Posted on Nov 19, 2018
Americans must share the consequences of our wars
107K
755
222
291
291
0
In 2014, I shared the story of an encounter I had on an airplane with a United States military veteran named Tim. He had overheard a fellow passenger suggest that the challenges facing some veterans after 9/11 were “fake news” and unlike during the Vietnam era. “America supports its veterans,” the woman said. Tim then shared his experience after serving in the Marine Corps in Afghanistan. He tried college, but it never stuck. He was battling with Veterans Affairs, and he was unable to find a job.
But then Tim said something that gave me goosebumps. “Worse than all that, now at home, I feel anonymous,” he told told us. Home among the very people who sent him to fight and kill our enemies, Tim feels invisible. For years, our elected leaders have debated strategies to end our wars after 9/11. However, only a brave few have acknowledged that until the costs and consequences of war are equitably shared by all Americans, our wars will drag on, military conflict will remain too painless a pursuit, and the experiment of an all volunteer military will fail us as a nation.
Three truths inform this proposition. First, our wars after 9/11 are not initially funded, at least in part, by taxpayers. Instead, the $5 trillion and growing cost has been largely paid on credit. Second, an exceedingly small number of Americans have directly shouldered the burden, and those who do serve are increasingly not representative of the citizenry. Finally, the assumption we have a ready pool of volunteers is becoming a myth. An estimated 70 percent of American youth are ineligible to volunteer, and the willingness of high school students to consider military service is at a record low. This could explain why the United States Army missed its recruiting goals this year for the first time since 2005.
Most agree that a military composed entirely of volunteers is superior to a conscripted force. However, many also acknowledge that this type of system is beginning to show cracks. Some of those cracks stem from fielding military members separate and apart from those who benefit from a safe and prosperous nation. The worst fears of those who architected the all volunteer military included a concern that because only “some” would shoulder the burdens of war, then war as an instrument of foreign policy would become too easy. They also feared that when those who fight come home, they would be cast as a government problem.
More than four decades and several wars later, I would describe these fears as prophetic. Since 1973, the United States has used military force on more than 220 occasions. Alternatively, in the 45 years prior when a draft was the law of the land, the United States leveraged military force as an instrument of foreign policy on just 24 occasions. Some of this contrast can rightfully be attributed to an complex global security situation, but it is also likely true that when you do not have to pay the bill, and when it is not your child being compelled to fight our battles, war is too easy.
Why do those who volunteer come home and cite lack of connection to civilian society? It is because after 17 years of war, we have discounted the foundational assumption sustaining the all volunteer force that those who benefit from the military service of others incur a moral obligation to those who serve the cause of defending our nation. Today, while a laudable segment of Americans remain committed to the concerns of veterans, the majority is not. Last year, less than 1 percent of charitable contributions in the United States went to veterans organizations. By comparison, Americans gave to animal welfare charities at five times that level. Most Americans are against reinstating the draft. Consequently, it is time to have a conversation focused on mechanisms to equitably share the burden of current and future wars with all members of our society.
I can offer a likely provocative start to that conversation. Congress should enact law requiring companies generating revenue from federal defense contracts to make annual philanthropic contributions to organizations that serve veterans and their families, equal to 1 percent of total operating profit generated from those contracts. Congress should enact law requiring colleges to make financial aid available to veterans, equal to 1 percent of the federal funding received annually by each institution. Those colleges must also admit students connected to the military, equal to or exceeding 1 percent of the total student population. Furthermore, Congress should enact law requiring all households to pay an annual military tax of $15. This would fund a national veterans trust designated to public and private programs serving the needs of military families.
After 17 years in Afghanistan, our elected leaders must demonstrate the courage to introduce policy requiring all Americans to shoulder the costs and consequences of war. In the absence of courage, war as a tool for diplomacy will remain far too easy a pursuit, our battles will drag on without end in sight, and veterans like Tim will remain anonymous.
Michael Haynie is a veteran of the United States Air Force, vice chancellor of Syracuse University, and executive director of the Institute for Veterans and Military Families. The views expressed in this column are his alone and not the views of RallyPoint.
*This article originally appeared on the Hill.
