US Draft as of 2005?

[InnerBrat]

Congress.org

This was linked to from a friend's LJ, so I'm not sure how reliable the site is...

[Col. Crackpot]

Congress.org

This was linked to from a friend's LJ, so I'm not sure how reliable the site is...

Draft bills are introduced almost every year. The fact is the US Armed forces no longer have the needed facilities to handle drafting masses of conscrpits anymore. The bases are training new solders as fast as they can, and the cannot handle a massive influx without infasructure upgrades. Also, that is not the official congress website. Official US Government websites always end in .gov not .org. Remember the porno site whitehouse.com?

[Tsyroc]

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.

Maybe this is part of one of Bush's jobs programs?


We had a thread a little earlier this year about the bills reinstating the draft coming before Congress. For the most part they were stunts by a couple of members of congress to protest the war.

IIRC this site should show who is supporting these bills and the last time I checked it was hardly anyone. So, whether the Bush administration overhalls the selective service program or not it still doesn't look like it will be getting much use anytime soon.


I also have to wonder what the political ramifications for the Republican party would be if Bush with all of his colorful history with the draft and the reserves, along with the current war, were the ones to insist on bringing back the draft.

[Hamel]

So far it's only politics from a scant few dems. However, it could become reality if the manpower problem gets worse.

[Col. Crackpot]

So far it's only politics from a scant few dems. However, it could become reality if the manpower problem gets worse.

where will they train? if it comes to that we'd have to build more bases for basic training, more facilities for MOS straining, NCO schools, OCS etc. Bases that were closed in the eraly 90's would need to re-open. Do you honestly think that would happen? There will be no draft unless we're invaded by Nazis from space or Kim Jong Il discovers a way to part the Pacific ocean.

[Vympel]

where will they train? if it comes to that we'd have to build more bases for basic training, more facilities for MOS straining, NCO schools, OCS etc. Bases that were closed in the eraly 90's would need to re-open. Do you honestly think that would happen? There will be no draft unless we're invaded by Nazis from space or Kim Jong Il discovers a way to part the Pacific ocean.

You're questioning the ability to re-open closed bases? You should know how incredibly hard it is for the military to close unwanted bases, since they pull in so much money for Congressmen Xs district. They still have a surplus. It's like pulling teeth.

[Tsyroc]

That's a good point.

I think the major thing they would be hurting on is the bases for basic training.

The Navy used to have three and now only has one. They might be able to reopen one of them without too much effort but they'd also have to likely reconfigure how they train if they are going to have a bunch of conscripts.

[Wicked Pilot]

This is part of a three page article written by former Air Force First Sergeant Rod Powers over on the U.S. Military page of About.com. I posted it the first time the draft issue came up, so I guess I'll post it again.

Are You Going to be Drafted?

Ever since the day of the devastating attacks in New York City and on the Pentagon, I have been inundated with requests about my views concerning the possibility that the United States will re-institute a draft for our military services. These questions continue in light of the 'War on Terrorism," and the very real possibility of armed conflict with Iraq, as well as the current situation with North Korea.

Is a draft likely? What exactly is "the draft?" Who is likely to be drafted? What happens during a draft?

Will a draft happen?

Probably not, unless the United States gets involved in a major, major conflict (on the scale of World War II). Probably not even then, for several reasons.

For more than a quarter of a century, the United States Military has been an "all volunteer" service. During that time, the military has dramatically changed the way it trains and the way it fights. In order to implement a draft, we would have to change the entire way the military trains and operates today.

A draft is a good way to fight wars of 50 years ago. It is a lousy way to fight wars today. Today's military members are highly trained professionals. The days of giving a couple month's of training on firing a rifle and tossing a grenade, then sending men off to combat are long gone. In today's military, even the basic infantry is "high tech." You don't train someone to operate and maintain highly sophisticated military equipment overnight. It takes a minimum of 18 months to 2 years to turn out a trained Soldier, Airman, Sailor, or Marine. It takes even longer than that for many military specialties.

In short, if we instituted a draft today, inductees would not be effective until about two years from now (at which time, their two year service commitment would be over).

Each of the military services are well ahead of their recruiting goals for this fiscal year (FY 2003). Even if we dramatically increase our force levels (unnecessary for most conflicts), the military services will have little trouble obtaining enough qualified recruits. Since the 9/11, recruiting offices all over the country have been inundated with individuals who wish to serve (many of them are disappointed to learn they can't simply rush off to boot camp, and then go kill the enemy). Recruiters are turning away more applicants than are being accepted (for a variety of reasons). The same was true during the Gulf War.

