I hate to say thie but america needs a military draft .

[lets-retire]

Black young men in Newark, the high school I will be done from in less than 3 weeks have ZERO joining so far this year. They want no part of the war right now. 1500 students.

Even the recuiters have not stopped by this year and that is wild, before the war in 2001 even before 9/11 we had the army and marines at the building once a month.

I wonder what is going on? The district has NOT banned them.

It could mean the recruiters are meeting thier goals from other avenues. Like most people if they are doing their work and meeting their goals, they are not going to go out and find a lot of extra work to do for free. If the recruiters were hurting for bodies they would be tapping every resource available, including your school.

 

[samclem]

It seems some people like the idea of a draft because they believe it makes US military conflicts more "democratic", and spreads the cost and pain more broadly. But, a draft is only "democratic in the sense of a lasaiz-faire democracy without protection for the minority. A draft allows the public or elected leaders to make a decision to fight a war, but to compel others to do the fighting. A volunteer miltary is much closer to a fair situation--if you want to be involved in the current fight (or want to contribute to playing a direct role in defending this country in the future), then you shoud enlist. Unpopular wars won't have many folks signing up, which will increase the cost of attracting people (either to that fight or to military service in general). Increased costs shoud serve to reduce the appeal of further adventures (barring deficit spending, which is another problem). Market forces at work. It avoids the situation of "hey, the rest of the nation has decided that you young people should be conscripted against your will and made to fight for the policy the rest of us like."

There may be a time when the draft is required for national preservation, but it should be instituted after a great deal of true reflection on the utility of this move. Registration for the draft (including females) makes sense IMO--it is low-cost, preserves the ability to conscript in short order, and puts the world's troublemakers (and US voters) on notice that we can go this route if warranted.

People who enlist under such a system should have a greater say in forming national policy than those who elect to let others carry the direct personal burden of national defense. Some people believe the wealthy have a disproportionate influence in national politics. Many of the same people believe that the All Volunteer Force is unfair, because those with more limited economic options choose to enlist at higher rates. Giving these people more political influence (more votes in each election? pre-requisite to public service?) would address both concerns. No one could be turned down who wanted to sign up.

 

[dumpster56]

Fix the american railroad system make all vehicles flex fuel and get a min of 60mpg. Then we would not need Middle eastern oil and would not need to have military forces in that part of the world. Iraqi war OVER!

 

[lets-retire]

I thought I read an article that stated all new cars are capable of running on E85, but they are not quite a efficient as a true flex-fuel vehicle. The article stated after the '80s fiasco of gasohol destroying the engines, they changed production to make new engines gasohol compatible sometime in the '90's. The big difference is the computer has not been upgraded to handle the differing demands of E85.

 

[samclem]

Everything is not about oil. There's no oil in Afghanistan, but we are there. There was no oil in Vietnam, but we were there. Only fish oil in Korea, but we were there. Contrary to the views of the Haliburton-Texas conspiracy mongers, the nation has many vital interests that we'll need to fight for, that have little/nothing to do with petroleum.

 

[dumpster56]

Everything is not about oil. There's no oil in Afghanistan, but we are there. There was no oil in Vietnam, but we were there. Only fish oil in Korea, but we were there. Contrary to the views of the Haliburton-Texas conspiracy mongers, the nation has many vital interests that we'll need to fight for, that have little/nothing to do with petroleum.

Sam there was no vital interest in Vietnam.

Afgahnistan? Uh we let bin laden get away, they set up their camps because we were sitting in Saudi arabia, remember that Bin Laden was wanting american infedels off sacred Islamic land.

 

[rs0460a]

There was no oil in Vietnam, but we were there.

Sure, I was there to help stop communism!?!?!

http://wfps.k12.mt.us/teachers/carmichaelg/vietnam_domino_theory.htm

 

[dumpster56]

Sure, I was there to help stop communism!?!?!

http://wfps.k12.mt.us/teachers/carmichaelg/vietnam_domino_theory.htm

Again we lost the war 56,000 died and we are wearing running shoes made in vietnam today here in america.

