BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


The spectre of military draft.

 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
 
Slim
14:45 / 16.05.04
I don't like what the current administration is doing in Iraq and I certainly don't like the idea of the draft. But if the draft comes around and I get drafted, so be it. I'll go and serve my country. It's always possible to request being trained as a medic or something to that effect. There are ways to help the people over there without having to fight.
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
03:38 / 18.05.04
That's if you have any interest in helping this idiocy, which I most definitely do not.

Senor Ward said: I have a Selective Service card, but I probably couldn't pass a medical examination for the infantry, on account of my flat feet (a blessing in disguse!?).

That's actually an outmoded disqualifier, which upsets me as well since I also have flat feet. More likely they would just put you in some sort of non-combat service, keeping you handy in case they run out of bodies to put in front of bullets.

But on the other hand, french kissing the draft sargeant might be a good way of being put on indefinite reserve. Don't think I wouldn't try it.

/+,
 
 
Ganesh
11:55 / 18.05.04
Perhaps if you claimed some aptitude in SM, you'd be stationed at Abu Ghraib?
 
 
grant
19:31 / 18.05.04
It's always possible to request being trained as a medic or something to that effect.

Good luck with that.

In WWII, they had the Conscientious Objector platoons (medics, mostly, and always unarmed), but I don't think they've been used since.

Please correct me if wrong.

And getting CO status is a tricky, tricky business.
 
 
Harold Washington died for you
03:57 / 19.05.04
My cousin was just called by some Army guy. He was in the Army for three years, then I think another four on inactive reserve, like probation after getting out of prison... just in case. Anyway he got this letter from the govt last week that said his time was up and he was out of the inactive reserve altogether, a "free man."

Then on Monday an Army officer calls him up. My cousin was told that if he had not recieved his letter yet then he would be staying on IR for an indefinite period of time. Ouch. He left active duty in 2000, BTW. So, if I was to guess, all the soldiers who left active duty between then and now are getting the same call.
 
 
Z. deScathach
04:50 / 20.05.04
While ,there has been talk about drafting females, I'm still out of range of age proposed, (well out). Still, I think if Bush gets a second term, it will be inevitable. They need the human-power to keep this war going. By that time though, I suspect that they'll be getting so much flack about the war that it will be a suicidal move. They will wind up with the same situation that they had with 'Nam. To anyone concerned about it? Canada, (they're nicer up there anyways). Of course I might be wrong about that. They might refuse asylum to draft dodgers because they fear invasion.....
 
 
Char Aina
05:42 / 20.05.04
They might refuse asylum to draft dodgers because they fear invasion....

yeah.
prolly best not running to mexico, then.
 
 
Slim
15:52 / 20.05.04
The problem I have with dodging the draft is this: If I don't go, somebody else will. Maybe that somebody else is my brother, my best friend or my cousin. Maybe it's somebody else's brother, friend or cousin. In the end, by dodging the draft you're dodging a bullet that somebody else is going to have to take. I would feel like a coward. I have no right to skip out so some other poor schmuck that can't skip has to go. How is anyone here different from Bush Jr. when he got out of his responsibilites or any other rich kid that dodges the draft? I think it's hard for one to argue that they care about the troops in Iraq or the citizens of this nation when by skipping the draft they force another citizen to go in their place.

I'd rather take my chances by going into the armed forces and hoping that everything comes out okay.
 
 
Perfect Tommy
20:25 / 20.05.04
An article on Camilo Mejia:

Camilo Mejia served with a unit that crossed into Iraq just after the invasion and then, for five months, fought in the counterinsurgency war in the Sunni Triangle, where he says he was in firefights, killed people, almost got killed, helped torture prisoners and finally had his life saved by a small-scale mutiny. Now he is a declared conscientious objector who spent five months absent without leave, facing the wrath of US military justice.

In October, when he was home on furlough, Mejia decided to ditch the killing and chaos of Iraq...

