Replies

Friend, do you not see the contradiction of points 3 and 4?

It is not really a contradiction. Again, in Vietnam the most who went were in the lower classes. Those who could afford it, got their kids college deferments. If the upper classes participate in a draft, there will be more pressure to win by whatever means necessary.

That being said, Lyndon B. Johnson was a political genius, but a military idiot. I think (hope) politicians have learned from his mistakes. Rule #1 — leave the day-to-day conduct of the war to the professional officers.

And yes, I have daughters too—though they are younger. But it doesn’t matter, if I lost any of my kids, it would totally devastate my wife and I. But I’d rather lose a kid, than lose the future.

You know, we could draft even more people.

1. Draft males 17 to 30. That seems reasonable.
2. Draft females 17 to 30.
3. Draft healthy males and females 31-50 for non-combat support to relieve more men for combat rolls.

Ridiculous? I don’t think that the possibilities should be ignored.

We are lied to about women not serving in combat, while they ARE indeed. And I predict that once they can get the public to agree to conscripting females, there will then be NO limits to whom may be conscripted for one reason or another.

Personally, I believe that the military should accept voluntary enlistment of older men who can still move around quite handily.