Skip to comments.McChrystal: Time to bring back the draft
Posted on 07/05/2012 11:51:33 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former top commander of international forces in Afghanistan, said this week that the United States should bring back the draft if it ever goes to war again.
"I think we ought to have a draft. I think if a nation goes to war, it shouldn't be solely be represented by a professional force, because it gets to be unrepresentative of the population," McChrystal said at a late-night event June 29 at the 2012 Aspen Ideas Festival. "I think if a nation goes to war, every town, every city needs to be at risk. You make that decision and everybody has skin in the game."
He argued that the burdens of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan haven't been properly shared across the U.S. population, and emphasized that the U.S. military could train draftees so that there wouldn't be a loss of effectiveness in the war effort.
"I've enjoyed the benefits of a professional service, but I think we'd be better if we actually went to a draft these days," he said. "There would some loss of professionalism, but for the nation it would be a better course."
(Excerpt) Read more at thecable.foreignpolicy.com ...
And I guess McChrystal has forgotten how dysfunctional the draft system was during the Vietnam War, which led to the volunteer military in the first place.
So I suggest that the problem is not a volunteer military, but the lack of will of our political leaders to WIN, and the crippling rules of engagement that they impose on our service people, thereby extending the GWOT and stressing the force.
What an asinine statement!
Undependable draftees get good soldiers killed.
Translation: Not enough rich, white boys dying in battle.
I think he’s complaining about the over representation of blacks and Hispanics in the armed forces. He’s not explicitly wrong.
Why would it be right to complain about blacks and Hispanics in the armed forces?
Let's do everything we can to screw it up.
Diversity uber alles!!!
Next time you are in line at Walmart, think about that McChrystal as you survey the young guys with the tatooed arms and legs, nose rings, Mohawk haircuts, eyebrow jewelry and tongue pins.
They might fit in pretty well with an army of Huns or Goths based on appearance, but when the chips are down, they Huns or Goths would kick their sorry butts out of the camp or cut their heads off.
I believe you are absolutely correct. Don’t need a draft.
Will women be included in such a draft, I wonder? If they are not the feminist lobby would go berserk.
“I think we ought to have a draft. I think if a nation goes to war, it shouldn’t be solely be represented by a professional force, because it gets to be unrepresentative of the population,”
This clown was in charge of anything more than a fry vat?
We no longer enter wars to win.
We enter wars to apologize and waste lives and treasure.
I think when you graduate from high school everyone should enter the military and spend at least two years. I also thing that all officers should have to serve time as and enlisted person
Blacks/Hispanics around 33%. Too many? Too few? Whitey still around 67%. Since it all volunteer, he is wrong. Draftees suck, not universally but enough to lower efficiency. Two year enlistments are a recipe for disaster.
Would you be a little nervous if someone like Obama or Holder were elected president and the military was all black?
I also thing that all officers should have to serve time as and enlisted person
Alternate translation: We were hamstrung by a lack of infantry.
In Iraq they were using artillery battalions to do foot patrols.
And of course, men should be forced to bunk with open homosexuals... < /sarc >
How about if Barack Hussein Obama were to go through basic training at least ONCE in his life since he HAS ZERO MILITARY EXPERIENCE and became Commander in Chief.
You are incorrect.
A heritage Foundation study, via DoD data, shows Whites are slightly over represented in the US Military, as are Negroes.
Whites are much more over represented in the combat arms jobs while Negroes and others are under represented.
So-called "Hispanic" people are under represented in all categories of the military.
The demographic study also points out that lower income people are under represented in the military, thus shooting down the fallacy poor people join to get the benefits.
Based on the number of liberals who stepped forward this week to say that the world would've been better off if America had NOT won its independence, they isn't much left to fight for.
Those in charge are against this nation and do not cherish it.
Blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented in the combat arms, especially in the special forces units and always have been.
I agree with all yo u said but think you far to kind and easy on the General. The idea a military oughtn’t to be the finast it can be and able to win, ALWAYS, is about the stupidest thing I have ever heard. This speech was written by Obama for McCrystal.
You will recall Rangle not long ago called for a return of the draft. The reason was obvious. It will give the liberals yet another talking point and a club to beat the anti fight for anything drums. They will as they did before cite the draft as “unfair” having far more minorities then is represented in the general population and on and on.
You don’t fix it if it ain’t broke unless you are looking for an issue to poltiticize and that’s what we see here.
Vietnam is not the only yard stick by which we can measure the combat effectiveness of conscripts. We can also look at Korea and WW2 and draw a much different conclusion. We all know that Vietnam era warfighting was plagued by much more than just unmotivated draftees. It’s political suicide to even discuss it of course but the fact is, any major war waged against a credible threat(s) will require a draft like it or not. If we’re unwilling or unable to even bring it up, we have no business entering such a war and should just rely on bombs and ICBMs.
