Wednesday, September 05, 2007

WIth the 1st Pick in the 2008 United States Military Draft the Army Selects.....

Excerpted from a Newsweek.com editorial by a marine calling for the reinstatement of the draft:
The real failure of this war, the mistake that has led to all the malaise of Operation Iraqi Freedom, was the failure to not reinstitute the draft on Sept. 12, 2001—something I certainly believed would happen after running down 61 flights of the South Tower, dodging the carnage as I made my way to the Hudson River [I worked at the World Trade Center as an investment adviser for Morgan Stanley at the time]. But President Bush was determined to keep the lives of nonuniformed America—the wealthiest Americans, like himself—uninterrupted by the war. Consequently, we have a severe talent deficiency in the military, which the draft would remedy immediately. While America’s bravest are in the military, America’s brightest are not. Allow me to build a squad of the five brightest students from MIT and Caltech and promise them patrols on the highways connecting Baghdad and Fallujah, and I’ll bet that in six months they could render IED’s about as effective as a “Just Say No” campaign at a Grateful Dead show.

On a macro level, we are logistically weakened by the lack of a draft. It takes six to seven soldiers to support one infantryman in combat. So, you are basically asking 30,000 or so “grunts” to secure a nation of 26 million. I assure you, no matter who wins the 2008 election, we are staying in Iraq. But with the Marine Corps and the Army severely stressed after 3.5 years of desert and urban combat in Iraq—equipment needs replacing, recruitment efforts are coming up short—you tell me how we're going to sustain the current force structure without the draft? The president’s new war czar, Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, essentially said as much earlier this month, when he announced that considering the draft “makes sense.”

Of course, the outcry was swift and predictable. America has rejected selective service before, though always in the guise of antiwar movements. But they should really be viewed as antidraft movements, and they existed, en masse, when the wealthy could buy their way out of serving—as Teddy Roosevelt’s father and his ilk did during the Civil War, or as countless college kids did during the deferment-ridden Vietnam conflict. Not every draftee has to be a front-line Marine or soldier, but history shows us that most entrepreneurial young men, faced with a fair draft, almost always chose the front. A deferment draft, however, is a different story, and ultimately counterproductive because of the acrimony it breeds. By allowing the fortunate and, often, most talented to stay home, those who are drafted feel less important than what they are asked to die for. At the end of the day, it was this bitterness that helped fuel the massive antiwar movement that pushed Nixon to end the draft in ‘73.

I don’t favor a Vietnam-style draft, where men like the current vice president could get five deferments. I am talking about a World War II draft, with the brothers and sons of future and former presidents answering the call (and, unfortunately, dying, as a Roosevelt and a Kennedy once did) on the front line. That is when the war effort is maximized. Quite simply, the military cannot be a faceless horde to those pulling the purse strings of our great economy.


That last point is most interesting to me because I recall a few weeks back a reporter on one of these cable news shows or maybe Meet the Press said he had been talking, a few years back, to Korean War veterans who were still serving in Congress and asked them if they thought the coming generations of politicians who would never serve in the military would be more gun-shy about rolling out the Army. Almost to a man, he reported, they felt the exact opposite; that those who had never experienced combat and didn't really understand the military would be infinitely more willing to put troops into combat, thinking the military is simply a blunt instrument that can solve any and all problems around the world; unfortunately, to dare say there may be situations and problems the American military is incapable of solving is tantamount to treason in the eyes of many today.

So, is a draft the answer? Maybe, maybe not, but the calls for it are certainly getting louder, and as they do, so will the calls for us to simply end the current conflict instead.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

If we get to the point of draft, you'll find me in London or Paris or Buenos Aires. I will not go. I can't think of a worst way to spend my time than fighting this idiotic war.