quote:

---

Originally posted by Amvet91Alpha:
I agree with your post 100% Thud. I think there should be a two year minimum of some kind of service, whether military or civil, before even voting priviliges are allowed, with some few necessary exceptions, of course. I also think the same should be before one can hold office.

---

Good to see ya Amvet! Am now being censored on that "other" forum by the Green one. Means he has to apporve every post and so far he ain't approved none of 'em. Situ normal I guess.

Good to see you too Thud. Atmosphere just not what I would like over there right now, sent me into a downward spiral that I am still recovering from. Waiting to hear back in an email mostly before I decide if I'm going back there, but also just don't feel much like posting there after recent events.

True the military is running out of the VM parts. . .but then why, for example, is the Air Force over their legal limit of people, and why are they making cuts? I think there is a similar problem in the Navy?.

Maybe the gov is trying to cut back for war w/ less people and more technology? Maybe with the war on terror we are leaning more toward spec ops type missions(which we are).

Just some ideas. . . what do you think?

AmVet, So, a "universal service" one must go through before they can even VOTE?

Ok, but explain what "...with some few necessary exemptions, of course." MEANS???

Yogi...Draft-Dodger in '68...

THUD,
You made a great stand though and I thought you did a great job doing it. Hope you do the same here. Seems everybody is bailing out over there based on a similiar problem. I see we also have the Band-Aid Lady here too. MIKEY!

Mikey whassup!

Looks like we gonna have the whole crew over in a minute.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe:
True the military is running out of the VM parts. . .but then why, for example, is the Air Force over their legal limit of people, and why are they making cuts? I think there is a similar problem in the Navy?.

Maybe the gov is trying to cut back for war w/ less people and more technology? Maybe with the war on terror we are leaning more toward spec ops type missions(which we are).

Just some ideas. . . what do you think?

---

Well, one reason they're making cuts is the "Blue to Green" deal. We need more Infantry.

Yup, there is a rightful trend towards hi-tech but hi-tech is not a panacea. We will definitely use more SOCOM but you can't do an op like Iraq with a giant A team.

SOCOM is definitely viable but we'll still need some conventional forces. Some things in warfare are classic like the need to consolidate and lock down turf while SPEC OPS does it's thing.

My younger bro has three tours in the sandbox with the 82nd and 4ID. He'd never say this on tv but he'll tell you that we need some more bodies.

Nam Grunts saw more combat in a year than WWII Grunts saw in four years due to a smaller force and the increased mobility afforded by the Huey. Stat's aren't in yet but I'll bet OIF Grunts will see more than even Nam Troopers.

Hooah Troops but burnout rate will be accelerated, especially among Senior NCO's. Realignment is a plan but it probably won't solve long term problems.

Plus, CIA has projected that terrorism will increase over the next 20 years. We gotta be ready for events past Iraq.

I agree I think that the troops may be overstretched right now. But do you think that the current military would want a draft? Anytime I talk to people it seems like they wouldn't. That is the impression I get anyway. . . but ya never know. I just think at this present time the commaraderie in the mil is very high among all services, and I am not sure what a draft would do to that. But then again I haven't been to Iraq.

Joe, the bad thing about the draft is that it's usually reserved as a last ditch solution. You're right, most current military don't want a draft but you've got to remember that most of them have never served with draftees and are buying a lot of propaganda such as the AVM is full of guys who want to be there and a draftee doesn't and won't watch your back when the bullets sing.

I was RA but I served with draftees and they were indistinguishable from any other soldier. A lot of draftees got drug into the military and found a home and didn't leave until 20 years later.

I think the draft should be universal and permanent with military service just being one option.

I also think good leadership = good morale.

quote:

---

Originally posted by yogi1950:
AmVet, So, a "universal service" one must go through before they can even VOTE?

Ok, but explain what "...with some few necessary exemptions, of course." MEANS???

Yogi...Draft-Dodger in '68...

---

well CO's, those who are physically or mentally handicapped, stuff like that..of course I think that except in a few extreme cases, some kind of civil service could be found for them too..hmm..but I might rethink that 'voting' thing..wouldn't make sense to put your life on the line with military service and not be able to vote at 18..guess it's why Nixon changed it..however it sucks that you can vote and die for your country and be an adult in all ways but still can't buy a beer..but that's another topic I guess.

AmVet...I was a draft-dodger. From an early age I comprehended it was involuntary servitude. We had plenty of USs in the bush with us and I couldn't tell the difference but I sure could my second year as a REMF at Bien Hoa Army Base. A lot of myths about the draft during Nam still hang on.

Yogi

No - we won't need no stinkin' draft because with terrorism so bad, true patriots like the Bush twins are sure to join up and rush right off to Iraq or wherever else Daddy is invading....

Then let me know when we're done with all these drafts and we're writing the final version.

LOL RON! as you can see, my first version was a 'rough draft' and needs some revision..

Well, guess who is here arguing FOR the draft?

It just doesn't make sense to me with our Nation at war, troops stretched tightly around the world with no foreseeable end in sight that we do not have a means by which we can offer support to our personnel in terms of relief from the heat of combat? I am hardly any kind of a liberal and have gotten just about smashed by supposed military 'experts' elsewhere.

Those who have served well in the draft in the past are heroes just like anyone else and to have some hotsy-totsy people who have never been in battle saying that they are against the draft for reasons which I can't even understand doesn't seem to make any sense to me.

OK. Rant over.

Out

THAT was a RANT??? naw, I didn't even see steam come out of yer ears..was too reasonable sounding to me to be a rant.

I am hopin to hear from more who are against the draft here tho to get the debate really goin. Got a good feeling that will happen pretty soon though, and to me that's a good thing.