There are dozens of other soldiers who have refused to show up for their deployments, but the military doesn't pursue most of them and usually releases them from service without too much fuss. Most AWOL soldiers don't even get tracked down. However, if a soldier goes public to make a political point, the military response can be severe.
 
 
Z. deScathach
00:23 / 21.05.04
The problem I have with dodging the draft is this: If I don't go, somebody else will. Maybe that somebody else is my brother, my best friend or my cousin. Maybe it's somebody else's brother, friend or cousin. In the end, by dodging the draft you're dodging a bullet that somebody else is going to have to take.

I can appreciate your sentiments, but that comes down to the question: Is this a just, or even a SMART war? I would argue not. The facts are that there was virtually no Al Queda presence in Iraq UNTIL WE WENT IN. Now the place is crawling with them. The war diverted us from dealing with them, now they are regrouped and even stronger than they were. This war was unprecedented as the first war in this century that could be called completely agressive. I could go on and on, but this is clearly a war that is, IMO, both unjust and downright stupid. To me, a conscientous objector is clearly different than Bush, who was following in the tradition of the rich getting a free pass on risk. What really determines the morality of skipping out, IMO, is the morality of the conflict, and the intent and moral focus of the dodger. In any war that is HIGHLY controversial, many dodgers will be focused on their beliefs about the war, rather than simply being cowards. Personally, I carried signs about this war, and as far as I'm concerned, we got it right. I sure would not go fight the damn thing.
 
 
w1rebaby
11:59 / 21.05.04
If you're concerned about other people being drafted, you should take them with you, or encourage mass resistance and try to stop the whole thing, rather than becoming someone's enforcer.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
01:25 / 22.05.04
Yeah, the difference between skipping the draft and being Bush is that in skipping the draft, you're not sending thousands of people of to fight.
 
 
Char Aina
02:27 / 22.05.04
i'm with the stoat. its bush's hypocrisy that grates, not his lack of service.
 
 
Isalie
10:35 / 24.05.04
from congress.org
=====
Pending Draft Legislation Targeted for Spring 2005
The Draft will Start in June 2005

There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately.

$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website: www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004.

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year, http://www.hslda.org/legislation/na...s89/default.asp entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services.

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era.

College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

Even those voters who currently support US actions abroad may still object to this move, knowing their own children or grandchildren will not have a say about whether to fight. Not that it should make a difference, but this plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a
shelter and includes women in the draft.

The public has a right to air their opinions about such an important decision.

Please send this on to all the friends, parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents, and cousins that you know. Let your children know too -- it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change!

Please also contact your representatives to ask them why they aren't telling their constituents about these bills -- and contact newspapers and other media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important story.

==========

Oh fuck me.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
11:15 / 24.05.04
The website for the above is here.
 
 
diz
12:59 / 24.05.04
The problem I have with dodging the draft is this: If I don't go, somebody else will. Maybe that somebody else is my brother, my best friend or my cousin. Maybe it's somebody else's brother, friend or cousin. In the end, by dodging the draft you're dodging a bullet that somebody else is going to have to take. I would feel like a coward. I have no right to skip out so some other poor schmuck that can't skip has to go. How is anyone here different from Bush Jr. when he got out of his responsibilites or any other rich kid that dodges the draft? I think it's hard for one to argue that they care about the troops in Iraq or the citizens of this nation when by skipping the draft they force another citizen to go in their place.

I'd rather take my chances by going into the armed forces and hoping that everything comes out okay.


my feeling on this is that you can discharge your responsibility to the situation by becoming as close to a full-time anti-war activist as you can. in other words, you enlist in the anti-war army and do what you can to get everyone out of the situation. that certainly strikes me as a hell of a lot better in terms of a solution than just joining up.