But then Tim said something that gave me goosebumps. “Worse than all that, now at home, I feel anonymous,” he told told us. Home among the very people who sent him to fight and kill our enemies, Tim feels invisible. For years, our elected leaders have debated strategies to end our wars after 9/11. However, only a brave few have acknowledged that until the costs and consequences of war are equitably shared by all Americans, our wars will drag on, military conflict will remain too painless a pursuit, and the experiment of an all volunteer military will fail us as a nation.
Three truths inform this proposition. First, our wars after 9/11 are not initially funded, at least in part, by taxpayers. Instead, the $5 trillion and growing cost has been largely paid on credit. Second, an exceedingly small number of Americans have directly shouldered the burden, and those who do serve are increasingly not representative of the citizenry. Finally, the assumption we have a ready pool of volunteers is becoming a myth. An estimated 70 percent of American youth are ineligible to volunteer, and the willingness of high school students to consider military service is at a record low. This could explain why the United States Army missed its recruiting goals this year for the first time since 2005.
Most agree that a military composed entirely of volunteers is superior to a conscripted force. However, many also acknowledge that this type of system is beginning to show cracks. Some of those cracks stem from fielding military members separate and apart from those who benefit from a safe and prosperous nation. The worst fears of those who architected the all volunteer military included a concern that because only “some” would shoulder the burdens of war, then war as an instrument of foreign policy would become too easy. They also feared that when those who fight come home, they would be cast as a government problem.
More than four decades and several wars later, I would describe these fears as prophetic. Since 1973, the United States has used military force on more than 220 occasions. Alternatively, in the 45 years prior when a draft was the law of the land, the United States leveraged military force as an instrument of foreign policy on just 24 occasions. Some of this contrast can rightfully be attributed to an complex global security situation, but it is also likely true that when you do not have to pay the bill, and when it is not your child being compelled to fight our battles, war is too easy.
Why do those who volunteer come home and cite lack of connection to civilian society? It is because after 17 years of war, we have discounted the foundational assumption sustaining the all volunteer force that those who benefit from the military service of others incur a moral obligation to those who serve the cause of defending our nation. Today, while a laudable segment of Americans remain committed to the concerns of veterans, the majority is not. Last year, less than 1 percent of charitable contributions in the United States went to veterans organizations. By comparison, Americans gave to animal welfare charities at five times that level. Most Americans are against reinstating the draft. Consequently, it is time to have a conversation focused on mechanisms to equitably share the burden of current and future wars with all members of our society.
I can offer a likely provocative start to that conversation. Congress should enact law requiring companies generating revenue from federal defense contracts to make annual philanthropic contributions to organizations that serve veterans and their families, equal to 1 percent of total operating profit generated from those contracts. Congress should enact law requiring colleges to make financial aid available to veterans, equal to 1 percent of the federal funding received annually by each institution. Those colleges must also admit students connected to the military, equal to or exceeding 1 percent of the total student population. Furthermore, Congress should enact law requiring all households to pay an annual military tax of $15. This would fund a national veterans trust designated to public and private programs serving the needs of military families.
After 17 years in Afghanistan, our elected leaders must demonstrate the courage to introduce policy requiring all Americans to shoulder the costs and consequences of war. In the absence of courage, war as a tool for diplomacy will remain far too easy a pursuit, our battles will drag on without end in sight, and veterans like Tim will remain anonymous.
Michael Haynie is a veteran of the United States Air Force, vice chancellor of Syracuse University, and executive director of the Institute for Veterans and Military Families. The views expressed in this column are his alone and not the views of RallyPoint.
*This article originally appeared on the Hill.
Edited 6 y ago
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 99
I agree that the cost of freedom is not being equally shared and should be. Not sure how the forced donations to vet organizations would do more than insure more corruption and graft in those organizations. I would like to see a mandatory two year conscription, whether that is in the military service or other federal service. IMO, one of the strengths of the draft was the diversity.
(73)
(0)
Sgt Jay Jones
The biggest "Welfare" group in the United States are those who have done nothing for their freedom. Freedom isn't free, but the "All Volunteer" force is being forced to shoulder deployment after deployment. You had more people concerned about Demi Lovato's drug overdose, than the U.S. Servicemen killed in combat to protect our freedom that week.
(1)
(0)
PO2 David Ball
Nope, the weakness of the draft was that some groups were either targeted or could not make the arguments to get out of service... Also what diversity are you talking about???
Whites are still the largest group of people in the United States by race and sex (around 70%). Blacks, however, are 7 percent by race and sex... (14% in total) so what is the total rate of service by race anyway???
