• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If The Draft Was Reinstated Would You Favor College Deferrments?

rhinefire said:
For me attending college should not be a reason to not serve if called in the future.
Click to expand...

They should be allowed to finish college in their currently chosen field of study (4 years max) and then upon graduation, they are enlisted into the military. TRUE deferment, not the "Get out of jail free" card that deferment became.
 
rhinefire said:
For me attending college should not be a reason to not serve if called in the future.
Click to expand...

Remember, deferment is not the same as not serving.

The idea of a deferment is that after such a person gets their degree, they become officers. Having a college degree is a requirement to be an officer, and we need more of them also, not just enlisted. So once they get their degree, they are drafted and go to a commissioning program.

It is called a deferment for a reason, not an exemption.

de·fer·ment

/dəˈfərmənt/

noun

noun: deferment; plural noun: deferments

the action or fact of putting something off to a later time; postponement.
 
rhinefire said:
For me attending college should not be a reason to not serve if called in the future.
Click to expand...

I don't believe in coerced military or government service.

The privileged (read 'rich/connected') will always be able to get out of it.

Conscripts can be moral and discipline problems.

Having seen the wars our government chooses to deploy troops for, I think they are frequently outside the scope of national defense.

A 1 year stint in the Natl. guard for service within the US borders, I might go along with, but there should be no way of "bone-spurring" your way out of it.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I agree. I served in between high school and college and benefited from the GI Bill.
Click to expand...

The GI Bill helped some -- not others. My dad enlisted in WWII and at the time he was promised pay upon leaving. After his 4-year tour was over, he reenlisted, was promised more pay. Before the end of the war, Congress made a deal with the colleges and the GI Bill was the result. It's too bad they didn't offer the soldiers a choice, because my dad had planned to open a little mechanic's garage with his pay. He only had an 8th grade education, so the GI Bill didn't benefit him at all. He didn't get anything. He was never sore about it. He didn't have two dimes to rub together, but he worked hard and ended up being one of the most respected geologists (non-degreed) in the nation. Even after he retired, he was often called to consult on large fossil fuel leases for national companies. I got to go with him a few times. I don't know if all the soldiers who ended up empty handed fared so well, I imagine they didn't. But, a large percentage of young men who fought in WWII hadn't finished high school, so Congress saved a lot of money by cutting them out. For some, however, I agree, the GI Bill was a good thing.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
I don't believe in coerced military or government service.
Click to expand...

And that is fine. An individual may not believe in the Earth being a globe, that does not mean the Earth cares. A pedophile may believe that sex with a 10 year old boy is something that should be natural and allowed, that does not mean the laws and the nation have to agree with it.

In other words, nobody other than you really cares what you believe in the scope of things. No more than the government cares what the "Sovereign Citizens" believe.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Congressional declaration of war ONLY - no loopholes or workarounds.
If a UN action requires participation, again Congressional approval via declaration of war.
If you need to "invent a new type of declaration" specific to the UN then fine, but it must work on the same methodologies.

No AUMF's, no "police actions" and no "anything else". A limited strike is a limited strike but beyond that, are we going to war or are we not, plain and simple.

I don't know what to think about reinstating the draft.
It does change the way the military works, and I know people who served who think it's better and I know people who served who thought draftees "didn't pack the gear" the way an enlisted man does.

It's tough for me to denigrate those who were drafted though.
They did their duty.
Click to expand...

If I am not mistaken no son of a senator or congressman was wounded or killed in Vietnam. Close relatives of senators and congressmen skated too. I knew one nephew of a well known Congressman who was stationed stateside, skating duty too. He was decent guy and was honest about it. He openly admitted he’d never have to ship over to Vietnam because of his uncle. As far as I know he never did.
 
rhinefire said:
For me attending college should not be a reason to not serve if called in the future.
Click to expand...