To me, a conscientous objector is clearly different than Bush, who was following in the tradition of the rich getting a free pass on risk.

something worth noting here is that Bush still supported the war, he just wasn't willing to put his own ass on the line. in fact, he spent the time that he was supposed to have been doing his National Guard tour campaigning for right-wing political candidates. and then, as mentioned, he's been happy to send other people to die ever since.

oh, fuck me

i'm a little freaked right now because the House and Senate bills in question both involve drafting females, and while i'm out of the age range, my partners are not. would love to flee to Canada, but that may not be workable due to the new laws and treaties. gah. i wonder which, if any, EU countries may be happy to entertain an application for citizenship...
 
 
rizla mission
16:25 / 24.05.04
If I was a US citizen I think I'd be legging it to the airport with my suitcases as we speak..
 
 
w1rebaby
17:49 / 24.05.04
It's not just citizens, it's anyone resident in the US not on a student visa, a visa waiver or some sort of diplomatic ticket. Even illegal immigrants can be drafted.

I however am too old.
 
 
Nobody's girl
12:07 / 25.05.04
I'm terrified of this possibility, someone reassure me!

Fuck me, you guys have totally not helped my paranoia

Well, I suppose hubby and I will be attending Quaker meetings from now on...

Although this gives me hope-

It's not just citizens, it's anyone resident in the US not on a student visa, a visa waiver or some sort of diplomatic ticket.

Perhaps my husband can get out of it due to being a settled resident in the UK. Though frankly the presence of US military bases in the UK doesn't reassure me of that vain hope.

Well, I suppose my French relatives'll have to prepare to put us up during the duration of this ensuing disaster. Anyone else fancy coming?
 
 
rizla mission
14:49 / 25.05.04
Yeah, at a guess I'd say mainland Europe might be the best place to go. I can't really see the US authorities bothering too hard to track down errant citizens in weird little European countries which are diplomatically snotty towards them anyway..
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
15:39 / 25.05.04
How would the British Barbelith contingent feel about a series of marriages to get our American friends out of trouble? Would that actually work?
 
 
Skeleton Camera
21:54 / 25.05.04
According to the congress.org article, the draft bills would make mandatory 'a period of military or civil service for the purposes of defense etc etc'. This sounds much like the policy of many European countries, or Israel, which require a period of military/civil service for a year or two.
But there are no details (in the article) as to how long the service period would be, or what exactly would be 'civil service'. I do not dispute the disaster of this legislation but I wonder about its nature in re: European policies.
 
 
Skeleton Camera
21:57 / 25.05.04
Also, another take from snopes.com

http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/draft.asp
 
 
w1rebaby
22:17 / 25.05.04
Yeah, I found out after posting that link re the two bills on my blog that actually, they were proposed by Democrats, theoretically as an "inclusive" measure to stop rich kids fleeing the draft, so don't really constitute any secret attempt by the administration to bring it in by next year.

However, they do still seem to be actively considering the possibility - that certain Dem congresspeople felt the need to do this is a bad sign, and there's plenty of other evidence, draft boards et al.
 
 
Nobody's girl
23:46 / 25.05.04
Phew!

Bastards, I must remember to check snopes more regularly, can't be doing with all this stress!
 
 
Charlie's Horse
06:17 / 26.05.04
How would the British Barbelith contingent feel about a series of marriages to get our American friends out of trouble?

Keep in mind: we Americans are verrry sexy. It's all that free-market capitalism. Survival of the... fittest.
 
 
sleazenation
08:59 / 26.05.04
This sounds like it has all the makings of a really tacky reality TV show...

Welcome to survival of the fittest - the show that helps only the most attractive americans to escape Bush's America in a marriage of convenience to a range of elegable Europeans...

Quick, someone sell the format to Rupert Murdoch.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
10:23 / 26.05.04
It wouldn't work unless one or other of the people had a sex change and turned gay first.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
10:29 / 26.05.04
Conscientious Objector Eye for the Military Guy?
 
 
Jub
13:11 / 26.05.04
Make love (within the confines of a marriage of convenience) not war?
 
 
grant
18:32 / 26.05.04
Hey fridge -- I'm reading over that Snopes page, as well as a related discussion over yonder, and I'm wondering -- you're a computer specialist, right? Didja know they're extending age limits for certain professions up to 55?

