• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hello Vietnam....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Hardcore
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: So
OLD news
If they start drafting people, I will vote Kerry. And I hate Kerry.
Click to expand...

Funny, because the main supporters of a new draft are liberal democrats. They are desperately trying to bring back the college anti-Vietnam war protests that promptly dried up when the draft was ended in '73.
Click to expand...

Even more funny:

A senior Republican lawmaker said that deteriorating security in Iraq (news - web sites) may force the United States to reintroduce the military draft.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Actually, Kerry supports sending MORE troops to Iraq. So, its not really a question of Democrats vs Republicans here, it seems that both sides want to escalate the war in Iraq. <**Off Topic**>Which is why it seems increasingly likely that neither candidate will win my vote.</**Off Topic**>
 
Originally posted by: sward666
Much ado about nothing.

Again.
Click to expand...

Agreed. No matter what, I'm not worried about it until it becomes official. It is far to clearly political seppuku for even Bush to do.
 
We don't need the draft and I doubt we ever will. We have enough people who volunteer for the military or sign up so they can get money and/or college paid for. We will never have to fight a war that requires tens of thousands of soldiers b/c of the technology available to us and the amount of destruction that can be caused by a small powerfully armed force.
 
Originally posted by: Hardcore
Just a bunch of alarmist.

The Nebraska Republican added that a draft, which was ended in the early 1970s, would spread the burden of military service in Iraq more equitably among various social strata.


"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he observed
Click to expand...

And how is this going to change anything? It won't, the upper middleclass will get out of the draft because they would be going to college. If they want to increase the military size, increase the salary. Then at least you would have people WANTING to fight for their country, rather than forced to.

But this is only one senator, and it'll never pass.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't serve your country for the money.
 
Originally posted by: brigden
Suddenly Canada doesn't look so bad, does it, Yanks?
Click to expand...
Why should I fear the draft? I live here. I take advantage of the freedoms this military provides. If the draft is re-instated and I am called I will proudly serve to the best of my ability. While I think that this senator's reasoning is flawed, I have nothing against the draft itself.

ZV
 
Originally posted by: ELP
Originally posted by: Hardcore
Just a bunch of alarmist.

The Nebraska Republican added that a draft, which was ended in the early 1970s, would spread the burden of military service in Iraq more equitably among various social strata.


"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he observed
Click to expand...

And how is this going to change anything? It won't, the upper middleclass will get out of the draft because they would be going to college. If they want to increase the military size, increase the salary. Then at least you would have people WANTING to fight for their country, rather than forced to.

But this is only one senator, and it'll never pass.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't serve your country for the money.
Click to expand...


I see nothing worng with serving your country 'for the money'.

It is CLEARLY less moral for the government to say 'we own you, and are going to send you somewhere whether you like it or not. The fact is, a volunteer army is better trained and has better morale than a conscript army ever can. History has proven time and time again that volunteer armies are much better fighting machines than conscript ones.
 
Originally posted by: dragonballgtz
Originally posted by: ELP

You shouldn't serve your country for the money.
Click to expand...



Said to say but most people only serve our country because of the money.
Click to expand...

I don't know if I buy that. It's not exactly a luxurious income the average enlistee pulls down. And the GI bill only gets you so far....

There's a lot of reasons people serve.
 
Originally posted by: ELP
Originally posted by: Hardcore
Just a bunch of alarmist.

The Nebraska Republican added that a draft, which was ended in the early 1970s, would spread the burden of military service in Iraq more equitably among various social strata.


"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he observed
Click to expand...

And how is this going to change anything? It won't, the upper middleclass will get out of the draft because they would be going to college. If they want to increase the military size, increase the salary. Then at least you would have people WANTING to fight for their country, rather than forced to.

But this is only one senator, and it'll never pass.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't serve your country for the money.
Click to expand...

But those who want to serve should have the comfort of knowing they and their family will be taken care of and appreciated. Same goes for their pension. These people should not have their $$$ taken from them so some guy who helped the world (Iraq is debatable but there are other worthy fights) ends up eating Alpo dog food in a can (yes...they DO do that)
 
Originally posted by: Jzero
Originally posted by: elanarchist
Um hmm, quick, whats the objective of the SSS? To encourage as many 18-25 year olds as possible to register in case of a draft. Any news of a possible draft means less men will register, so its in their best interest, regardless of reality, to vehemently deny it.
Click to expand...

If $250,000 fine and 5 years in federal prison isn't going to convince you, I don't think a little press release is going to do much to sway your views.
Click to expand...
This is never enforced at the state level. Some have registration rates as low as 70%. So yes, it does make sense for the SSS to try PR-ing people into signing up.
 
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: brigden
Suddenly Canada doesn't look so bad, does it, Yanks?
Click to expand...
Why should I fear the draft? I live here. I take advantage of the freedoms this military provides. If the draft is re-instated and I am called I will proudly serve to the best of my ability. While I think that this senator's reasoning is flawed, I have nothing against the draft itself.

ZV
Click to expand...

well said.
 
Draft will never happen. For one thing, the military can no longer afford to draft and pay thousands of E-1s thanks to inflation. (It's been a while since I've looked at a housing and expenditure chart) per soldier, you're talking on the order of $25k/yr gross pay outside a combat zone, another couple of grand for lodging and food. Then there's the bit the gov't has to chip into CHAMPUS/Tricare (health insurance) and the soldier's retirement (it is a career after all...). So let's round it up to $35k/yr/soldier. Drafting 200,000 people into the military at the E-1 pay grade would amount to $7 billion dollars per year. This, of course, does not account for all other necessary supplies and the cost of construction for lodging and support facilities for these extra 200,000 conscripts.

Cliffs notes: Our military wouldn't know what to do with an extra 100,000 troops, no place to house them and no money to pay them.
 
Rumors about the draft have been floating since post 9/11. However I am now somewhat concerned because I do not understand why any politician would actually suggest the idea during an election season. This is the worse time to even hint at the idea of reinstating the draft, therefore the fact that some of them are talking about the draft means they are pretty damn serious about it.

Now, I have no problem serving, however I think a draft would be a very bad idea. I am under the impression that most general officers in the Pentagon are highly against the draft.

I have been trying to gather some information about getting an Army OCS package together, but like many government related things, it is a very difficult thing to get going.
 
Wow, someone other than Charlie Rangel (D-NY) calling for the draft. Still won't happen. Too much like political suicide.
 
Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever
sounds like a great idea, but they should concentrate more on the outlawing of tobacco products.
Click to expand...
I like my coffin nails, thank you very much

 
So more people can die, but this time unwillingly for their country?

I'm glad I'm Canadian, even though I live in the States.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top