A nice place to visit

[19th_VA]

Way to go, Don. Though I have never been in combat (almost fit that diaper category mentioned above/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif), I try very hard to be as informed as I can about war and history. I served in the National Guard for a number of years but had to get out since I owned my own business. My old unit has been activated for two years. I believe strongly that there is no such thing as a "good" war. I do believe some have been necessary but to those who fought and died, there was nothing good about it--except coming home, and also those unbreakable bonds mentioned above by harv. When our vets come home from Iraq, even though I was opposed to them going, I'll be in the front row cheering them on. Not to get into politics, but both our President and the V.P. avoided combat in Vietnam (unlike George H.W. who served with great distinction in WWII). I believe one of the ancient Greek city states had a rule that no one could vote to go to war unless they had a son in the military. Seems like a good idea to me. Now we would have to include daughters too.

 

[wroughtn_harv]

Jonathon you hit on one of the reasons I think we need a military draft. We need a cross section of our population to be there. We don't just need kids that need the military to learn about discipline. Or the ones that are only interested in being a hero under fire. Nor do we just need the ones that see the military as their only way out.

Sometime visit a Medal of Honor site and check out how many of those heroes were draftees. It's a majority. Without the draft we lose that well to draw from.

 

[Boone]

Hi utahmule,
I decided to serve my state. Sixteen years in uniform this month.

Harv,
I don't think the draft they had towards the end of the Vietnam war was truely bringing in people from all socio-economic communities.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

some of the best warriors in VN and probably before, were those that were put there by court order.. For whatever reason in their lives, court, jail or service, and those guys ended up being some of the best. And, some of those, were MOH winners. I can't see why that program isn't restarted. I would rather see someone try out in the service than be a continual problem to society and or tax our system to more court, jail, appeals, etc.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

this is true, however, the video gamers as you call them, still need a lot of support personnel in order to play the game. We had a lot of hoodlum types at Caqmp Holloway. As far as I remember, all turned themselves around (maybe by being in a controlled atmosphere, I don't know) but, all turned out to be decent warriors. Although, none of them, that I can remember, had an interest in flying., They were great mechanics, armorers, etc.. And we that flew, needed a lot of support people.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

The Congressional Medal of Honor is not WON. The medal is awarded, and when it is formally presented to the RECIPIENT, he is known as a RECIPIENT, not a winner.

I personally have the honor of knowing 2 RECIPIENTS of the Medal, and both cringe when they are called winners. Please be kind enougn to referr to these rare MEN properly.
Thank You

 

[19th_VA]

Mornin' Harv,

I agree 1000%. I think the draft in the Vietnam era had too many exemptions. I believe we should have 1-2 year national service for every 18-20 year-old American--no exceptions. People who have objections to the military, or some sort of physical/mental condition that would make it difficult for them, can do other things, like volunteer in a hospital, or inner city school.

There has been a bill in Congress for various types of national service since the draft ended--it has gone nowhere. I guess this gets into politics, so I apologize.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Too many folks can't make the division between protesting the war and blaming the soldiers. )</font>

I have yet to see <font color="red"> anyone </font> who is/was opposed to the Iraq war blame it on the soldiers who were ordered over there. That is blatant political rhetoric.

SnowRidge

 

[Anonymous Poster]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Jonathon you hit on one of the reasons I think we need a military draft. We need a cross section of our population to be there. )</font>

I respectfully disagree. I spent a lot of time in the military during the draft years, and maintained contact with others who stayed in after it went all volunteer.

The all volunteer forces are a much superior group. There is no longer a bright line distinguishing those who were drafted from those who weren't. Discipline is better, the treatment of the rank and file by the brass is better, and combat effectiveness is much better. Most importantly, the overall quality of life for the average enlisted person is vastly superior to what it was during the draft years. This serves the country well.

A lot of people don't realize that it wasn't just the draftees that made up the "non-volunteer" component of the services. A large percentage of the "volunteers" were those who chose to enlist in other branches to escape the consequences of being drafted into the army. These individuals tended to to see themselves as separate and distinct from the rest of the military, and many if not most got out about the time they became fully skilled in the complex jobs they were trained for. A lot of money was spent training those folks that could have better been spent elsewhere.

Unfortunately, many of those "volunteers" were discharged with not particularly good feelings about military service. This, I think, markedly impacted society's feelings toward the military and military service. The all-volunteer force concept, coupled with our current reliance on the reserve and guard components' citizen soldiers, has brought the country's respect for the military and those who serve in it back where it belongs.

SnowRidge

 

[Anonymous Poster]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( . . . uncountable numbers of "officers" who chose to view the military as a caste system . . . )</font>

Yes, that is part of my point. The draft is what allowed and fostered that very thing. With an all-volunteer military, you either treat the enlisted men and women like the professionals they are--not to mention paying them a decent wage, or you have no military to speak of.

