Activism and Politics > Politics
Selective Service/Draft. Isn't it biased?
justmeinoz:
It's a silly idea really. All volunteer, citizen armed forces are a lot more effective anyway.
Jamie D:
--- Quote from: Beth Andrea on May 15, 2012, 03:47:55 am ---When I got out of the AF, I was still young enough to be required to sign up for selective ("it's not a draft!") service...I filled out the form, but also wrote "UNDER DURESS" next to my signature.
Didn't hear back from anyone.
Re: the bias claim...since a draft (by any name) would only be used "in times of national emergency", most of our civil rights and freedoms will get tossed as needed. After the situation is resolved, we'll be hearing about 3,683,901 apologies and promises that "it'll never happen again, trust us".
Yeah, right. When a gov't is threatened, it has the power to change the rules at will, including our rights. And the "gun-toting 'Mericans!" won't do anything about it...in spite of all their bluster and camoflage utilities.
--- End quote ---
From the deep dark recesses of my memory, I could swear there was/is a special classification for someone who had been in and separated from the military, but was under the age of 26.
Jamie D:
--- Quote from: justmeinoz on May 15, 2012, 05:28:16 am ---It's a silly idea really. All volunteer, citizen armed forces are a lot more effective anyway.
--- End quote ---
Karen, all of the branches of the US military are "top-heavy." That is to say, it has a structure with lots of commissioned and non-commissioned officers, but relatively few general enlistments.
The rationale for the selective service is so that many can be called into service (the draft) if a sudden mobilization is required.
Between the active duty volunteers, and the reserves, that has not been necessary, or politically expedient, since the Vietnam Was era.
Some free countries (Israel comes to mind) still maintain mandatory service. It is a matter of national policy.
Beth Andrea:
--- Quote from: Jamie D on May 15, 2012, 05:40:05 am ---Karen, all of the branches of the US military are "top-heavy." That is to say, it has a structure with lots of commissioned and non-commissioned officers, but relatively few general enlistments.
The rationale for the selective service is so that many can be called into service (the draft) if a sudden mobilization is required.
Between the active duty volunteers, and the reserves, that has not been necessary, or politically expedient, since the Vietnam Was era.
Some free countries (Israel comes to mind) still maintain mandatory service. It is a matter of national policy.
--- End quote ---
And that is the reason why the US .mil is top-heavy...so that if a draft occurred, the framework for a greatly enlarged force is already in place.
Kinda like "instant army"....just add recruits.
Slanan:
Yes, it's sexist, and it's a stupid thing to keep around period.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version