Should we reinstate the draft? Would it affect the quality of our military? Would it drive better policy decisions?

2015-01-24T09:43:31-05:00

Here's an interesting perspective from the Atlantic. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/how-i-learned-to-love-the-draft/383500/

How I Learned to Love the Draft

A veteran of the Cold War–era draft argues that once again sharing the burden of defending the country would produce better foreign policy—and better Americans.

Response by SFC Collin McMillion made Jan 24 at 2015 9:56 AM

2015-01-24T09:56:20-05:00

I would have to vote yes. No one really liked the draft, but at least we got a cross section of people that made our military a place where even if you didn'the want to be there, you still did your job just to get out, now it's join the military and if you don'the like it, quit and go home. Get a pay check, have fun, play around, but when it come to being a real soldier scream for moms and go home. I know this does not apply to all current service members, but old school knew if you messed up, you got messed up.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Jan 24 at 2015 9:59 AM

2015-01-24T09:59:29-05:00

I vote NO on this. There are fair arguments on both sides of this, but I look at what appears to have happened with the Army during its most recent draft era (Vietnam), and what the aftermath was for the force after that. My main concern is that I don't want people in the Army (or the military at large) who do not WANT to be in the military. If I am out on patrol with a platoon of 30 personnel, I want to know that each and every one of those 30 people joined the military because he/she wanted to do it -- knowing full well what that meant. During Vietnam, my understanding is that the military at large suffered from problems related to drug abuse, good order and discipline, and morale due to many service members being forced to serve. Again, I acknowledge that there are decent arguments on both sides here, but my vote is NO. PS -- I wish this thread was in a survey format. :)

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2015 10:03 AM

2015-01-24T10:03:45-05:00

Andrew Bacevich’s book, "Breach of Trust: How Americans Failed Their Soldiers and Their Country" discusses this with the argument that the American people have lost touch with their military and a draft would have them become more connected.
He uses WWII as a story of a successful draft military that won the war, and he also uses Vietnam as an example of how society at home (the 1960's) impacted the draft Army which was more closely linked to the people.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jan 24 at 2015 10:19 AM

2015-01-24T10:19:18-05:00

There are huge benefits to an all volunteer service. First is longer commitments. IIRC the draft had a requirement of 2 years, which just using my time in the Marines... I was was in Boot Camp for 3 months, MCT for a month, Intel School for 3 months. That's just to get me ready for my first unit. So almost half a year gone. I can't think of any school in the Marines that will really get you to your unit in under 6~ months. So your remaining obligation of 1.5 years just doesn't provide anything.

I had not completed my first deployment until after the 2.5 year mark, and I arrived at my unit right as they got back from their previous WestPac, so I was able to experience a full work up cycle.

All that said, with an all volunteer force, you get folks who sign up for 4-6 years initially. That gave me 2 full deployments at my first unit. I learned a lot, through the first deployment.. but more importantly I was able to utilize that knowledge on the second one.

That's just from a time standpoint.

Then we get into the conscription aspect.

Indentured servitude is wrong. The Draft (in the modern era) is nothing more than that.

In the modern era where we are not defending the USA's soil, but instead promoting Global Stability with our Military (which is also important), it is impossible to convey WHY this duty is so important people must be conscripted.

We aren't protecting 'us' anymore, but all the 'thems' of the world.

Having an inactive draft makes sense, if another Pearl Harbor happens. But not for the modern face of warfare. For that, we need volunteers.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2015 10:52 AM

2015-01-24T10:52:44-05:00

Placing requirements on how citizens use their time and talents is foreign to the idea of a free country. It places undue limitation on both Life and Liberty. I can only see a draft as justified in the event of national survival--nothing else rises to the level of placing someone in such a position.

Also, I simply don't believe that society will allow us to change the training environment back to what it was in order to absorb large numbers of people who do not want to be there. Those who want a return to the "Full Metal Jacket" style basic, well, it'll be a necessity. That had to go away because the number of people who will volunteer to be abused is very small. You have to remove the element of choice.

Further, once the labor is less scarce, it's value will decline. Pay raises will stop, if not be cut, and benefits will be rolled back with no need to attract volunteers.

And finally, people like me would not willingly serve in such a force. I will lead Soldiers. I will not drive slaves. Some portion of conscripts will assimilate and become fine troops, even if unwillingly, and some will simply not, which is not a leadership challenge that I am willing to meet or place on someone else.

