who are physically and/or mentally incapable of performing any service whatsoever? They’ll need an exemption, right? And there you’ll find loophole number one that would be exploited by the children of the rich and powerful (and, to be fair, by con artists from all walks of life).
And you’ll allow draftees to opt out of military service? So what if entirely too many of them say, “I’ll take whatever’s behind door number not-the-military, Monty”? How do you choose who works in the soup kitchen and who goes to boot camp? Lottery, perhaps? That hardly ensures that those who aren’t suited for the military don’t go–unless you create another post-lottery loophole.
And so I’m thinking that the trust fund babies end up as Washington interns while the poor kids get blown up in the desert. Same as it ever was. There’s no reason to believe that this country is capable of conducting a fair draft. And I can’t see any good arising from an unfair one.
Excellent questions.
So it comes down to having to give some special inducements to persuade people to choose military service.
In other words, you have a volunteer army within the supposedly mandatory universal service system.
This may be a fatal flaw in the idea.
…are the same ones who choose it now.
And what do you bet me Jenna and Barbara Bush, aka the Bush Twins, would pick some cushy “community service” and wouldn’t even show up for THAT?
You’ve hit the nail on the head. I have no faith whatsoever that when the going in the battlefield gets tough, or there’s a juicy new oilfield to grab, those folks at the soup kitchen won’t get transferred to KP duty at Bhagram, and those guys building roads and schools on Indian reservations won’t be building new airstrips in the desert. What is to stop those in charge? Public opinion? By the time public opinion is roused, if it is, 20,000 young people will have been “temporarily reassigned.”
Is this not exactly what happened to our national guard, who thought they were enlisting to provide flood and hurricane relief and to fight forest fires?
Good point.
Knox-
follow my logic here and tell me what you think.
What conditions are different in America that explain why people oppose the continued occupation of Iraq in as high or higher numbers than people opposed the continued war in Vietnam, but are not taking direct action to stop the war in the way they did during Vietnam?
For me, the draft explains it. There are some other causes, but I believe the draft explains it.
It’s not just that there is no draft. It’s that there has been no draft for 30 years. In that period of time, our culture has changed. In my father’s generation most people had served in the military and understood it and its ethic and the need for its ethic. Allowing the military to self-select has alienated most of the country from the idea that they have any duty or any responsibility to protect the nation. In excess, people come to the conclusion that the country doesn’t even need protection. So, that’s on one side.
On the other side, anyone that has agreed to join the military probably has greater faith in the wisdom and morality of our civilian leaders than the average joe. They, and their families, are less likely to oppose the use of force.
Now, we see what we have. We have a military deployed at astonishing cost, for no good reason, that people oppose, but that they have insufficient motivation to oppose with direct action. How can we assure this is less likely to happen again in the future?
Compulsory service puts a higher political threshold on the use of force. If wasn’t the Vietnamese that routed us off the battlefield in Vietnam. It was the people at home that began to exact a price on politicians that wanted to stay the course. Bush considers domestic public support to be the key to whatever ‘victory’ he hopes to achieve in Iraq and he is correct to think that. Because he will have no ‘victory’ if his Congressional supporters abandon him and call the troops home.
If there were compulsory service and they started pulling people off Indian reservations to go guard a bank in Baghdad, the tolerance of the American people for a failed strategy would be much lower.
This would weigh in any future pre-war deliberations. Compulsory service would almost have to make war less likely, and bad wars of shorter duration.
Add to that, that there are thousands of lost punk kids running around here in Philadephia that sure could use a two-year stint in some disciplined organization (followed by a subsidized education or training). Right now few of them are going to college or getting any education to speak of.
Allowing the military to self-select has alienated most of the country from the idea that they have any duty or any responsibility to protect the nation.
Allowing the military to self-select is only part – and perhaps not the most important part – of the problem.
Your father’s generation witnessed how the government provided a means for the nation to pull itself collectively out of the depression, and then face down Hitler. My generation witnessed the assassination of both Kennedys, MLK, and Malcolm X, Vietnam, illegal secret wars in Cambodia and Laos, Watergate, rampant inflation reducing our parents hopes for a better life to a treadmill effort at best, the Iranian hostage situation, Iran-Contra, the threat of nuclear war, environmental destruction, the rise of the religious right and the eviscerating of a range of progressive programs, economic policies of “tricle down” that never seem to trickle all the way to where the need is greatest, and on and on. And I’m supposed to be enthusiastic about signing my kids up for national service under such leaders? I can remember back to the mid-60’s, and the only president in all that time I believed in enough to trust with such responsibility is maybe Carter. I don’t trust the leadership to not change the rules for their convenience once the warm bodies are in the pipeline.
If we want to be safer we need to behave as a nation that is not actively generating new enemies at every turn. We have squandered opportunity after opportunity to generate goodwill abroad – Why didn’t we channel a bit of that dot-com money in the 90’s into foreign aid, for just one example?
Compulsory service once the people are alienated from the government is not likely to bring about the result you seek. Look at the Red Army in the waning days of the Soviet Union – compulsory service just bred deeper cynicism, more blatant efforts to find loopholes to avoid service, more AWOL troops.