Whites are still the largest group of people in the United States by race and sex (around 70%). Blacks, however, are 7 percent by race and sex... (14% in total) so what is the total rate of service by race anyway???
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
CPT Philip Bailey
The draft or conscription needs to be a last resort to filling the needs of the service. If we can meet the needs of the nation with an all volunteer force then we should do so. The all volunteer force is far superior military when compared to a conscripted force. An all volunteer force is more expensive and typically smaller. I remember the problems with a force that contained draftees. The problems with discipline, evasion of service, and uneven distribution of exemptions from the draft made the system difficult to manage and created perceptions that the wealthy could avoid combat or service all together. The draft did not make Americans appreciate the service of members. The opposite was true.
(0)
(0)
I think the military and the civilians are tired of these wars. Our senior military leaders said this will not be another Vietnam, however 17 years later we are still stuck in a quagmire. I concur there is apathy.
(41)
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
SFC Melvin Brandenburg - Ideology is often the Center of Gravity. Alexander the Great, the Mongols, the British, and the Soviets killed millions of Afghans but could not break the Afghans ideology of having an independent nation.
(0)
(0)
SFC Barbara Layman
PO1 Donald Kennelly - "PO1 Donald Kennelly 2 mo
I think the military is tired of war. I think the civilians don't care one way or the other. Not on their radar. You have the warrior class and you have the civilians. Unlike previous wars where everyone knew someone in the military personally; there are now those who know of no one personally that are or have been in the military. "we deserve what we get because we volunteered for it" is what I hear."
You are so right. I had 2 neighbors - 1 a disabled VN vet the other, same age, with no military service of any kind. The vet operated a small business out of his garage converting vehicles to right side steering for rural mail carriers.
The other fellow complained frequently threatening to report the vet for fraud because he was 'totally disabled' and shouldn't be doing any kind of work. When it was explained that the vet's 100% didn't mean he couldn't work at all, but was specifically directed at the work he was trained to do for the military and was apparently not qualified for reclass because he wasn't, the guy's flippant response was "He was a fool, he volunteered so he asked for it."
That ignorant jackass had absolutely no clue and wasn't interested in learning.
I think the military is tired of war. I think the civilians don't care one way or the other. Not on their radar. You have the warrior class and you have the civilians. Unlike previous wars where everyone knew someone in the military personally; there are now those who know of no one personally that are or have been in the military. "we deserve what we get because we volunteered for it" is what I hear."
You are so right. I had 2 neighbors - 1 a disabled VN vet the other, same age, with no military service of any kind. The vet operated a small business out of his garage converting vehicles to right side steering for rural mail carriers.
The other fellow complained frequently threatening to report the vet for fraud because he was 'totally disabled' and shouldn't be doing any kind of work. When it was explained that the vet's 100% didn't mean he couldn't work at all, but was specifically directed at the work he was trained to do for the military and was apparently not qualified for reclass because he wasn't, the guy's flippant response was "He was a fool, he volunteered so he asked for it."
That ignorant jackass had absolutely no clue and wasn't interested in learning.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
I don't know if this amounts to a hill of beans, but Sparta was strong due to its citizen warriors.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
SFC Melvin Brandenburg - I concur with you. In Vietnam and Afghanistan we were unable to protect villages, and we had a queer way of winning the hearts of minds by shooting civilians and burning down villages.
(0)
(0)
When the masses do not have to experience any of the hardships lived by others, they have no buy in... No reason to care at all. Not for the use of the troops or against..
Its not on their radar at all if they are here in the states or in some far away land.,,, the troops are just a bumper sticker, a quick flash in view when the media makes some coverage, or they see someone in uniform, and as quick as moment came, its gone just as fast....
The saying "America is not at war, America is at the mall, the Military is at war" is silly, yet true.
An excellent article Maj Michael Haynie, thank you for the efforts you make for vets, current and future.
Its not on their radar at all if they are here in the states or in some far away land.,,, the troops are just a bumper sticker, a quick flash in view when the media makes some coverage, or they see someone in uniform, and as quick as moment came, its gone just as fast....
The saying "America is not at war, America is at the mall, the Military is at war" is silly, yet true.
An excellent article Maj Michael Haynie, thank you for the efforts you make for vets, current and future.
(37)
(0)
Read This Next