Old Trapper said:
During Vietnam over 90% of the Republicans that supported the war avoided the draft either by deferments, or joining the Nat. Guard. The Liberals fled to Canada, or used the defense of "conscientious objector"

When the invasion of Iraq came around over 90% of the Young Republicans that supported the war did not enlist.

For me it is no deferments, no excuse, and no war without a Constitutional declaration of war. In fact, I would support a mandatory two-three years military service for all able bodied men directly after graduation from HS.
Click to expand...


You'd need to factor in Rotc at colleges and universities. Or at least recognize Rotc by mentioning it.

A third of all active duty officers are commissioned via Rotc.

More active duty officers of the Army and the Air Force are commissioned via Rotc than by the academy route, OCS, direct commission. (38% in each Army & AF).

More than 70,000 Senior Rotc cadets or midshipmen Rotc are enrolled at more than 400 campuses. At a time when 1% serve in the armed forces Rotc interacts on campuses daily year in and year out. All Rotc are under the Pentagon Cadet Command headed by a three-star officer.

2018 is the 100th anniversary of Rotc by that name (Oct 1st). Among Rotc precursor programs was the Yale officer training program of 1775, Potus Lincoln signing the land grant act funding state universities with military programs, and the 1910 Preparedness Movement of Army Chief of Staff General Leonard Wood who himself was a grad of a military officer program at Harvard. Teddy Roosevelt gave Rotc a significant boost in 1914 when he said isolationist opposition to it was the scheme of “professional pacifists, poltroons and college sissies.” Luvit we still do.

When the US entered WW I there were 20K Rotc officers to step up. By Christmas 1941, 56,000 Rotc grads stepped forward. The VMI Rotc grad Gen. George Marshall said, “Just what we would have done in the first phases of our mobilization without ROTC graduates I do not know." In WW II Texas A&M Rotc provided more officers than West Point and Annapolis combined. My Rotc program at Princeton is a Leonard Wood original with Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth. Among its grads is Army CofS Gen. Mark A. Milley who is the second CSA from Rotc. Current brass hat Rotc grads include James Mattis (Central Washington State), JCS Chairman and Marine Joe Dunford (Middlebury College Vt), John Kelley (UMass) -- Milley, Dunford, Kelley are Boston Boyz. Colin Powell is Rotc from City Uni of NY, the first JCS chairman from Rotc. Dunford is the second.

Of the seven JCS to include Gen. Dunford four are Rotc.


There are six Senior Military Colleges of Rotc (SMC) that are 24/7 academies presented here by DoD ranking: Citadel #1; Virginia Military Institute #2; Texas A&M #3; Norwich the original concept since 1819 is ranked #4; University of North Georgia #5; Virginia Polytechnic Institute #6.

There are several hundred Civilian Colleges (CC) of Rotc to include universities, all of whose grads are strictly obligated to enter active duty. In the interests of brevity the DoD top six are: Northeastern U Boston #1; Iowa State U #2; U of MD #3; U of Mississippi #4; U of Utah #5; Notre Dame #6;

There are four Military Junior Colleges of Rotc that grant the associate degree and whose grads are commissioned a 2Lt (O-1) in the reserve or National Guard only. Grads may continue Rotc at a four year degree granting institution and have the strict obligation to enter active duty. During the Vietnam war two year MJC 2LT were shipped directly to Vietnam where the life expectancy of a 2LT was six months. The four are: Georgia Military College, Marion Military Institute in AL, New Mexico Military Institute -- and Valley Force Military Academy and College ranked #1 by DoD.

Rotc continues to deliver bang for the buck. Cost of educating an Rotc officer is $130,000 whereas the cost to produce an officer at a USG service academy is $300,000 minimum. Marine Corps Rotc officers go through NRotc programs, however, entry to the Marine Oriented Program at Citadel is fiercely competitive. Coast Guard hasn't any Rotc programs.
 
Rexedgar said:
It was difficult to pick out draftees in my hitch, maybe a little more attitude but we all got the job done. Didn't you used to have a HALO avatar?
Click to expand...

