Moderating:
Stop with the personal attacks in this thread. You all know the rules to attack the post, not the poster.
Duty, honor, country seems to be a foreign concept outside of military circles. Many people don’t have any experience of being a part of something larger than themselves. They live their lives secure in the notion that somebody else will stand guard for them. That someone else will sacrifice on their behalf.
I served in the all volunteer army and I have mixed feelings about a draft.
One one hand, I remember when my uncle got his draft notice during the Vietnam war. The war was hugely unpopular. Our family got together for a big cry-fest the day before he left for basic training.
He served two terms in Vietnam. When the war was over, he kept re-enlisting until he was able to retire. I spoke to him about it and he liked the camaraderie and the sense of shared purpose. He found a higher calling that didn’t exist before.
OTOH, I served in NATO during peacetime with some soldiers that didn’t want to be there. For the most part, these folks were loners, weren’t interested in World Affairs and only joined to escape their dead end life back home.
Did I sign up due a sense of duty, honor, country? No. It was for more selfish reasons. But I left with a feeling of pride that I stood watch and served my country when needed.
You don’t get that from working at most civilian jobs.
I don’t see how invading Iraq over WMDs that don’t exist is serving our country. Maybe if we started using the military to serve the interests of all Americans rather than a few wealthy elites the American armed forces could once again enjoy the prestige you describe.
Poland has been a NATO member since 1999. If Russia decided to heat things up against Poland, NATO agreements would have not only the U.S., but the western European countries, coming to their aid.
The U.S. has, of course, been strongly supporting the South Korean military since the Korean War. We currently have over 28,000 service members in South Korea, as part of a combined military command.
Neither Poland nor South Korea are being expected to “fend for themselves.”
Taiwan is a more challenging subject, due to the continual tension (and dispute over sovereignty) between them and the Communist Chinese government, which has limited the extent to which the U.S. has provided any serious military support to Taiwan. If mainland China decided to finally exert military pressure to bring Taiwan back into the fold, I have serious doubts that the U.S. (or other powers) would do much to oppose this, for fear of causing an escalation into direct conflict against China.
Regardless…as others have already, and repeatedly, pointed out, given how the modern U.S. military is structured and how it fights conflicts – and how very different that is from how we fought in WWII, Korea, or Vietnam – I don’t see how adding large numbers of conscripted U.S. soldiers will significantly help any of those situations.
I agree with the OP, reintroducing the draft is an excellent idea and I think it should be a cornerstone of Trump’s campaign, and for that matter, the platform of the whole Republican Party.
That is a very offensive statement.
From where I am sitting, those do not appear to be the three most vulnerable populations in the world. They do seem to have some other things in common, though.
My personal perception only.
Perhaps you could share, not what your country has done for you, but what you have done for your country?
Reintroducing the draft would be a political death sentence for whoever was foolish enough to attempt it. Secondly, the major problems facing us today cannot be solved by a “really big army”. A huge military force can’t do anything about an eroding environment, overpopulation, an increasing risk of pandemics, cyber attacks, or terrorism.
Let’s not make it personal.
Duty is serving on a jury, obeying the speed limit, paying your taxes, tending to your sick spouse, teaching Sunday school, learning to do your job better, etc.
Honor is speaking the truth, keeping your promises, being a guest, helping strangers when they ask, listening with compassion, not trashing things, not taking advantage when given the opportunity, doing a favor without expectations, etc.
Country is voting your conscience, protesting injustices, respecting individuals as they are, etc.
The statement “duty, honor, country seems to be a foreign concept outside of military circles” belittles the ethics, efforts, sacrifices, and the very lives of many, many people. Our country depends on everyone doing many things that help the whole, without personal profit nor public recognition.
The statement also shows a wrong-headed disdain for our country, which is why it is very offensive to anyone who loves this country.
Involuntary servitude is not an example of you honoring your country-It is an example of your country dishonoring you.
This sounds absolutely wonderful to the economic and social stability of the United States. We should send all of our smartest, wealthiest people off to war. We’d all be better off if there were a higher percentage of dumber, poorer people entering the work force. For fuck’s sake, man. Do you even think things through before you post? Or are you just branstorming, here? Ensuring a draftee be immune from elitist waivers is one thing. Purposely selecting only college-educated candidates from the most financially successful families is imbecile.
I’m obviously not the best communicator on this forum and I didn’t post to offend.
You make a good case for being a good citizen, doing the right thing and acting morally. These things are important to a functioning civil society and I live by them now that I’m a civilian.
But there is something different about duty, honor and country when talking about the personal sacrifice that many in the military make - up to and including giving their life to complete their assigned mission.
Obviously law enforcement and some public officials have similar risks but I don’t really think of them as civilians.
I agree with you. Also, making proposals that you know would never get passed by a Congress owned and operated by the rich doesn’t seem very helpful at all, does it? The only way the OP could make any sense at all is if it started with “If you had a magic wand…”
Not when you are dragooned into it, there isn’t.
Duty, honor, and country are all neutral terms. They mean absolutely nothing on their own. I may consider someone who feels duty-bound to care for his wife and kids to be a good person, while someone who feels duty-bound to serve in the Wehrmacht is not. Honor can drive you to pay your taxes, or to chop off your kid’s head because they engaged in premarital sex. Love of your country can lead you to feed and clothe the poor of your nation, or it can lead you to fight for slave-holding terrorist traitors out of a misguided loyalty to Virginia.
Nobody is denying that going off to fight the Nazis was a good thing for us to do, and I would argue that stationing troops in Germany or Japan or Korea in order to discourage WW3 is also a worthwhile endeavor. On the other hand, spending decades wrecking Iraq and Afghanistan was a huge waste of lives and treasure.
The point is, if the US armed forces no longer possess the respect and prestige they once commanded in the eyes of the American public, I’d suggest we should look into those actions taken by the armed forces that earned the public’s disdain, rather than complaining that those who haven’t drank the camo-colored cool-aid aren’t loyal enough.
I totally agree with this. People in the military do contribute in important and unique ways. But that does not devalue the rest of the country, which is why I pushed back.
Er… what does that have to do with the subject at hand? Are you proposing to conscript people to work at munitions factories?
Perhaps we could conscript people to serve as ammunition!
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/BetterDiligentHartebeest-size_restricted.gif
The Russians won’t know what hit them.