If we need a greater bridge between the civilian and the military, the answer is larger Reserve Components (and a return to community basing in the Guard in particular), which is also a potential answer to budget problems, as well as being right in line with the principles of the founders.

As for better policy, anyone here agree that the choice to engage in Vietnam, and especially the string of choices on how to engage were better policy than today? I submit that with a draft, the military can be as big as you want it to be, you can deliberately choose to forgo survivability, engage in as much attrition as you want, and send the troops on as many deployments and fight as many wars, for whatever reasons, as you like. You won't run out of troops and they'll have no voice.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Jan 24 at 2015 11:07 AM

2015-01-24T11:07:22-05:00

These are three seperate and almost independent questions.

Should we have a draft? While I am personally in favor of mandatory service (but not specifically military service) given our current draw down state, a draft is not only not needed, but unwarranted.

As for quality, the simply fact that that many of our most decorated military members were originally drafted and many drafted members chose to say after thier initial terms of service shows that the quality of a drafted SM is no less than a volunteer.

As to policy, only if there were absolutely positively no exceptions outside of medical disqualification. Otherwise it will be abused just like it was abused in Vietnam.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2015 12:11 PM

2015-01-24T12:11:25-05:00

Lt Col Skip Fleshman, think of the issues that we have now with a volunteer force (disrespect to superiors, ducking Colors, improper wear of the uniform, etc.) and then factor in people who don't want to be there. How could that POSSIBLY make things better?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2015 12:22 PM

2015-01-24T12:22:08-05:00

I think it would improve the quality of our country.

Response by Sgt Adam Jennings made Jan 24 at 2015 12:28 PM

2015-01-24T12:28:10-05:00

Bad idea, the citizens of the U.S. Aren't the same caliber of citizens of the WWII era. I'm not trying do down any certain generation, but the WWII generation came from a great time of despair whereas just about every generation since then has not had that issue and has become more and more entitlement minded. A draft now would be even more of a disaster than it was in Vietnam.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Jan 24 at 2015 1:59 PM

2015-01-24T13:59:43-05:00

It would be a great tool to give the average citizen a clue, but in the periods we had a draft, we had huge formations from platoon through Echelons above theater to fill. Through random luck, draftees were either Infantryman or some esoteric MOS handing out towels at the gym, sampling ice thickness in Greenland, playing the oboe at the officers club, or the like. A lot of the functions filled have been supplanted by IT systems ( like moving routine correspondence). I also think about the people problems we have now, that under a draft system, would be ignored or would have to be solved by correctional custody or even time in the Brig. That could be solved by appropriate legislation that would make failure to complete an enlistment for other than medical reasons (ie discipline ala Ch13/14) a felony. All of this has to be undergirded by national resources to draft, screen, select, train, equip, maintain, and employ draftees. You would also have to have a draft large enough to make it "fair" and not some random disaster visited upon the random few who would be inducted. The power of the draft connecting the people to the conflict is only achieved if it is wide enough to affect a large part of the county, across socio-economic lines. College deferment would only be possible for those who have already served, are contracted ROTC Cadets, delayed entry OCS enlistments, or are service academy cadets/midshipmen. Our society lacks the where with all to do this.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2015 11:23 PM

2015-01-24T23:23:20-05:00

Why would we reinstate the draft when we are going through massive force shaping efforts to kick individuals out because the defense budget is continuously being cut? I may be young and naive, but i see no strategic benefit to bringing back the draft when we are turning people away from the military right and left. Furthermore, I believe when you are grabbing random individuals to fight in any war without knowing beforehand that they, at least, agree to idea of being in the military, you will have a quality issue without question.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2015 10:14 PM

2015-01-25T22:14:49-05:00

The main thing I'm wonder is if you are of course refering to conscription or a draft where in the case of a large scale conflict to bolster the ranks and overall manpower. In the case of conscription I have to disagree for I don't find it to be fiscally responsible. Many countries can justify the use of conscription laws due to low population numbers.

I also find it to be irresponsible due to the idea of it potentially pulling many civilians out of higher education facilities and pulling civilians out of the economy.

I can't say that it is a horrible idea, but I believe it is an antiquated practice that has no place in our society.