I am sure the majority did their job well, just figure there would be a higher percentage of unmotivated folks with bad attitudes them there is now.

Yeah it is a Pic of me doing one of our jumps in Japan
 
braindrain said:
I am sure the majority did their job well, just figure there would be a higher percentage of unmotivated folks with bad attitudes them there is now.

Yeah it is a Pic of me doing one of our jumps in Japan
Click to expand...

Did you come thru Yuma (HALO School)?
 
Risky Thicket said:
If I am not mistaken no son of a senator or congressman was wounded or killed in Vietnam. Close relatives of senators and congressmen skated too. I knew one nephew of a well known Congressman who was stationed stateside, skating duty too. He was decent guy and was honest about it. He openly admitted he’d never have to ship over to Vietnam because of his uncle. As far as I know he never did.
Click to expand...

That was the basis of a famous John Fogerty song:



Fortunate Son
Creedence Clearwater Revival

Some folks are born made to wave the flag
Ooh, they're red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no

Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, oh
But when the taxman comes to the door
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yes
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no millionaire's son, no
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no

SOLO

Some folks inherit star spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask them, "How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer "More! More! More!" yoh

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no military son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, one
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no no no
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate son, no no no
 
braindrain said:
Yep. Been there for the basic free fall course, Freefall and ATIC.
Click to expand...

My brother flew the Casa for a long time. Took me on a tour of the museum there The early medical problems were pretty neat l nosebleeds and the high-altitude problems and the guys were ripping off the altimeters out of airplanes to do the research.
 
No college deferments. Let the war-hawks and/or their kids experience the suck up close.
 
Rexedgar said:
My brother flew the Casa for a long time. Took me on a tour of the museum there The early medical problems were pretty neat l nosebleeds and the high-altitude problems and the guys were ripping off the altimeters out of airplanes to do the research.
Click to expand...

Yeah I have heard plenty of horror stories from the early years. Luckily its come along ways since then. I love jumping. Though night jumps with 120lbs rucks, two rifles and under nods takes some of the fun of of it.
 
braindrain said:
Yeah I have heard plenty of horror stories from the early years. Luckily its come along ways since then. I love jumping. Though night jumps with 120lbs rucks two rifles and under nods takes some of the fun of of it.
Click to expand...

I spent two years in the 82nd and jumped after ETS for almost 20 years. Was hard to understand that altitude is your friend.
 
Helix said:
i don't support reinstating the draft.
Click to expand...

It should always depend on the circumstances. If all hell breaks loose, it could become necessary to reinstate the draft for the sake of this nation's survival. Having said that, I prefer an all volunteer military as we end up with a more professional and motivated force.
 
Rexedgar said:
When I served in the mid 1970's many of the soldiers I ran into were from the mid to lower socio/economic scale. There was still a draft. Since 1973 the services have been all volunteer. From what I have read the quality of the troops has increased. The foreign legion comparison is more to describe the disconnect/remoteness from the general population. Deployments affect smaller and more spread out communities. My analogy is in no way casting the US military in a negative light, I just think as a population we are under represented in our military. Maybe a 'warrior class' is a better comparison than 'foreign legion.'
Click to expand...

I do agree that the quality of troops increased after we went all volunteer. Volunteers are better motivated. I also served in the 1970s, 72 to 75. If I recall, it went all volunteer in 74.
 
HowardBThiname said:
The GI Bill helped some -- not others. My dad enlisted in WWII and at the time he was promised pay upon leaving. After his 4-year tour was over, he reenlisted, was promised more pay. Before the end of the war, Congress made a deal with the colleges and the GI Bill was the result. It's too bad they didn't offer the soldiers a choice, because my dad had planned to open a little mechanic's garage with his pay. He only had an 8th grade education, so the GI Bill didn't benefit him at all. He didn't get anything. He was never sore about it. He didn't have two dimes to rub together, but he worked hard and ended up being one of the most respected geologists (non-degreed) in the nation. Even after he retired, he was often called to consult on large fossil fuel leases for national companies. I got to go with him a few times. I don't know if all the soldiers who ended up empty handed fared so well, I imagine they didn't. But, a large percentage of young men who fought in WWII hadn't finished high school, so Congress saved a lot of money by cutting them out. For some, however, I agree, the GI Bill was a good thing.
Click to expand...