The break in trust is one of the steps on the path an empire follows as it unwinds. We can assume a less exaulted role on the world stage voluntarily and save some dignity, or we can try and force the system until we are forced off the top of the hill. This could involve compulsory service, but I strongly suspect our leadership will follow the path of most previous empires and increasingly turn to mercenaries, foreigners, and the poor. Does military service in exchange for amnesty to illegal aliens really sound like something our politicians would pass up? Sure, there would be a language problem to work around, but hey, the Romans did it. It got them by for a few hundred years. It would probably get us by for 50+ years until China and/or India force up off the top of the hill.
We could instead look at organizations at the UN with new eyes, and seriously try to work through it and reinvigorate it so it could really be a vehicle for change and peace, as it was envisioned after WWII. Do we really need to see that much horror again until we see the light? If we keep up like we are we may generate enough enemies in the Muslim world that we eventually do.
Or we can wait for the oil to run out (or be cut off), and our foreign lines of credit to be cut off, and then we’ll get to live through another depression, with the added spice of environmental degradation and climate change to make it interesting. Roll the dice to see if we get a bad pandemic too, and suddenly we have bigger problems than this – suddenly we’re looking a lot like Rome, or England, or the USSR, rapidly trying to spin off territory in a controlled manner to keep the whole thing from exploding.
Empires don’t last forever, the end is seldom pretty, and compulsory service is not the tool that going to get us through the problems we face. It might be a good idea for the Republic of New England to adopt in 2105, when it’s young, poor, up-and-coming, and has the confidence of its people, who just lived through “the Great Unraveling,” however…
I understand your point and your warnings should be heeded, but I am not as pessimistic as you are.
First of all, your kids can be drafted as easily under the current system as they could be under the system I suggest.
In both cases, the cause would be some catastrophe of some sort that mobilized the nation for war and that required more troops than we had at hand.
My idea for compulsory service isn’t that we need to have a bunch more divisions. It’s the actual service part of it that interests me.
I’d like to see a much more diverse army, not a much larger one. I’d like people to remember that they can’t disown any obligation to their nation and then turn around and treat our military like a red-headed step child.
I want our politicians to know that they will face harsh consequences if they start a war they can’t finish because the patricians kids are dying too.
I want some outlet for a generation of inner city kids that doesn’t involve the military (that would be all the alternatives to military service set up as part of the program).
I don’t mean to suggest that a compulsory service program would be some kind of panacea for our problems and suddenly fix the rifts in our society and teach humility to our leaders.
But it could help in the following areas:
I do not see the program as a way to add divisions or as an excuse to build more warships. It should in no way make it easier to use our military. If it is designed correctly, it won’t.
I think you may have a misunderstanding of the anti-war protests on college campusus during the war in Vietnam. I was involved in the activities in Boulder, Colorado during the early 1970s, and it was pretty obvious that outside of a fairly small core of activists, most of the participants were largely interested in the street party dimension. The demonstrations generally happened when the weather got nice in the spring–because during winter people were too busy studying.
The U.S. population as a whole had turned against the war by the time that the anti-war activists really got going, and in my opinion the rallies and protests were mostly an effect, not a cause.
An interesting look at the ’68 student uprising at Columbia, from one who was there: “The Strawberry Statement: Notes of a College Revolutionary” by James Simon Kunen. Still available at Powell’s. A lot of idealistic angst (not necessarily about Vietnam) and more than a little narcissism on campus. The ’60’s were not necessarily for everyone as the collective memory has idealized them…
But Americans don’t, as a rule and as a majority, oppose going to war. Draft or no, Vietnam didn’t become unpopular until after it was clear that we were losing. Johnson didn’t realize that he was sunk until Walter Cronkite went on the air and said that we couldn’t win the thing. So I doubt that the existence of a draft would prevent wars from starting–especially if they start by Congress ceding its war-declaring authority to a trigger-happy cowboy in the White House.
And if that trigger-happy cowboy has a massive pool of potential soldiers at his disposal, it would be more likely that he could start a war of aggression and win it. If Iraq had been flooded with troops who killed off any and all opposition, the Iraq war would probably still have majority support in the U.S. But it wouldn’t be any less wrong.
I re-read the thread and hopefully I didn’t miss it, but I have not seen anyone discuss this issue in the light that we no longer have an ‘all-volunteer’ force. Stop-loss has been in effect for quite some time. Servicemembers that before Iraq would have been relieved of duty/medical are being kept on the list to deploy (disabilities, PTSD, etc.). Involuntary service is alive and well.
Just in case its needed, my perspective is as a military mom and a peacetime vet.
I would like to thank everyone for an excellent discussion of this topic.
toward domestic impressment, in order to staff its expanding crusade theatres, even with the use of robot soldiers and renting expendables from other nations, the sheer number of those who oppose US policies is so very large that an extremely large number of gunmen will be needed in order to reduce that number and maintain “crackdown” on those left un-exterminated, for whatever reason.
There has always been the argument that impressment fills the ranks with some who while they have not taken the admittedly difficult and complicated steps necessary to escape seizure, may nevertheless prove reluctant, and thus less effective, in some of the “wetwork” aspects of implementation of US policies, however these individuals can always be assigned to some menial job in conditions that they are unlikely to survive, or eliminated in tragic accidents.
I think several people, however, have made an excellent case for having the gunmen dissolve any ties they may have with other individuals, especially such as families, while the social costs cannot be said to reduce revenue to the corporations, programs such as “dependent health care,” “housing allowances,” and “life insurance” definitely does cause money that could go to purchase more weapons to go into areas that frankly, are not big profit producers, to say the least.
While the family question does impact on civilian profit, as US transitions to a single-industry economy, that will decrease in importance, and Wal-Mart, who will effectively become the sole non-defense “business,” is already doing some very innovative work in helping labor units to transition from the “family” module.
In fact, I don’t have a link at hand, I think it may be an offline article someone showed me, but someone has done a study that shows that not only are Americans moving away from the family concept, but that fewer Americans have close relationships with non-family members than just a few years ago!
This is good news for the fellows in accounting! Emotion-based human relationships can be profit-eaters regardless of whether they are determined by genetics or choice.
And of course I have an old blogrant on the subject of the original post! I would not disappoint!
That’s where I go to the movies, the Expanding Crusade Theatres. The popcorn is so-so but the seats were just refurbished and are very comfortable. I saw “A Scanner Darkly” in an Expanding Crusade Theatre just last week.
Here’s your All Purpose Ductape Fatwa blogpost/diary:
Americans are evil.
In case you missed it the first 4,018 times:
Americans are evil.
One more time, in case anybody missed it:
AMERICANS ARE EVIL.
Ok, now I need everybody to copy down that sentence, “Americans are evil.” Tape it on the wall by your computer monitor. Any time you see a diary by DuctapeFatwa, or a comment by him, save yourself a ton of time and read the sentence instead.
Hey, I’m here to help–if I can help you save valuable reading time, then I’ve done my good deed for the day.
And remember: AMERICANS ARE EVIL. If you see one on the street, do NOT approach him/her. Run to the nearest safe place and hide until the American has passed by. DO NOT SHOW FEAR. Americans may not have a soul, but they do have a brutish animal instinct and they smell fear! If you live in a place where there are a lot of Americans, stay indoors with your curtains drawn and your doors locked. AMERICANS ARE EVIL and if you come into contact with one, you, too, may be tainted by them. Do NOT attempt to sort out “good” Americans from “bad” Americans because the good Americans are so few in number that you could put them all in a rowboat and still have room for a picnic lunch.
p.s.–You may not want to trust what has just been written, because I wrote it, and I’m an American. And that means I’m evil.
You forgot to put “crusader” in there. It’s not complete without at least one reference to “crusaders.”
You’re an American.
That makes you a bad person.
Now go write on the chalkboard 1,000 times, “I will try not to be an American.”
Couldn’t I go to the Expanding Crusader Theater instead? Are they showing DEVIL WEARS PRADA?
Well, that’s an evil movie about an evil person. The evil person in “The Devil Wears Prada” is American, of course. If she were another nationality, she’d be good. Because not only are all Americans bad, all non-Americans are good. Some of them are even saintly…so saintly they post on blogs and make themselves the object of scorn and ridicule to lure evil Americans off the streets so that they can’t harm anybody.
So yes, Other Lisa, you may go to the Expanding Crusade Theatres and see “The Devil Wears Prada”. Remember, ONLY Americans are admitted to that theatre, so make sure that you mention you’re an American.
Thanks! I wondered what I was going to do on Friday! It was either that or eat babies.
You cards……..I really needed that. More than you guys can know!
I kick babies. I EAT baby seals. AFTER I club them.
Oh wait, that’s Canadians that club baby seals. That can’t be right…that’s an evil thing to do, and Canadians are never evil.
Now I’m confused.
Those baby seal-eaters aren’t Canadians. They are Americans, disguised as Canadians.
I’ve got some serious genocide to commit in the AM, and I need my beauty rest.
…I’m outta here. I’m sick of listening to the whining of a bunch of piss-ants.
Good luck.
Ok boo, let us think this through realistically. If we go your route, and then if some one gets the bright idea that we need yet another world war and we do not have the military to subscribe for this adventure, do we take those kids from the civilian ranks of public service to fill those vacancies? What do we do then? HUH?? I sit on a ss board and I want answers from you the public! Listen up, you ppl this is serious stuff you talk..not some some hyper-venting on things. Some one in civilian public service with some clout will someday make this a reality if we are not careful..I personally want some answers to your rhetoric not just hyper-venting. Do you really advocate changing the rules, or what?
We, as of today, are too far into debt to pay any ppl to so such a deed. That will not fly, like Jeff said in his diary.
If we want to maintain the real quality with quantity, what is the real answer to this dilemma? Like I said, I want answers for the job I may have to perform, and it is not gonna be an easy one, if you subscribe to in this diary!
I have read each of your coments and I can honestly tell you, some of you really scare the hell out of me, beside you are not gonna make my job an easy one, in the future, you hear me on that one, please–as if was an easy one now, as it stands.