AntiDraft Policy - a failed standard of the Sixties

drieux H. (
Mon, 5 Aug 1996 20:24:20 -0400

What seems to have gone missing in the general
review of the Failed Policies, and agenda items
of the sixties, is the current position we find
ourselves in with our 'all volunteer' armed forces
and it's slow but stead detachment of the the US Military
from it's traditional role as both the Citizen's Armed Forces,
as well as a portion of the 'melting pot' in this land of
the great cultural diversities.

Granted, the US Military has not been one of the Greatest
Bastions of Progressive Liberal Policies, but it was worth
noting in the recent reveiws, that the Military was doing
far better in it's resolution of sexual harrasment cases,
than was occuring in the Civilian Corporate Counterparts.
It should also be recalled, that while Civilian Organizations
were still considering the idea of 'integration' the US Armed
Forces were in fact leading the charge, both by taking Federal
Law Seriously, as well as by the far simpler method of obliging
folks from all ranks to just work it out, and leave those Civilian
Attitudes at the Main Gate to the Base.

I understand that there were some apparently good reasons to
attack the draft, and for the Government to end the draft, as
a part of the politial manuevering of the sixties, since the
draft was a primary source of manpower for the war in vietnam,
and by Ending it, it disarmed the Major Concern of a Lot of Nice
People who would otherwise have been willing to Support the Government,
were it to limit it's warfare to the use of merely the Untermenschen.

But I fear that the long term problems remain, and that we will
not be able to fix them simply by the continued policies of
creating and maintaining an 'independent' Military detached
from it's primary base of support the Civilian Community. As such,
I am an advocate of the restoration of the Draft, so as to 'right size'
the armed forces to the relevant levels we will actually NEED to maintain
for Peace Time Operations, as well as to cycle through it the large body
of 'reserve components' that will be required during time of war.

Granted, such a policy, will increase the requirement for the Government
to call upon the 'Reserve' Component when we seek to embark upon
wars abroad, but I am not too sure that this is as frightening a downside
as it might at first appear, since it would Oblige the Government to make
clear why we are embarking upon Military Operations Abroad, and whether or
not the Government actually believes we are in a State of War.

This, it would appear, might have cleared up some of the Ambiguity
that came with the Vietnam Era Politics. And yes, given that there
was a Draft On Going during that time, it did have the nasty habit
of providing the AntiWar Faction with a Primary First Lever for trying
to oblige the Government to clarify it's position.

Currently, we do not have any such a lever with the Government, and
as one notices from so much of the Press of Late, Operations Abroad
are merely a part of 'biznizz as usual' - and gracefully out of sight
for so many civilians. "Well They Volunteered."

The trick, of course, will be to find that 'right sized' armed force
that will be both cost effective, as well as readily scalable, without
leaving the Government with a large enough chuck of miscellaneous Bodies
readily available to embark upon wars of adventure.