Good points. My father served in WW2 as well. If I recall, about the only benefit he ever took advantage of was VA healthcare benefits. The GI bill was much improved by the Vietnam Era. I went through college on the GI Bill and since that piece of **** legislation known as obamacare was passed, I have taken advantage of VA healthcare, and still have the opportunity to get a VA Mortgage loan if needed.
 
Risky Thicket said:
If I am not mistaken no son of a senator or congressman was wounded or killed in Vietnam.
Click to expand...

So what? What does that even mean or matter?

I had 2 relatives serve in Vietnam. Neither one was wounded or killed.

Now for some reality. The death rate in Vietnam was 0.5%. In other words, by averages in order to have a single politician son die in Vietnam, there would have to be 200 of them serving in the theater.

Now being wounded, the odds are greatly increased. To a whopping 3%. That means that by averages, 34 politicians would have to have sent their sons there.

Over 96% of soldiers who deployed to Vietnam were never killed or injured. And you are whining that politician sons were not part of that minimal 3%?

Statistics are some amazing things. You can twist them to support almost anything you want.

Here are some commonly passed around. 25% of those in Vietnam were drafted, and 30% of those killed in Vietnam were draftees.

Well, conversely, that means 75% of those in Vietnam enlisted.

And here is another statistic. Of all the Draftees during Vietnam, Only 35% were sent to Vietnam. 65% of them stayed in the US. That is because draftees only have to serve a 2 year term. By the time most finish their schooling, it was not worth the effort to send them over. But there were plenty of jobs stateside for them to do.
 
Old Trapper said:
During Vietnam over 90% of the Republicans that supported the war avoided the draft either by deferments, or joining the Nat. Guard. The Liberals fled to Canada, or used the defense of "conscientious objector"

When the invasion of Iraq came around over 90% of the Young Republicans that supported the war did not enlist.

For me it is no deferments, no excuse, and no war without a Constitutional declaration of war. In fact, I would support a mandatory two-three years military service for all able bodied men directly after graduation from HS.
Click to expand...

rhinefire said:
For me attending college should not be a reason to not serve if called in the future.
Click to expand...

braindrain said:
I am sure the majority did their job well, just figure there would be a higher percentage of unmotivated folks with bad attitudes them there is now.

Yeah it is a Pic of me doing one of our jumps in Japan
Click to expand...


I wuz on active duty during conscription -- I entered service as a 2LT butterbar in 1966 and was separated as a captain in 1970. Career nco to the man said conscript US grunts were very fine soldiers until the Vietnam war. Until Vietnam the conscripts took their military obligation of two years active service as a duty of citizenship. Nco had good things to say about draftees such as, for instance, the conscript soldier accepted being drafted, he'd already decided to do his duty, i.e., make the best of it, be conscientious, follow orders, keep himself and his stuff straight and be a credit to himself and to his unit. In a word, nco said the draftee was mature. I'm sure you get the picture here so I'll leave it at that.

Career nco on the other hand said the RA volunteer was a crappy soldier. Not that the RA volunteer didn't obey orders or failed to keep his nose clean and himself and his stuff straight etc. He did do that and he did it well. The problem nco found in the RA was his attitude. Nco universally advised their platoon and company officers the problem with the RA wuz that he signed up voluntarily to parachute into Normandy and save the world from tyranny. The RA volunteer was full of WW II legend and fact, had listened to his father, uncle, neighbor, coach etc insofar as they talked about the war as a just war and the experience of a lifetime. Saving Europe and saving the Pacific-Asia -- saving the world.

