LL, you give me a 'choice' of (1) a draft, or (2) Nazism. <G>
That seems rather a Hobbesian choice.
Alternately, you could have posed the equally false choice of a draft or 'invasion by Martians'. LOL!
The choice is false because 1) Nazis belong to history and, 2) there is no evidence presented that a national draft would provide in any way for a better defense then our present policy of a volunteer armed forces... or better then other alternatives, such as universal national service.
For my part, I personally believe that BOTH choices of a volunteer armed forces (perhaps with improved pay and benefits), or universal national service (as in Israel), would be far superior to a national draft.
Throughout history, drafts have been manipulated to allow the rich/famous/influential to skate free... while disproportionately burdening the sons and daughters of the less well-connected.
Drafts often produce less well motivated conscripts... while volunteer armies have higher reenlistment rates, so training costs are more advantageous.
Like I said: I still won't drink the koolaid and say that 'old people should be able to tell young people what to do with their lives', particularly as it applies to a national draft.
In summary, volunteer forces AND universal mandated service are two very different approaches that BOTH are superior to drafts.... |