No it was a stupid war and remember the gulf of tonkin incident well really never happened. and macNamara

Please!

 

[Patrick]

Fix the american railroad system make all vehicles flex fuel and get a min of 60mpg. Then we would not need Middle eastern oil and would not need to have military forces in that part of the world. Iraqi war OVER!

So what are you doing now to reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Drive a hybrid? A high-mileage car? Reduce energy consumption in your house? What?

 

[samclem]

Sam there was no vital interest in Vietnam.

Afgahnistan? Uh we let bin laden get away, they set up their camps because we were sitting in Saudi arabia, remember that Bin Laden was wanting american infedels off sacred Islamic land.

I didn't say there was a vital interest in Vietnam. I said there was no oil. There was a perceived vital interest in Vietnam.

Do you know how many troops were in Saudi Arabia when the Taliban was in Afghanistan? Darn few. Bin Laden and his ilk do have a gripe about US support to the current Saudi regime (and other regimes that they view as not sufficiently Islamic). Yes, the basis of that particuar gripe can be atributed to US interest in securing access to petroleum. However, we would still have problems with bin Laden even if we didn't get a drop of oil from SA. He is not interested in a "live and let live philosophy, he is interested in expanding the influence of their particular religious view.

I would agree that the present Saudi government is far from ideal. But, if you liked what the Taliban brought to Afghanistan, you'd LOVE what that set of vales would bring to Saudi Arabia, particulary when empowered with oil wealth.

Many folks seem very eager to have the US leave Iraq, believing that a democracy is not possibe and that benign dictators are probably the best we can hope for. I wish these people would adopt the same realistic view with regard to other national governments with which we've formed/had longterm partnerships. Maybe that's one silver lining of this Iraq situation--an increased appreciation for the complexity of the real world, and that sometimes "okay, and we're working to improve them" is better than refusing to deal with every government that does distasteful things.

 

[dumpster56]

So what are you doing now to reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Drive a hybrid? A high-mileage car? Reduce energy consumption in your house? What?

Yes the car is a 4 cyl 5 speed gets close to 40 on the highway. the house in winter is cool 60 degree setting even my furnature is cold when you sit down!! wear a sweater. Having a wife who is in surgical menopause helps, she loves the cool house.

Summer, AC is set at 78 with ceiling fans.

Sold the big house and bought a smaller square footage better insulated place.

 

[Zathras]

So what are you doing now to reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Drive a hybrid? A high-mileage car? Reduce energy consumption in your house? What?

While not directed at me, it is an excellent question!
The best thing we can do for our national security is eliminate our need for foreign oil. We can do this through discovery of oil here at home, developement of alternatives (nuclear, wind, solar, coal, etc) or the elimination of cars that use oil to run.

Personally, I am using solar power, a geothermal heat pump, lower power requirement appliances and compact fluorescent bulbs. In addition in about two years I plan to stop using gas for transport and use electricity (with the exception of vacations when I will use a hybrid).

 

[2soon2tell]

Mr Bush is the candidate of big business, especially big oil. He will not do anything that will upset the status quo. The big downnside of his lack of action are the long term consequences of global warming and peak oil. I totally agree that it is our national interest to curtail imports of middle eastern oil but it's not going to happen. We can't even get our congress to approve drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico much less ANWAR. How about a $1-2 surcharge on every gallon of gasoline, or increasing the CAFE requirements for all vehicles or even better a comprehensive energy program like the 60's race for the moon to reduce our comumption of fossil fuels while transitioning to renewable energy sources.

It seems that democracies do not have the political will to make radical changes until our backs are against the wall. I wish this were not so but thats the government we have for better or worse.

Just the rantings of an aging baby boomer who just turned 60.

 

[samclem]

I wish this were not so but thats the government we have for better or worse.

Well, I'm glad most folks think it is for the better.

Hey, why don't we have a huge taxpayer-funded program to produce oil from abundant coal? Like the Manhattan project. Oh, we did that already? How did it turn out? Okay, never mind.