Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
I agree with this post with an addition. Israel requires the draft for both men and women because in the last 67 Years they have fought four wars for their very survival in which their territorial integrity was in question (im not putting a value on any of their occupations which is another matter entirely, simply that their national boundaries have been compromised or been risked compromised a number of times)
The very survival of their nation demands that each and every citizen be militarily trained so that in a national emergency their small professional army can be turned into a large professional army with the snap of a finger.
70 years ago the world was a very different place with many large nations, many large armies which shared relative parity and most of which were militarily and politically opposed to each other. In that light a draft makes sense. Things have changed however and the nature of warfare has changed. In my mind, only the Korean border and the straight of Taiwan represent regions where 'old school' conventional warfare still has the possibility of happening.
The USA is far better off positioned with a regular army of volunteers who regardless of their economic background, ultimately have chosen to be there. That most represents the value they are there to defend most: freedom of choice. If you take that away than the very principle which the US armed forces stand for is shattered.
I'm sorry man but I can't agree. That does not make sense. You're suggesting that with a broader army representing a cross-section of American society the military leaders would face 'constructive' opposition in the ranks which would act as a moral checks and balances to get them thinking twice about the ethics of the conflict in which their involved?
This undervalues the most basic and fundamental aspect of a nation's armed forces. Discipline and dedication to duty. If you are in the army you follow orders. Simple as that. Without it an army cannot function. To even entertain the possibility of dereliction of duty as a moral guage is a scarier thought than re-instating the draft itself. A soldier must follow orders. Every soldier must follow orders, ther very nature of the game is that a commander must order people int osituations where they may get killed. If a soldier refuses the job doesn't get done.
On a basic level this applies all the weay up the chain of command. If Congress orders a war, the Genera's draw up plans. It is not for the army to decide which wars are right but the voting public.
My two cents.