May 10th, 2008
I‘m grateful that I was never confronted with this situation, even though days after 9/11 I contemplated reenlisting. In time, and with sober head, I saw things more clearly and never placed the call to a recruiter. If I had made that call, however, I might now be in the horrible position that this soldier is now in:
When I voluntarily enlisted in the Army, I remember asking my recruiter about the fine print on the contract about being called back up to active duty once my enlistment was completed. He assured me not to worry, that every contract said that and it would only happen if “World War III” broke out.
That was a little over five years ago. After serving in Iraq, I elected to use my GI Bill to enroll in a photography course at San Francisco City College. I felt good, and I had a feeling that the days to come were all going to be good as well.
On way out of my building two weeks ago, I checked my mailbox and found a letter from the Department of the Army with “Important Document” printed in all caps on the middle. I immediately felt sick, so I went back to my room, locked the door, grabbed a beer from the fridge and stared out my window for a while. People outside were all wearing sunglasses and walking about enjoying the sun. I took a picture.
And like this soldier, I agree, reinstating the draft may be the only way to bring the Iraq war to an end:
Many people believe that the draft ended the Vietnam War. I’m convinced that reinstating the draft would definitely end this war. Rich, connected people will always find a way to evade mandatory service, but what about the rest of America? The middle class - people with good jobs and nice lives - would perhaps riot if the government even suggested that it expected from them what the Army expects from veterans.
November 27th, 2006
Whenever the issue of reinstituting the military draft comes up strong dissenting opinions soon surface. That said, my immediate reaction to renewed calls for reinstating the military draft is to support it. However, I certainly understand the many rational, reasonable and emotional reasons to oppose the reintroduction of the military draft.
While I understand why one would oppose the draft, when I read items like this, I can only say, My god, no wonder we’re not on the streets trying to stop Bush’s war of choice; since the country is not bearing the consequences of Bush’s Iraq war.
With no obvious personal stake in the war in Iraq, most Americans are indifferent to its consequences. In an interview last week, Alex Racheotes, a 19-year-old history major at Wesleyan University in Connecticut, said: "I definitely don’t know anyone who would want to fight in Iraq. But beyond that, I get the feeling that most people at school don’t even think about the war. They’re more concerned with what grade they got on yesterday’s test."
His thoughts were echoed by other students, including John Cafarelli, a 19-year-old sophomore at the University of New Hampshire, who was asked if he had any friends who would be willing to join the Army. "No, definitely not," he said. "None of my friends even really care about what’s going on in Iraq."
While shoppers here are scrambling to put the perfect touch to their holidays with the purchase of a giant flat-screen TV or a PlayStation 3, the news out of Baghdad is of a society in the midst of a meltdown.
November 21st, 2006
There’s been a lot talk recently about reinstating the draft:
The incoming Democratic chairman [Rep. Charles B. Rangel] of the House Ways and Means Committee said yesterday that he will push to renew the military draft, as lawmakers in both parties sharpened their criticisms of the situation in Iraq and struggled for consensus and solutions.
Rep. Rangel explains his motivations for reinstating the draft:
"There’s no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm’s way," said Rangel, a Korean War veteran. "If we’re going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can’t do that without a draft."
And, given the following, Rep. Rangel is clearly on to something:
With Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) “calling for resuming the draft to spread the burden of military service across society,” the Atlanta Journal Constitution notes that Congress itself illustrates the same gap.
“Only about 10 percent of the members elected to Congress for the first time this year are military veterans, according to a survey by the Military Officers Association of America. In all, only about one in four members of the new Congress will have served in the military — down from half in 1991 and three-quarters a decade earlier.”
The decline in military experience among members of Congress reflects the fading of the World War II generation — where most of the men served — and the decades that have passed since the end of the Vietnam War and the nation’s last military draft.
“The number of veterans in the House peaked in 1977-78, when about 80 percent of the members had military experience, said Strobridge. The peak in the Senate was in 1983-84, when 75 percent were veterans.”
As I mention at the start, all this talk about the draft has gotten a lot of people around the blogsphere chatting about the topic, its consequences and how we can address the current lack of service inequalities illustrated by the paragraphs quoted above.
A diarist over at DailyKos.com suggest that we should reinstate the draft, along with a slew of "public service corps" for those that don’t want to serve in the military.
If there’s a draft I would ONLY support it if everyone had to serve in the military in some capacity. I would not support the draft if draftees could serve their time in one of the "service corps" that the DailyKos diarists suggests; because the mechanism that the diarists suggests opens the door to abuse by those that wish to dodge serving during a time of war and, too, the "service corps" alternative offers a way for politicians to skirt the political consequences of an aggressive foreign military policy (just like we have now, where the consequences of foreign wars are not widely felt across our country nor by the political elite because they don’t have "skin in the game").
Of course, there are those that would object to serving in the military because of religious or other moral reasons, and for those individuals there would be an option to serve in a non-combat role within the military. But the point, though, is that everyone would wear the uniform and be exposed to the sort of discomforts that come with serving in the military — which, quite simply, are not the same sort of discomforts that one is exposed to in any other type of organization.
Of course, having everyone serve in the military would create a large and ready resource available to tackle some of our ongoing domestic concerns. Consequently, a peace time military with a large number of draftees could be used at home to do many of the things that the DialyKos diarists suggest: clean up and rebuild our crumbling cities and towns; work with patients in rural areas with poor medical service; work with conservation issues; etc. My point is that the draft is only fair if everyone is obligated to serve through the military; otherwise we will not be addressing the very problem that the current "draft reinstatement" discussion seeks to address, that is: making sure that our military is used more responsibly by our political elite by ensuring that the costs of not doing so are felt widely by the American public.
May 5th, 2006
Could this happen again on American college campuses?
Had he not been gunned down by National Guard troops on the Kent State University campus on May 4, 1970, Jeffrey Miller would be 56 years old this year. Instead, Miller’s life ended at age 19 and the thing for which he will forever be remembered is being the body over which young Mary Ann Vecchio cried in despair in a Pulitzer Prize-winning photo that quickly came to symbolize a deeply-divided nation.
It was 36 years ago today that Miller, Allison Krause, Sandra Scheuer and William Schroeder, were massacred by Army National Guardsmen at a Vietnam war protest on the Kent State campus. It was a watershed event that touched off a nationwide student strike that forced hundreds of colleges and universities to close and signaled the zenith of American opposition to that war.
Bob Geiger asks if the Kent State massacres could take place again.
