# Let's reinstitute the Draft in America! Or Huh? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 11, 2009, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633 "2009-07-11T02:11:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2009, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633/61 "2009-07-13T20:09:16Z")
We’ve finally gotten to the point of debate I’d hoped for: whether the intended effects of less military adventure would actually come to fruition by a 10% draft. Lots of good posts to respond too, I’ll try and go thru a couple of the counter-arguments > [@](#): > > OP, you’re making all kinds of unfounded assumptions. First, that poor people are the only people that join (as you’ve had pointed out to you). Second, that the rich have political clout (Who put Obama in office? Hint: Not the rich). Third, that the wars that turned out so poorly shouldn’t have been fought at all. Let’s not forget- the vast majority of the country supported the Iraq War in the beginning. Fourth, that having a politician’s judgment compromised by personal investment is a good thing. 1- see below. 2- Money, when used for it, is political clout. This is America. Without getting into a debate about the Obama election (or any election), any serious Presidential candidate needs money backing him before the public, of any financial means, can vote him into office. 3 - I’m not really talking about the outcome of a war, only whether they should have been entered into in the first place. You do make a good point, though. Let’s assume there was no misrepresentation about Iraq. A lot of times a valid case can be made to attack a country, but it might not be totally necessary to do that. Even if it’s somewhat necessary, it might not be worth the loss of American lives. I’m hoping a lot less cases will be made to go into war in the first place (through political pressure), thus the vast majority of Americans won’t support it. 4 - Do you mean if the politician’s child was in the military? I would hope the politician would vote for a war thinking everyone soldier was his child; having a real one serving, would solidify this. If that’s not what you mean, then let me know. > [@](#): > > From here, as of 2005 the military looked a lot like America, demographically. In fact, in 2003, 22% of the military came from the top quintile, percentagewise. I distinguished between voluntary and involuntary service, but even a “rich” person would not want their child to serve in an unworthy war. So that’s a minor point. I read the report again, carefully, and if I read it right the top “quintile” was [$52k - $200k](http://www.heritage.org/research/nationalsecurity/upload/85090_1.gif); and not $52k - infinity. You should check to make sure I’m reading that correctly. If so, then that’s not the rich I’m talking about. Not close. I wouldn’t even start “rich” with political clout at anything under $250k. And I’d rather it be well above that. Let’s just say I’m looking at the Top 1% of income to have the kind of influence it would take. > [@](#): > > Let’s assume for the sake of argument that you’re right, and that the relatives of those drafted would become a powerful political force. > > Why would they bother using that political power to muck about with foreign policy when they could just end the draft? Good point. It does mean they would “care” then, whereas before they might not have. I’m not sure how to get around this, though. You’d have to use the ole, “what, you’re too good to serve in the military” type of pressure and hope they respond, “No, not at all. I just don’t think we need to be fighting over there because of x, y, z”. Anyone else got ideas? > [@](#): > > The military’s job is to be the most efficient and effective at performing their mission. It is not to be a political check on foreign policy. Anything you do to hamper the military from that role is counter productive, and drafting unwilling and/or less capable soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines reduces the effectiveness of the military. I think it would still be extremely effective. As long as they can be trained effectively, and the pressure to perform by the other 90% of the military notwithstanding, should keep things in check. It’s a good argument, though. You will no doubt get some people who are less unwilling than a volunteer, but I bet there are volunteers who are/act the same way in the military today. The soldiers themselves would not act as a check, but their friends/relatives (the public). The public can influence their elected Congressman. Politicians should act as a political check on foreign policy. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633/62 "2009-07-13T20:25:59Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > Too young to remember Vietnam? > > “People with clout” got their kids college deferments, posts in National Guard Units, draft-exempt jobs, non-combat roles, etc. > > In the end, instead of a war being fought by poor, 19-year old enlistees, we ended up with a war being fought by poor, 19-year old draftees. 25 years ago, the two main reasons for volunteering in Spain (most soldiers and noncoms were draftees) were: - being able to pick an exotic or macho unit (airdropped units were popular with my region for a while; mountain units were popular with guys who’d never seen snow before) - being able to pick a service that would have you sleeping at Mom’s every night (Red Cross, or one which happened to be quartered in your home town). That kind of thing has gone on in every country that’s ever had a draft. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2009, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633/63 "2009-07-13T21:27:04Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > “Mr. Kennedy? Please report for duty.” > “What? Why?” > “Well, your father won the election, so if you’d please pack your things…” > “Then make him serve!” > > You do realize that Prince William went to Iraq, right? And it wasn’t a cushy spot either. Lots of US Senators’ kids are in the infantry et al. as well. Prince Henry/Harry, and he went to Afghanistan. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633/64 "2009-07-14T20:16:06Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > The only problem I’d see is motivation. That’s rather like declaring that the only problem you see with a manned mission to the sun is refrigeration. ---
**Author:** ![ashman165](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@ashman165](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ashman165)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633/65 "2009-07-14T20:25:29Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > That’s rather like declaring that the only problem you see with a manned mission to the sun is refrigeration. Well, the hard part there is that when you close the fridge door, the sun doesn’t turn off. The big problem is getting that little switch to work right so the sun doesn’t spoil the milk. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2009, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633/66 "2009-07-14T20:27:55Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > It seems to me that NOT having a draft is much more likely to restrain the impulses of the leadership to involve the military in more foreign adventures. > > For example, even if Bush had wanted to invade Iran, he knew he couldn’t do it, because the military didn’t have the manpower. Precisely. People support this argument by citing anti-Vietnam-War protests, ignoring the obvious fact that protests can merely make politicians **reluctant** to start or continue an unpopular war, while refusal to show up to serve in an all-volunteer force can render the politicians **unable** to do so. Proposing a draft instead of an all-volunteer force as a brake on military adventurism is like proposing the deployment of anti-theft lecturers instead of armed guards at banks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-reinstitute-the-draft-in-america-or-huh/502633.md?page=3)