SnowRidge

 

[19th_VA]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( or you have no military to speak of.)</font> Hey Snowridge, so what would you call what we had during WWII and Korea?

 

[Anonymous Poster]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Hey Snowridge, so what would you call what we had during WWII and Korea? )</font> Hey, I'm not that old Jonathon, but there was a draft as far as I know, or am I missing your point?

SnowRidge

 

[19th_VA]

There was a draft from WWII through the end of the Vietnam war, so I guess you're not missing my point. I do agree with some aspects of what you said, which is why national service should not force everyone into the military. However, the all volunteer force was in place for a long time before the military regained at least most of the country's respect and admiration. I believe it took a very successful campaign like the Persian Gulf War, and fading memories of Vietnam to do that--not just $'s and benefits for the troops.

I think an all-volunteer professional military is a great idea, and has worked in many respects, but I think it should be supplemented by a national service program. We do have a draft of sorts now--an economic draft. Look at the demographics of enlisted men and women and you'll see my point. What we have now is that those people of means who do not care to serve don't. A few who believe in service do serve. And many of the rest are there for a job and a paycheck. Nothing wrong with that, but I think serving increases respect for the institution and an understanding of what military life is all about.

I believe the WWII generation is more patriotic than current generations, which seem more interested in acquiring and spending money. 9-11 has reversed some of this but not all of it. Listen to all the complaining about the waiting in line at airports due to increased security.

****** is a prime example of how a professional military can be supplemented with manadatory service. I dare say that pound for pound it is one of the most effective fighting forces in history.

Our military is THE most powerful fighting force in history, but I think our citizenry have become overly self-interested. So it's for the citizens, as well as the military, that I think national service is a good idea.

My apologies for being so wordy.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Our military is THE most powerful fighting force in history, but I think our citizenry have become overly self-interested. So it's for the citizens, as well as the military, that I think national service is a good idea.
My apologies for being so wordy. )</font>

No apology needed.

I don't disagree with the notion of national service; I disagree with the idea of a peacetime draft, and I do not equate the two. As I've pointed out, I've seen how a peacetime draft works--up front and personal--and I don't like it one bit. No, I wasn't drafted, but I did feel the effects of the draft in the policies and military insanity of the time, and I saw first hand what kind of morale, attitudes, and respect for our country it engendered. I don't want to go back to that again.

As to ******, well it is a country that rightly or wrongly finds itself on a perpetual war footing. Therefore, I don't believe it to be a valid comparison to this country, which has not been on a war footing since the end of the second war to end all wars, despite what some politicians say.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Nothing wrong with that, but I think serving increases respect for the institution and an understanding of what military life is all about. )</font>

Enforced servitude (also known as slavery) has never brought about respect for the institution that enslaved those who are forced to serve. If you are familiar with what it was like during the Vietnam years, you will recall that the draftees as a group had less respect for the military, the country, and its politicians than any other group--except for the anti-war movement, which brought a whole new meaning to the term disrespect.

I repeat. I do not want to go back to that, and the draft is the surest way to get there.

SnowRidge

 

[Anonymous Poster]

with respect to draftee's, I find your overall observation (RVN era) correct. I do have to say, and I can't answer the how come and why's, the helicopter companies had many draftee's and they seemed to perform exceptionally. If one matched draftee's in probably any other MOS (in country) the chopper draftee's, as sheet metal, armorer, engine, upper/lower pylon, etc, etc seemed to do quite well, some extending their tours 6 months for an early out. Maybe Camp Holloway was the exception or maybe just lucky. Perhaps because they were relatively safe, and knew it, they did their thing so they could go home unscathed. In any case, I would rather see more, voluntarily join or at least not see so much, anti military or unless they come and get me, I'm not interested attitudes. May not be like this where others live. It sure is in central Mass/northern Ct areas.

 

[19th_VA]

Franz,

We do not have a draft currently, just selective service registration. I would respectfully submit that if the draft were reinstituted, there would be a host of exemptions introduced in Congress. Perhaps they won't pass but it's too early to judge.

Snowridge,

Not to belabor the point but what I am trying to say is that the WAY the draft was instituted during Vietnam caused the problems, not the draft itself. In WWII, most everyone served that was physically capable, and the problems of Vietnam were not prevalent.

I also would say serving one's country is not slavery. First, you get out after a couple of years. Second, service to one's country is considered a duty by many, including myself. It would be nice if everyone would volunteer to do it, but they don't. If national service were insituted in an equitable WAY, I don't believe it would cause the kind of problems we saw during Vietnam. Of course, there are always those who resist any kind of service but they do not have my sympathy.