TodayGÇÖs professional military is second to none. Yet, history teaches us that military professionals live for war. It is the bedrock upon which military careers are built. Conversely, citizen soldiers yearn for peace.
Universal conscription makes for an even playing field when it comes to debating the need versus the desire to send AmericaGÇÖs sons and daughters in harmGÇÖs way. Likewise, when all the electorate is directly involved in war there is an inherent national desire to win and to come home. World War II is perhaps the best example of that simple truth.
I do not know what form Representative RangleGÇÖs bill will take. Nonetheless, it is obvious there are some pretty simple ways to fairly raise the human resources we need. We can even do so without requiring anybody who does not want to serve having to do so:
GÇó Subject all males between the ages of 18 and 26 to conscription for military service. Allow no deferments for school, marriage, or children. Allow only those who are too disabled to do the most minimal of military duties to be exempted from serving.
GÇó By lottery based on dates of birth, select a manpower pool large enough to meet any given yearGÇÖs need.
GÇó Allow all eligible men not selected in the lottery, and women not included in the lottery, to opt-into the military if it is their patriotic desire to do so.
GÇó Allow all who are subject to draft by lottery to declare whether they will or will not serve. Such declarations, without regard to any mitigating circumstances, shall become a matter of public record. As needed go deeper into the lottery pool to fill the ranks.
GÇó As is the case today, the military will retain the right, during basic military training, to determine the military adaptability of individual soldiers. Those found unfit may be separated from the military before obtaining the legal status of veteran.
Our ability today to fight and win a worldwide war on terrorism requires larger forces than our military commanders have available to them. Our military will be strengthened by including in its ranks the sons and daughters of the privileged, wealthy, educated, and middle class. As a people, the shared risk to our children, will bond us as a people. To the world, it says the full faith and will of the American people stand committed to this war. For the decision-makers who send our children to war it ensures they will hear a full and honest debate about the merits of doing so.
Remember that citizen soldiers led by George Washington crossed the Delaware River on Christmas night 1776 to defeat a professional Hessian army barracked at Trenton. That victory saved our Revolution. Nothing is more American than a true patriot embodied as the citizen solider. Such was the case at the beginning of our nation and thus it should be today.
As Democrats let us encourage our representatives to support a fair conscription of our military forces. Doing so will allow us to build upon the accomplishments of the finest professional military cadre ever assembled.
I think the idea of a two year service requirement probably isn't such a bad idea. (e.g. an option to serve in the military or even the peace corp--which is no cakewalk either). Very difficult to pull off politically, but a topic still worth discussing.
That's one reason I don't think a purely military draft has a chance.
Now, a requirement for universal service, broadly defined, is something else, and that should include women.
We'll see what happens, but I do not think Rangle's proposal is going anywhere. Military prefers all volunteer approach - and for services other than Army that is largely what they have been dealing with, although during Vietnam there were Marine draftees.