Posted: 6/5/2007 6:44:01 PM EDT
www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?storyID=7062 Discuss |
|
|
Scare tactics. And the fact that involuntary servitude, whether it be for a cotton farming 'Southern Gentleman' or the Government, is against my religion -- the US Constitution. And I'm too old. And have too much stuff wrong with me. I do have my own guns and ammo though :) I read an analysis somewhere (maybe linked to from here) that only about 10% of our forces are actually in contact, the rest of them are on fortified bases. Maybe that has something to do with their lack of traction. And now it looks like Turkey has had enough of the Kurds, this could get way too interesting here pretty soon... |
Nothing to do with "lack of traction"... It takes a lot of butts in chairs, loading docks, hospitals, radio rooms, chow halls, motorpools, mechanics bays, flight lines, ect..ect... to support one ditch digger. 
|
|
This is from someone who never served, so take it for what it's worth. Stepping aside from this specific war to our country as a whole, I think compulsory service is a terrific idea, and one I wish they had when I was a stupid young man. I like the idea of a two year commitment, with an opt-out into something non-violent for peaceniks. I think we should do it Heinlein style, and tie voting rights into it - no service, no vote. Some pitfalls I see are getting quality people in NCO leadership positions, and training people for very technical MOS's. You could address some of that by encouraging people to serve more than two years in exchange for some set of benefits - college money or the like. But the quality issue is one I haven't been entirely able to address in my cogitating about this. The benefits of compulsory service are twofold: First, I think actually serving - and potentially dying for - your country would engender a greater appreciation for the liberty and freedom we enjoy. Too many kids today go from high school, to college to some damn sharpie job without having to sweat or suffer. That's to the peril of us all. And second, I think it'd be harder to take us to war, if everybody's children are under arms. After Vietnam, the junior level officers who served there took steps to see that we couldn't fight a major war without involving the reserves. The idea behind that was the Clausewitzian idea of political capital - the people must be aware of and believe in a war if it is to succeed. Check out Harry G. Summers' "On Strategy" I and II to see what the hell I'm talking about. To be sure, Bush II and his pals have called up the reserves for this war. However, because so few people actually serve these days, our plutocratic oligarchs (oligarchic plutocrats?) in the White Houes haven't had to worry about the widespread disaprobation a general draft would entail. So, they've kept on their merry way - sending in a wildly optimistic small number of troops to begin with, and only begrudgingly accepting the idea that we face an insurgency. Wores, they've been pretty merciless about sending good folks back, for tour after tour after tour. But since the pain is limited to a small demographic, they get away with it, and the rest of us lazy fuckers keep on trucking - drinking our lattes, buying SUV's and slapping little yellow ribbons on them. One thing I've been struck by is the idea that some of the best folks we have - those who stepped up and enlisted, have been giving their all for a set of politicians who would happily sell them down the river. Fuck that. I say it's time to share the suffering. Like I said, this all comes from someone who never served. I took my dad's advice on it - he served in Vietnam, and told me to avoid service if I could. But as I've grown older, I've really come to appreciate the value of serving one's country. The more of us that do that, the better off I think we'll be. </rant> |
10% now, it was more like 5% years ago. We didn't have Halibutin (sp) serving meals and hauling fuel ammo etc. Thats why the CIB was such a prized award. From talking with MPScout things have changed. It's even harder to get now. |
|
CIB still goes to Infantrymen who deserve it, CAB goes to anybody else who has been in documented contact with the enemy. I think that Germany has the right idea about either the service for 2 years or something else to serve your country when you hit 18. As an NCO I do shudder about what kind of soldiers we'd get, but then if Basic Training went back to how it was (ie alot harder and more discipline based) we'd be better off, too. Plus if more people had a military background then we'd have less people ignoring whats we're doing, and only caring long enough to complain. |
|
I didn't voluntarily give the better part of a decade to my country so that my son and daughter would be forced to go fight in some rich man's war. Fuck that! No offense to those who have served honorably in a draft army, but I also do not want to work with conscripts. If we can't get the job done with a volunteer Army, we shouldn't be doing it, with one exception. If we were invaded by a standing army of a foreign nation, then yes, a draft would be called for. I do not, however, have any problem with compulsory civic/state/federal service to be served between 18 and 2 years after whatever age it is that doctors graduate. |
That is about the only time I would agree. However I have no problem with every male putting in 2 years after his Basic Training/AIT into at least the National Guard. (Air/Army) |