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Jan 25 at 2015 10:30 PM

2015-01-25T22:30:14-05:00

Having a draft Army, an all volunteer Army, or compulsory service is not a matter of right or wrong. It is a matter of advantages and disadvantages of each system and what affect we, as a society, want to make by choosing either system. I have tried to articulate some advantages (+) and disadvantages (-) of each below.
Draft Army.
+ All citizens at equal risk or probability of being selected (theoretically).
- Potentially leads to corruption of the system when not implemented consistently and fairly.
- Large turnover of lower ranked personnel with only small cadre of career personnel leads to resulting drop in expertise and competence from what we have now with all volunteer Army.
Compulsory Service.
+ All citizens of a nation have a shared experience and understanding of the costs and benefits of security.
+All citizens of a nation are better educated and informed as to security issues.
+All citizens have a direct stake in security decisions.
- Very hard to implement in a country of 330M people and after 40+ years of an all volunteer force.
- Very hard to implement when a large percentage of the target population (18-24 year olds) is unqualified for service (no HS diploma, felons, out of shape, medical, etc).
All Volunteer Army.
+ Increased ability to gain and maintain expertise.
+ More reliable Soldiers since all volunteered to serve rather than being ordered.
- Increasing risk over time of a separation between those who are protected and those who do the protecting.
- Already leading to a "family business" type of Army where children of military personnel are more likely to serve than children of non military personnel (my perception). Helps to create the disadvantage noted above.
- Higher costs than a draft or a compulsory service Army. Have to pay more and recruit more.

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Jan 26 at 2015 12:57 AM

2015-01-26T00:57:29-05:00

Lt Col Skip Fleshman, my own experience was that when the first big draft lottery was held on 1DEC69 (for application 1JAN70), I had already been in basic training for about a month! My number was 332 and had I not enlisted, I would never have had to serve.

However, I like and agree with CPT Aaron Kletzing's remarks, so I won't reiterate them here.

President George Washington's thoughts on the matter were as follows:

"It may be laid down as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every Citizen who enjoys the protection of a free Government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at a Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency."

Response by LTC Marc King made Mar 18 at 2015 2:45 PM

2015-03-18T14:45:40-04:00

Making the case for Universal Military Conscription / National Service.

Many of you on Rally Point are too young to remember a country where all qualified military male over the age of 18 years were required to serve in the military. Now before you jump me, extolling the outstanding performance of the all-volunteer force – allow me to make my case. In 1966 when I enlisted in the Army we were a force of volunteers and draftees designated “RA” if you enlisted and “US” if you were drafted. We were also a force of significant racial, economic, religious and geographic diversity. Meeting people from all parts of the country, rich guys, poor guys, high school drop outs and college graduates; training with them, exchanging barracks talk with them and learning how to be a team in basic training with them provided an experience that would remain you for the rest of your life. Even in today’s force of volunteers this type of cultural exchange is still experienced so I’m not addressing this to those of you who have benefited from such an experience but I want you to consider what the impact is across society on all of those who have not had the experience, the exchange or the exposure to something other than their Face Book page and “World of War” X-Box video game.

You can sense that there is something being lost in the country – the late night shows interview young people on the street who cannot identify a picture of the Vice President, they don’t know who we fought in WWII or how the first president of the United States was… In 1966 we all knew the Chain of Command – a picture of the Commander in Chief hung in every barracks and office building in the military and there was a quiz… and even if you “did not want to be there you got the lesson and then you moved on – but you got the lesson and 2 years later when the enlistment was completed and 20 years later when discussing the experience with your grandchildren – you still remembered. You remembered your General Orders, the serial number of, what was for many their first weapon. You remembered the first time you spoke to an African American from Yazoo, Mississippi, a surfer from California, a cowboy from Montana or a Jew from New York. You shared ideas, cultures and thought on religion. Sometimes you did not agree and from time to time someone threw a punch – but you were all soldiers and when the time came to standup for each other that is exactly what happened.

A great deal of time was spent on the rifle range, everyone fired their weapon for qualification and learned gun safety on the process. Perhaps if that was still the case the paranoia that grips the country regarding gun control would be less if everyone understood guns better.