Interesting thought - my take on this is a little different and disregards the diversity argument: I have been pondering whether one of the reasons we’ve declined as a nation is that EVERYBODY isn’t required to serve when they reach adulthood - no deferrals, no exemptions except for physical or mental inability. It seems to me that when, in McChrystal’s words (though not with his agenda), people have “skin in the game”, they tend to think harder about whether to go to war.
My understanding is that this is true for blacks, but that Special Forces are heavily White Southerner and Hispanic.
He’s probably worried about the gays in the military.
The draft is a way for government to steal the labor and lives of citizens. At most its use is justified in the case of an existential threat to the nation, which is not the case today.
The left used to scold the rest of us that we were “not paying the full price of the oil we imported”. A draft allows government to put a large part of the cost of our defense off on to others. In order to make rational public policy decisions we must force government to pay the full market price for everything that it presses into its service.
Moreover, having nearly free manpower for its armed forces allows government to think going to war costs far less than it does. The Vietnam war cost the lives of tens of thousands of people who would not otherwise have been in a position to die. Had Johnson been forced to pay the full cost in blood for that war, he would have conducted it far more differently. And this is not accounting for the blood shed by the Communists or the civilians who died as a consequence.
My opinion is that a draft FOR ANY REASON (even to be a civilian Obama brownshirt corps assigned to building solar powered wildlife shelters), apart from a substantial DECLARED war is a gross “taking” of the lives and time of citizens.
They ONLY reason we would need a DRAFT is because the HOMOSEXUALS have taken over and no decent straight person wants to go near the military!! I think that time will come very quickly.
Good points, and note that even Korea was arguably not entered into with a view toward defeating the enemy. I think we do better when we seek complete victory, THEN talk about assistance with reconstruction (if at all).
Which is ridiculous - the last time the idiot Rangle brought it up it was proven that the other minorities where under-represented in the military. In other words - it’s those middle class white-boys that make up the largest percentage of the military.
I agree with the sentiment that going back to the Vietnam era setup is just DUMB! As a side note - this idiot NEVER served when the draft existed! He entered Westpoint just a year before it ended!
So you can have the inferior catch the bullets while the professional force drops in behind lines?
That’ll go over well... forcing young Americans to “join up” with the new, politically correct, homo-friendly military.
Huh? We need to fill the military with crackheads, bath-salt zombies and moochers? Yea, that should really make things so much better.
I agree with your sentiment, and am a Navy veteran.
The draftees could fit in a forces category of serving only two years. They would be specifically trained to hold combat positions, on land, on the seas, or in the air.
This would eliminate expensive, long term training in technical schools unless the draftees option to volunteer and sign up for an additional 6-years of active duty.
And of course that gets right back at the "Peace Dividend" nonsense of the 1990s, when infantrymen were separated from the service in the thousands and Fort Ord was closed.
Remember at the time all the DoD rhetoric about how "boots on the ground" wouldn't be needed since technology was the end all-be all of future warfighting.
Do you really want a fighting force representative of the population? Careful what you wish for.
Very rare I rebut my own statement... but on second thought... that may just be the medicine needed to focus civilian minds onto the fallacies of the notion the military has been "improved" with the repeal of DADT.
...or is someone planning to get us into a conflict demanding large numbers of conscripts?
Further, universal service would either require the expansion of the military far beyond the size necessary to do it's mission, or a dramatic shortening of enlistments. The latter would be terrible in terms of troops quality, training, etc..
And finally, I don't think the state has the right to take a couple year of your life absent a true national emergency. The idea that we all inherently owe something to the government is very distateful to me.
I served in the Marine Corps, and am extremely happy that the Marines I commanded were all volunteers.
Exactly... Charlie proposes legislation for a military draft... then promptly votes against it. Must be his meds kicking in.
I’d hazard to guess, ‘white boys’ throughout American Military History, are the ones who have been dispropotionately dying.
I once ran across a PDF of a typewritten report done at the end of WWII that detailed with some specificity the exact casualties, deaths, MIAs, etc. of ALL of our military. My recollection is that whites were far and above the major affected group. I have since searched for this report, but cannot find it where I once did. I suspect Clinton had it erased.
If you’re going to do this, then no exceptions or waivers. No college exceptions, no religious exceptions - you can be a chaplain or a medic - and absolutely NO exceptions for the sons and daughters of politicians or corporate captains. - in fact, they get issued the low draft numbers.
I think a universal draft is a great idea.
The fact that most people no longer serve is one of the main reasons we have a red state/blue state, elites vs. everyone else mentality in this country.
If every entitled darling spent three years as a soldier before Harvard, it would do a lot to end the pernicious classism that has infected our country in recent years.
Women should serve, too, doing the kind of administrative work the WACs and WAVs used to do.
exactly. our willingness to go to war without a total commitment to victory is a gaping hole in our suit of armor and our enemies are becoming increasingly aware of that vulnerability as well as our others.
spelling — “classicism”
That has never worked out as we have seen and you just pointed out.
The only time boots on the ground doesn't work is when you are going to drop a nuke.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.