The Rosie the Riveter mother, aunt, neighbor were other heros of the Big One. So when the RA volunteer didn't get that he got let down -- felt cheated even. And each time the RA got latrine duty he went from a bad attitude to a foul disposition. After all, the RA wanted to kick ass not polish the seats. Sweep the barracks, dig a latrine in the field...etc etc. Virtually every nco I worked with swore without my asking he'd take a US to an RA every time to get the job done, the mission accomplished -- to get it done right, with the least hassles, sorehead grumbling, griping and RA cussing the Army for it.

I'm certain in the absolute the AVF continues the ages old traditional military assertion that it's every soldier's right to gripe. We won't find that in the Constitution, the UCMJ or in the Manuals but we know it's in there somewhere. The principle includes officers too and for sure. Still it is more than obvious to all of us the AVF is an entirely different beast than the conscript Army wuz. I'm confident I'd prefer the attitude and demeanor of the AVF over the conscript force. Still however, there is a great deal to be said of the citizen-soldier armed force, especially given it's a standing army that we have. I notice anyway that in my unit at Ft. Myer, when I look to see if there is any difference in the quality of the force between back then and since the AVF came on, there isn't any. Quality is quality, pride is pride, competence is competence -- and a mission accomplished and well done besides remains exactly that. It's a continuum of the generations, i.e., the senior guys show what they inherited from their seniors and the junior guys pick it up cause they know its their mission to preserve it, improve it and to hand it on. All we need to know indeed is that the 3 IR The Old Guard is the oldest active infantry regiment because the fact is forever. That is, no change.
 
Old Trapper said:
During Vietnam over 90% of the Republicans that supported the war avoided the draft either by deferments, or joining the Nat. Guard. The Liberals fled to Canada, or used the defense of "conscientious objector"

When the invasion of Iraq came around over 90% of the Young Republicans that supported the war did not enlist.

For me it is no deferments, no excuse, and no war without a Constitutional declaration of war. In fact, I would support a mandatory two-three years military service for all able bodied men directly after graduation from HS.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, the military has leaned republican for the past 50 years.

What a load of crap.
 
I fully support the draft but would make two amendments:

1. All US citizens must serve. Females don't get a pass.

2. If a draftee doesn't want to join the military, he/she will be assigned to a non-military function.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Meanwhile, the military has leaned republican for the past 50 years.

What a load of crap.
Click to expand...

That is changing among the enlisted, and even among the officer corp. In time people do get tired of being used for cannon fodder so people like Cheney can draw huge profits. I am sorry that the main body of the military hasn't learned they do not have to obey unConstitutional orders.
 
Oozlefinch said:
So what? What does that even mean or matter?

I had 2 relatives serve in Vietnam. Neither one was wounded or killed.

Now for some reality. The death rate in Vietnam was 0.5%. In other words, by averages in order to have a single politician son die in Vietnam, there would have to be 200 of them serving in the theater.

Now being wounded, the odds are greatly increased. To a whopping 3%. That means that by averages, 34 politicians would have to have sent their sons there.

Over 96% of soldiers who deployed to Vietnam were never killed or injured. And you are whining that politician sons were not part of that minimal 3%?

Statistics are some amazing things. You can twist them to support almost anything you want.

Here are some commonly passed around. 25% of those in Vietnam were drafted, and 30% of those killed in Vietnam were draftees.

Well, conversely, that means 75% of those in Vietnam enlisted.

And here is another statistic. Of all the Draftees during Vietnam, Only 35% were sent to Vietnam. 65% of them stayed in the US. That is because draftees only have to serve a 2 year term. By the time most finish their schooling, it was not worth the effort to send them over. But there were plenty of jobs stateside for them to do.
Click to expand...


How cavalierly you discuss death and wounding in the Viet Nam conflict. Reminds me of the stated casualties on UTAH Beach in JUN1944, less than 150, not bad unless you found yourself a statistic.....all relative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom