did someone say 'draft'?

[REWahoo]

I just can't comprehend how a coerced career choise can be viewed as a "benefit."

I can respond to how it applied in my situation. Had it not been for the draft, I would have never considered joining the military and doing some of the things I had the opportunity to accomplish. Wasn't within my scope of what I thought I could achieve in life. The draft forced me to make choices I wouldn't have otherwise made, exposed me to opportunities I probably wouldn't have run across, and gave me the self-confidence to try things I would never have attempted.

It worked out fine for me, and I think the taxpayers got their money's worth on what they spent for my training and upkeep (we won the cold war, remember ). That said, I'm not a supporter of the draft and think bringing it back would do more harm than good for all the reasons that have been expressed in this and other threads on the subject.

 

[youbet]

Rangel is just playing politics and the proposal will go nowhere.

While Rangel's proposal will likely go nowhere, he is not just playing politics. His proposal reflects his true feelings and he means exactly what he is saying.

 

[brewer12345]

While Rangel's proposal will likely go nowhere, he is not just playing politics. His proposal reflects his true feelings and he means exactly what he is saying.

Where's that Kool Aid graphic when you need it?

 

[Brat]

What I think Rangel has in mind is the fact that many of those who propose war have no personal/family risk, no skin in the game so to speak.

During the Viet War lots of kids attended college to avoid the draft. As a result youth who couldn't aford college were pulled in first. Families with contancts somehow managed to keep their kids out of harm's way. What's "fair"? When war is the game at hand is any life more valuable than another?

A draft is a PITA for the military because they have so many who are unwilling. I would like our leaders to be similarly unwilling.

 

[youbet]

What I think Rangel has in mind...........

I think Rangel is pretty much a straight shooter. What he has in mind is what he is saying. No need for paraphrasing, rewording, interpreting, spinning, etc.

 

[MikeD]

While Rangel's proposal will likely go nowhere, he is not just playing politics. His proposal reflects his true feelings and he means exactly what he is saying.

I am not absolutely positive about this but didn't Rangel vote against a draft bill just a little while ago? I think it was something along the lines of him saying how only the poor are in the service now (not true) and how we should have a draft. The Republicans then said OK here's a bill to re-instate the draft, calling his "bluff.". Then Rangel (and almost everyone else) voted against it.

At least that's the way I remember it.

Mike D.

 

[bpp]

A draft is a PITA for the military because they have so many who are unwilling. I would like our leaders to be similarly unwilling.

How about sending those leaders themselves to the front lines of any combat for which they vote? Surely if it is a just and necessary cause, they won't mind. Worked for Alexander the Great.

 

[Mr._johngalt]

While Rangel's proposal will likely go nowhere, he is not just playing politics. His proposal reflects his true feelings and he means exactly what he is saying.

If your IQ is south of 50, it makes very little difference about
"true feelings" or "means exactly what he is saying". The man has the
brainpower of a radish. Let's face facts.

JG

 

[Patrick]

He has said the U.S. fighting force is comprised disproportionately of people from low-income families and minorities.

It seems that Mr. Rangel is misinformed. According to a Heritage Foundation report:

"The estimate for mean household income of recruits increased every year from 2003 through 2005. The poorest areas continue to be underrep­resented, while middle-class areas are overrepre­sented. Although the richest income brackets are underrepresented, the difference between the recruit and population proportions for these brack­ets is less than 0.25 percent. Overall, the distribu­tion for recruit household incomes is very similar to that of the youth population."

http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-09.cfm

 

[samclem]

Right. And the next canard that normally crops up is the claim that blacks suffer a disproportionately high number of casualties in America's wars. This is not true, but has become such a mantra among some segments of the population that it is just accepted as fact.

- In the Vietnam war, blacks accounted for 12.5% of combat casualties. At that time, blacks constituted 13.5% of the draft-age population.

- While I could not find firm numbers for the Iraq conflict, a Washington Post report http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/25/AR2006082500940.html indicates black troops suffered a casualty rate 30-40% lower than the rate experienced by non-blacks. Blacks are being recruited at a rate approximately commensurate with their %age of the overall population. (Conversely, the casualty rate for Hipanics was higher than for non-Hispanics). The lower casulty rate for blacks is generally attributed to their higher representation in combat service support roles and lower representation in the combat arms.

 

[Mr._johngalt]

Right. And the next canard that normally crops up is the claim that blacks suffer a disproportionately high number of casualties in America's wars. This is not true, but has become such a mantra among some segments of the population that it is just accepted as fact.

- In the Vietnam war, blacks accounted for 12.5% of combat casualties. At that time, blacks constituted 13.5% of the draft-age population.

- While I could not find firm numbers for the Iraq conflict, a Washington Post report http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/25/AR2006082500940.html indicates black troops suffered a casualty rate 30-40% lower than the rate experienced by non-blacks. Blacks are being recruited at a rate approximately commensurate with their %age of the overall population. (Conversely, the casualty rate for Hipanics was higher than for non-Hispanics). The lower casulty rate for blacks is generally attributed to their higher representation in combat service support roles and lower representation in the combat arms.

I wrote 4 different responses to this. So non-PC that even I didn't have the guts to post them. That's a first. See you all tomorrow.

JG

 

[Nords]

So explain. Not looking for a knock-out, drag-down. I just can't comprehend how a coerced career choise can be viewed as a "benefit."

I wasn't coerced but I was certainly suckered by the irresistible challenge.

There's no way to do a double-blind controlled experiment, but I graduated from high school lacking in most of the social skills & graces and with a strong interest in alcohol & drugs. The military helped me with one area and eventually discouraged the second while equipping me with the skills & confidence to get to ER. Judging from my classmates' performance, a lot of them would have benefited from a military environment as well... although some of them found a substitute in a different federally-funded system.

The lower casulty rate for blacks is generally attributed to their higher representation in combat service support roles and lower representation in the combat arms.

Maybe they listen better during training, pay more attention to their environment during operations, and exhibit more common sense than combat veterans of other races!

I'd love to see a modern DoD study on genders & races in the various combat arms/logistics branches.

I'd also like to see a record of divorce rates broken down by service & warfare community, and I'd like to know why submariners seem to father more daughters than sons.

Finally I'd like to see the submarine force's officers become more than an overwhelming majority of male WASP Republicans. Failure to evolve has pretty much doomed them to extinction, yet so far we only seem to be making progress on the third category. I'd like to know why BUPERS doesn't seem to be able to figure out a solution.

But I doubt that we'll ever get complete answers to any of those questions.

 

[samclem]

Many folks who have looked at the issue say that black youth tend to enlist as a means to get skills and practical experience that will be useful after they leave the service. White youth tend to enlist as a means to get life experiences ("adventure") that they cannot get other ways. So, a black enlistee is likely to seek out a career field that he/she knows will transfer well to the outside world--logistics, an admin field, transportation, etc. A white kid is more likely to go into the infantry, armor, etc where, historically, the odds of being killed are higher.

That's an interesting observation about blacks in the submarine force. I know they are also under-represented in the USAF pilot community and in Army Special Ops/Navy SEALS. I don't think this is due to institutional bias, I think it is far more likely the result of self-selection factors. At least I hope so.

 

[Nords]

That's an interesting observation about blacks in the submarine force. I know they are also under-represented in the USAF pilot community and in Army Special Ops/Navy SEALS. I don't think this is due to institutional bias, I think it is far more likely the result of self-selection factors. At least I hope so.

I don't have the numbers (if indeed they're public) but anecdotally I'd say that minorities are over-represented among submarine enlisted and almost non-existent in the wardroom.

I'm afraid that it's difficult to support the "self-selection factors". However I watched one black officer resign at the end of his obligation because he was tired of the crappy leadership he'd been subjected to, and he was extremely heavily recruited by the assignment officers to the point where the rest of the office WASPs were beginning to feel a little miffed... so maybe it's not institutional bias, but it's certainly not because BUPERS appears to have a clue either.

 

[Gumby]

..

 

[youbet]

WASP

You called out your displeasure at the number of Protestants in submarine duty in two different posts, obviously you harbor some feelings about this. I wonder what the issue was/is?

 

[samclem]

I am not absolutely positive about this but didn't Rangel vote against a draft bill just a little while ago? I think it was something along the lines of him saying how only the poor are in the service now (not true) and how we should have a draft. The Republicans then said OK here's a bill to re-instate the draft, calling his "bluff.". Then Rangel (and almost everyone else) voted against it.

At least that's the way I remember it.

Mike D.

Ah, Grasshopper, you remember correctly.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll494.xml

It got 402 "NAY" votes, including Rangel. Paragon of virtue John Murtha was one of the two "YEA" votes.

But, Charlie has brought the idea back again.

I remember several folks of liberal persuasion decrying on this board the Republicans wasting the time of the legislature and trying to distract the public with a bunch of public theater BS (flag burning, etc) in the months before the election. Are any of the same voices to be heard registering discontent over Charlie Rangel's shenanigans? (followed by silence except for faint sound of crickets chirping)

 

[brewer12345]

Did you see the multiple posts I made indicating that Rangel was playing politics?

Since the new Dem leadership has indicated they will put the kibosh on this, it ain't going nowhere.

 

[Ol_Rancher]

"Are any of the same voices to be heard registering discontent over Charlie Rangel's shenanigans? (followed by silence except for faint sound of crickets chirping)"

Crickets chirping in late November ? Not around here south-central Texas, brrrrrrrrrrrrrr

It must be 40 degrees out on the porch this dawn.

I am having to feed the emu cracked corn 'cause the bugs are in short supply.

 

[samclem]

Did you see the multiple posts I made indicating that Rangel was playing politics?

Since the new Dem leadership has indicated they will put the kibosh on this, it ain't going nowhere.

Okay, ONE of the same voices is being heard.

Ol Rancher,
I'd a thought them Texas cricket bugs was a might hardier than reg'lar cricket bugs. Maybeez I wuz wrong.

 

[Ol_Rancher]

"Ol Rancher,
I thought them Texas cricket bugs was a might hardier than reg'lar cricket bugs. Maybeez I wuz wrong."

Yer thinking of them big cockaroaches that fly from the trees and try to get in yer house. In Florida they are called 'Palmetto Bugs' - now there is a bit of P.R.

Them big red two inch long flying cockaroaches take three swats from a swatter and usually manage to crawl off and hide under the fridge anyhow. Nothing less than a 14 ounce hammer with a direct hit will actually stop one of 'em. Enev then they are still wigglin' so you need to let them lay there for an hour or so.

The scorpions are even tougher but they sink like rocks in water so just flush them down the toilet, but don't try that with the big red cockaroackes because in a drought they might just come back through the waste line into the bathroom.

This is why some ranchers keep emus. They hold down the snakes and reduce the 'field roach' population.

Yee Haw.

 

[HFWR]

"Frankenstein gives me the shakes
And Count Dracula's driving me batty
But they're not on a par
with the worst one by far
The cockroach that ate Cincinnati..."

Author unknown

 

[2soon2tell]

During my years 1969-72 the Navy caught a lot of flack for having the whitest officer corps of all the services. I wonder if it has changed 35 yrs. later.

2soon

 

[samclem]

"Frankenstein gives me the shakes
And Count Dracula's driving me batty
But they're not on a par
with the worst one by far
The cockroach that ate Cincinnati..."

Author unknown

By "Rose and the Arrangement"

 

[Nords]

You called out your displeasure at the number of Protestants in submarine duty in two different posts, obviously you harbor some feelings about this. I wonder what the issue was/is?

I'm a lapsed Lutheran turned apathetic. Like Scott Adams says, you won't learn about my religious big business preferences by reading my posts.

The issue is the acronym. WASP seems to get the point across for at least three-quarters of my purpose.

I briefly considered WASP/WASC/WASM/WASJ/WASH/WASS/WASB but it just seemed too cumbersome... anyone have a better acronym?

During my years 1969-72 the Navy caught a lot of flack for having the whitest officer corps of all the services. I wonder if it has changed 35 yrs. later.

Not as far as I can tell in the submarine force.

But FWIW one of the Navy's most newsworthy new admirals (coincidentally a classmate) isn't noteworthy for being African-American-- it's because RADM Howard is the first flag officer from USNA to be a woman, as well as the first African-American woman to command a ship. So hopefully in 25-50 years our grandkids will be wondering what all the fuss was about.