1. You are not against required service in an emergency or dire need (like a World War), but are against it otherwise on the basis the need isn't there and therefore it would be some kind of makework project and bad for morale (in the sense that the people who didn't want to be there would get int he way of the people who did). Is that correct?
No. You are applying what I said about sacrifice to required service. You equate them but I see them as two different things.
Re sacrifice, I approve of sacrifice in a dire emergency. If I saw a gunman taking aim at a schoolyard full of kids and I could stop him, although it would risk my life, I should make that sacrifice. I'm an old woman without close family and he could kill dozens of kids. Sacrificing myself for those kids and their families would be the right thing to do and I would hope that I would have the presence of mind and the courage to do it. The same would apply to a terrorist attack or an epidemic or other such emergency.
That's different from being drafted into military service in too many ways to enumerate again. Yes, they are both sacrifices on behalf of the community. That's about all they have in common.
2. You do feel there are other means of building character than requiring service through existing institutions and more citizen involvement. Is that correct?
Yes.
3. You more or less agree with me that requiring service would act as some kind of check on the politicians. Is that correct?
Yes, specifically regarding starting optional wars, a scenario that fortunately doesn't come up often.
4. And you don't think having more college educated people in the service would necessarily mean a better military in the sense of it being free from the type of abuses that occurred in Iraq. Is that correct?
Yes.
Now in contrast to this I think you are saying this is all BS because requiring all people to serve is requiring them, in most cases, to waste time. Therefore whatever sacrifice is involved is for naught. Is this correct?
Pretty much. Waste of both their time and the taxpayer's money. Probably ironically resulting in reduction in military readiness. And lots of ugly unanticipated consequences. I do see some potential benefits but I can't find a net positive. Not even close.
(Re unintended consequences, have you considered how many of those kids might end up dead even if they never see combat? Training accidents, hazing accidents, drug and alcohol accidents, suicides? Sure, you'd improve the character of some kids. But you'd badly damage others. I can't guess at the ratio but you can be sure that there would be some downside. There always is.)
(And I haven't even mentioned in this discussion the assault the draft is on the very essence of that for which you and I want to build respect, like "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." How ironic is that?) |