You're under 55, right?

Right?
 
 
Skeleton Camera
19:06 / 26.05.04
The new and expanded army! With the civil service provision, it's neither just poor kids being used as cannon fodder, nor is it just a search for grunts. The range of who counts as 'draftable' has greatly expanded.

And I still wonder about the proposition in re: European mandatory military service time.
 
 
Jack Fear
22:00 / 26.05.04
Can we put aside the self-interest for a moment to look at an important question here?

The status quo of an all-volunteer fighting force--supplemented with "contractors," i.e. mercenaries--a military which constitutes unto itself a separate professional class, practically a separate culture, the values of which are often drastically at odds with those of the larger culture: of a military that is perforce largely ideologically homogeneous, and therefore subject to the kind of just-following-orders groupthink that led to the horrors of Abu Ghraib: of the subsequent splitting of the US into, effectively, two nations--one (the military nation) at war, the other (the civilian nation) at peace: of an anti-war movement that lacks a certain credibility, given that (unlike during the Vietnam era) it cannot with any credibility claim to be speaking for those who will actually be doing the fighting...

...everybody's okay with this?
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
09:47 / 27.05.04
But if I object to the war I'm not doing so as much for the soldiers that are over there fighting, although that is a part of it, as I am for my deeply held belief that war is bad, mmmkay and that, while a pro-war nutbar is equally entitled to their view, putting into practice their view over mine ends up with their view resulting in a lot more deaths than mine.

Taking part in conflict is not a prerequisite to have a valid moral opinion on something, else the anti-abortion and pro-choice campaigns would pretty much shut up shop overnight.
 
 
Jack Fear
10:36 / 27.05.04
Well, this much is true--and that's part of mypoint. By professionalizing the military, we've made the anti-war movement, as you say, analogous to pro-lifers at abortion clinics: When war is a profession, then to protest against war is also to protest against the way in which these people earn their living.

Thus the soldier and the anti-war activist are put in opposition to one another, because the common ground of "the life you save may be your own" has been removed; and you end up with something much like what Lenny Bruce described, with demonstrators "actually protesting against policemen."

I think the root question here (and one that's not being addressed in the Oh-God-what-if-they-come-for-me hysteria of this thread) is: Is soldiering a job that should be left to professionals?

And there are a lot of progressive arguments to be made for bringing back the draft (with--and this is a major proviso--a realistic national service option for pacifists). In fact, as you'll notice, it's not the Bushies who are floating the idea--it's the Democrats. And most of the hetoric calling for a return to the draft has been coming from progressive voices--later today, I'll link to some of the arguments and articles.

Why should this be so? Aside from some of the practical reasons I outlined above, there are strong ideological reasons for a person of socialist (or even democratic) leanings to prefer a service-based military over a professional fighting force--and certainly over the bastardized semi-corporate corps currently operating in Iraq.

If we take the existence of the miltary as a necessary evil--as an organization for the common defense of all citizens--it must be understood on a service model. And an all-professional military, one could argue, represents the thin end of the wedge in that old liberal bugaboo--the privatization of social services.

All right, so it's only semi-private--it's still paid for by tax money--but the military is increasingly removed from the civilian culture, and its members (as evidenced by recent actions) are increasingly less beholden to civilian morality. We're heading towards the class system of STARSHIP TROOPERS: the us-and-them attitudes are hardening, and the mutual contempt will follow (we've already seen some of that in the response to the Lynndie England scandal).

Look, I'm not sure where I stand on this. But it seems to me that the status quo of a professional military is deeply broken and produces a toxic mentality on both sides of the military-civilian divide, and that a national-service draft might be worth considering as a solution to this problem. And it seems to me that the issue deserves to be examined in that larger context, with more brought to the table than panicky self-interest.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
  
Add Your Reply