So the case is for universal conscription – we have progressed since 1966. Woman have a very different role in society today than they did in 1966. Service to the nation is no longer in the sphere of males only. Women contribute and women should serve right alongside the men. Today’s laws regarding registration need to be changed to require women to register as well. And then we need to return to the business of requiring all eligible men and women 18 years old to serve the nation. No deferments, no buying your way out, school can wait till the service is completed – and we would also see a lower dropout rate at the university level. Education comes in many forms and a tour of duty serving the nation imparts great wisdom – technical skills, a lost art in this country, serves to satisfy the wonder lust for travel to different and exotic places so when you return concentrating on a life skill such as formal school seems a great deal less arduous. Been there – done that!
A better educated, more well-rounded citizen – a citizen who understands civics and who and what the nation stands for – having served, who can appreciate as you do the special opportunities that United States offers. Imagine if you will a society where all can say “I served” – I think we need to rethink our approach. What do you think?

Response by Col William DeMaso made Apr 22 at 2015 8:59 PM

2015-04-22T20:59:46-04:00

My gut tells me that a draft / mandatory military commitment by all Americans is a good thing. However, when you look at the way a draft or mandatory service requirement works, you'll find that the actual affect is relatively limited. This is due to the numerous categories of candidates that are excluded. The analysis reveals that the all-volunteer force actually enables a healthy organization and doesn't result in a necessarily restricted pool of candidates. I recommend you review: http://www.hooverpress.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=680
Martin Anderson, Hoover Fellow, made some interesting conclusions, which he and I discussed during my time as a National Security Fellow in the early 2000's.

Registration and the Draft: Proceedings of the Hoover-Rochester Conference on the All-Volunteer...

You must have javascript enabled to utilize the functionality of this website. If you have set your security settings to high, please reduce to medium

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Oct 31 at 2015 5:19 PM

2015-10-31T17:19:35-04:00

Heck no! I don't think that today's military should have to deal with all of the country's youth. I realize it would be good for the country to instill some sense of discipline and sacrifice into today's youth, but that really should start in the home. I couldn't imagine today's professional military dealing with the turnover resulting from a draft. Plus, the cost would be unreal.

Response by SPC Elijah J. Henry, MBA made Oct 31 at 2015 5:20 PM

2015-10-31T17:20:19-04:00

Now? No. Why should it be?

Response by SSG Robert Webster made Oct 31 at 2015 5:27 PM

2015-10-31T17:27:27-04:00

Yes

Response by SPC David S. made Oct 31 at 2015 5:32 PM

2015-10-31T17:32:41-04:00

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 31 at 2015 9:20 PM

2015-10-31T21:20:53-04:00

Yes. Maybe the country will give a damn if the females are in harms way.

Response by 1SG Nick Baker made Oct 31 at 2015 10:55 PM

2015-10-31T22:55:35-04:00

Well the Drafted Nam Vets are the ones that stayed around and made the US Army better. They got screwed over, but made my 20 years was a great career.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2015 11:11 PM

2015-10-31T23:11:25-04:00

The military is looking to recruit more troops. No better way than a draft!

Response by SGT Scott Henderson made Nov 1 at 2015 9:15 AM

2015-11-01T09:15:33-05:00

Dear god NO!!!! There's already too many dipshit privates who VOLUNTEERED for service and then complain and cause problems. With the de-balling of the NCO Corps by DoD I can't imagine the discipline problems that would manifest if we instituted the draft with the knuckleheads of this generation.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 2 at 2015 3:20 PM

2015-11-02T15:20:32-05:00

I don't think the draft should be reinstated. I do think that every citizen of the U.S. should have to complete mandatory federal service, whether it's military or government. This way everyone would have a perspective of what we in the military have to go through and put up with from those who did not serve. This should also be necessary if you want to vote.

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 1:07 PM

2015-11-06T13:07:10-05:00

No, as long as the all volunteer service provides enough volunteers, there is no need for the draft.

Response by SSG Carlos Madden made Nov 6 at 2015 1:17 PM

2015-11-06T13:17:22-05:00

Good for democracy, bad for the military.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Nov 6 at 2015 1:37 PM

2015-11-06T13:37:44-05:00

Having uninterested members serving is a horrible idea. If a major event such as WWIII ever occurs, and we are in dire need, then re-initiating it for the duration of the war I support.

But if something like that ever happened again, sign me up.

Response by PO1 Cleve Ikaika Waiwaiole made Nov 6 at 2015 1:58 PM

2015-11-06T13:58:55-05:00

I believe this method of enlarging the military force would be useful only during a time of a critical war of the sort. This should be a last option when our forces are diminishing and our nation is in dire need to protect itself against a force thats too overwhelming for what we already have.

my honest opinion.