I disagree with Ron Paul...

Every human being on Earth should read that.

Spooner has been dead for years, and is still kicking ass and taking names (non-violently, of course)...lol.
 
I just think that there are times where it can be necessary.... you cannot predict the future, so to say we should get rid of the draft is just ignorant, in my opinion.

With the improvements in technology and warfare systems, the amount of infantry is greatly reduced. Therefore, I suspect that a voluntary draft would be sufficient and paid mercenaries would be all you would need. Our Navy and Airforce would be sufficient I think.

Who the hell is capable of invaded the US anyway?? Who is the most likely aggressor that would even think to under-take such insane mission?
 
I would sign up if the cause was right, at this point in my life there have been no wars worthy of giving my life up for.
 
Draft is Slavery.

This seems like a good place for this:
"The Supreme Court's 1918 decision that federal conscription is constitutional was explicitly based on the contemporary practice in the German Empire, Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, Turkish Empire, British Empire, Japanese Empire...."Do you see a theme?
From: Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution pg. 156

The SC's decision was not based on the constitution; but rather the custom in other empires.
 
One positive thing that having a draft would be that it would be much more hard for us to go to wars.

Having a professional army, like America at the current moment, allows the government to invade and attack other countries without any serious public opposition.
If mandatory military service was around, the public would be outraged if their sons are shipped to a war like Libya or Iraq.
 
Personally, I wish we had stayed out of WW1 and WW2. If we had stayed neutral, what harm could have happened? Did we need to lose so many of our people? I know Pearl harbor got bombed, and I don't pretend to know all the answers. But I feel that the right course of action would have been to beef up defense, and arrange the existing military into defensive positions all around the states. We would have only suffered the losses that we suffered in Hawaii.

Maybe Germany could have won some ground all over Europe, maybe it would have been a tragedy, but that's life. We didn't need to send our own there to die too. Thats stupid.

Draft is WRONG. If the government stopped trying to regulate gun ownership, then our country would be more than prepared to deal with an actual true threat to our safety. I am confident that every man and many women would lay down fire in the general direction of the enemy if the enemy came here.

Making a Draft to get us involved overseas in someone else's war is wrong.

If we didn't interfere in WWI then there wouldn't have been a WWII (and consequently there wouldn't have been a Hitler).
 
One positive thing that having a draft would be that it would be much more hard for us to go to wars.

Having a professional army, like America at the current moment, allows the government to invade and attack other countries without any serious public opposition.
If mandatory military service was around, the public would be outraged if their sons are shipped to a war like Libya or Iraq.

That is an interesting point you make...
 
Draft? I'm not even for the way we have it now!

"Volunteer military" is a misnomer. We have kids recruited in high school (only contract you can legally sign under 18), the age of adulthood was dropped from 21 (in the Constitution) to 18 to accomodate the draft, and instead of raising the draft age to 21, we allowed the smoking age and contracts to be signed at 18. I do not see an amendment which overrules the age of 21 in the Constitution (I could be wrong, correct me if I am, please). And even that law, contracts at 18, is defied by recruiters now, who sign CHILDREN at 17.

If we had a voluteer military it would look like the military that won the Revolution...70% come-and-go militia (literally came and went, battle to battle), and 30% standing Army (Continental Army).

How would that work today?

Instead of luring children from poor backgrounds into service with the promise of college money (seen as way out of their impoverished lives), we'd just offer universal service at a premium over non-universal service. So, say the government gets us to join on 9/12, but instead of sending us to Afghanistan, they send us to a war we may or may not agree with, not in self defense, like Iraq. In this case, you may be for it, and choose to sign on for the entire operation (not battle to battle, like the militia). This is important for functionality, troop levels being stable, and strategy. I, on the other hand, may be totally opposed to the war, so I will not go.

Universal soldiers, or those who sign on for any war anytime, are basically the Continentals who didn't have a say in which battles they fought.

Why did that Hassan dude shoot up that base? He didn't want to kill people who looked and prayed like him. The problem is he was forced to.

Any moral militray would operate as follows:

Two different levels of service, and pay, would be offered to recruits over the age of 21. The first plan is universal service, not being able to opt-out of any conflict the government sees fit. This plan pays vastly more than the non-universal plan. The Second contract would be voluntary service (not just paying semantical homage to it, like now), and pay way less than the universal contract. When a battle comes up, they can recieve a raise in pay, combat pay...if they CHOOSE to join the fight. This is also true for universal service soldiers, but they will always have a higher pay scale. Those who choose not to fight, will just continue their service in other ways, or at the discretion of the military, be layed-off like any other job when it is no longer needed. I suspect lay-offs would be rare.

Why do this?

Because if you can't get the consent of men to fight, the war is NOT justified.

No war in self defense requires a draft, and if you concede it does, you concede Americans are generally cowards. I would whole heartedly disagree.

How have they been able to fight all these immoral and unprovoked wars?

By having the threat of law to hold over soldiers who refuse to fight.

No just cause, like a war of self defense, EVER requires a draft. No people in HISTORY have EVER voted themselves into a war, EVER.

Without the threat of law, and prison or death, the State CANNOT find recruits for their nefarious bullshit they call "national interests".

DRAFT??????

We need to make our military MORE voluntary, not less. It would cause us to be less war-like, and more reserved in foreign policy.

And while we're at it...tax is theft. So next time you want a war, assuming our taxes were cut to allow this idea, GET DONATIONS. Between the people having to fund it themselves, and the mass amount of soldiers volunteering (or not), the moral justification for the war will be quantified...

....when the money in the donation fund, or the soldiers that volunteer for the operation (whether war, foreign aid to Japan, etc.), dwindle away so does your moral authority and ethical justification for the operation. It's that simple.

DRAFT?!

Sir, tyrants favor drafts. Read the quotes I have in my signature. I'll rot in cell before I go to war drafted...if it were self defense I'd volunteer.

Yup...School is in session
 
Fuck the war.
Fuck the draft.
Fuck the government.
I support Ron Paul 200%.
War is an invention of kings to pursue their greed.
As Hermann Goering said, a war serves only the rulers so they need to drum up the propaganga (i.e. patriotism and all those horse shit crap) to encourge people to fight and die for some worthless cause.
I am a veteran but I refuse to swallow any more of government propaganda.
Fuck the war.
Fuck the draft.
Fuck the Military Industrial Complex.
Fuck the Oil industry.
Fuck AIPAC
Fuck MSM and their propagandists cheering up for war.
 
I agree with the OP. Outright eliminating the possibility of a draft is irresponsible and naive. There could be a time in our country's future where the defense of this nation depended on the draft. Never say never.
 
If we didn't interfere in WWI then there wouldn't have been a WWII (and consequently there wouldn't have been a Hitler).

That's not really true. Yes, we helped sway the balance of power during WWI to enable us and our allies to win, but it was really the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles which descended Germany into turmoil and enabled the rise of Adolf Hitler. And most of those provisions were to pay France for reconstruction and damages. That's where the idea of rebuilding countries after we beat them came from, and it worked out pretty well with Germany and Japan after WWII.
 
I agree with the OP. Outright eliminating the possibility of a draft is irresponsible and naive. There could be a time in our country's future where the defense of this nation depended on the draft. Never say never.

There's just no turnin back when your heart is under attack.





If our nation 'depended on a draft', don't you think enough people would volunteer?
 
If our nation 'depended on a draft', don't you think enough people would volunteer?

And if people oppose the war, or choose not to volunteer, what are ya gonna do? Give them a choice between rape cages (Prison) and the Meat Grinder (war)?
 
Back
Top