A significant problem with a draft is that Congress would have to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" legislation which allows homosexuals to serve in the armed forces, as long as they keep their sexual preferences secret. Under current rules, "open" homosexuals are not allowed to serve. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that anyone (especially today's "youth") who do not wish to serve would have no problems with claiming homosexuality in order to escape military service. (Note: Many people feel that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" should be repealed anyway, but that's another topic).

For more than 20 years, each of the military services have come to rely upon the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) testing program to determine whether or not one has the aptitude to learn military jobs. If a draft were re-instituted, it would be far too easy for individuals who did not wish to serve to intentionally score low on this exam. The military would have no way of knowing which skills these individuals would be capable of learning. As I said, even today's infantry is "high tech," and we have to have the ability to determine whether or not one even has the mental capability of succeeding before we waste thousands of taxpayers dollars to pay for the training.

I often hear individuals state that everyone should serve a term in the U.S. Military. While I personally think that a term of military service would benefit most of our youths, the idea is simply not workable. At any given time, there is approximately 70 million people in the United States who are eligible for military service. We can barely afford our current force-levels of about 1.5 million members on active duty. If we instituted a draft, we could afford to induct a very small percentage of those 70 million eligible.

Most military personnel I know would rather serve alongside someone who has volunteered to be there, not some small percentage of the population dragged there by threat of prison.

Our country does not need a draft. We have a million and a half highly trained, professional Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines currently on active duty. Additionally, we have 1.3 million in the Guard and Reserves. Together, these 2.8 million "all volunteer" professionals can handle any foreseeable military conflict. Also, let's not forget the millions in the inactive reserves, or the millions of military retirees who, by law, can be recalled to active duty at any time. Thousands of military veterans have already phoned in or otherwise contacted the various Military Reserve Centers, volunteering for re-instatement.

The Selective Service has issued the following official statement concerning the likelihood of a draft:

The Selective Service System remains in a standby, caretaker status. On Wednesday, September 18, 2002, in response to a question about the draft, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld indicated that there was "not a chance" of reinstituting the draft. According to Rumsfeld, the military is successful in attracting and retaining talented people in sufficient numbers.

It would take legislative action by the Congress and implementation by the President to reinstate a draft in an emergency.

The Selective Service System, like all Federal agencies, is ready to accomplish its missions. While no heightened measures have been undertaken to bring the Nation closer to reestablishing conscription, young men are reminded that they are still required by existing Federal law to register with Selective Service within 30 days of their 18th birthday. Late registrations are accepted, but not if a man is 26 years old or older.

All of the military services are far ahead of their recruiting goals. In fact, for the Air Force, on the very first day of the Fiscal Year (which began on October 1), the service had already signed up more than 50 percent of all their quotas for the entire remainder of the fiscal year. The other services are reporting similar recruiting and retention successes. Whether this is because of a worsening civilian job market, or increased patriotism due to the "war on terrorism," or a combination of both, is unclear.

No, don't expect the initiation of a draft, anytime soon. It ain 't gonna happen.

[jegs2]

The modern Army is not designed to be a conscription force, and an infusion of conscripts would be disruptive and expensive at best. We would have to put all conscripts through basic combat training and Advanced Individual Training (AIT). Once the conscripts reported to their first unit, they would have to be further trained and developed in order to become useful soldiers. By the time they were fully trained and useful, most of their time would be up (assuming a two-year service obligation), and they would begin the six-month long ACAP process, becoming all but worthless to the unit to which they were assigned.

Time and money wasted.

[RedImperator]

The only concievable reason to reinstate the draft is if the United States were invaded by a numerically superior force and we needed cannon fodder. So unless Beijing starts issuing snorkels to the People's Liberation Army, I wouldn't worry about it.

[Sea Skimmer]

The only concievable reason to reinstate the draft is if the United States were invaded by a numerically superior force and we needed cannon fodder. So unless Beijing starts issuing snorkels to the People's Liberation Army, I wouldn't worry about it.

Even they are moving away from a mass army as quickly as they can, which is fucking slow as hell but the effort is there. The PLA right now only has about 40 manurver divisions, four times that of the US Army but then they have four times as many people. The PLA however could call on much greater reserves then the US.

[Ma Deuce]

The only concievable reason to reinstate the draft is if the United States were invaded by a numerically superior force and we needed cannon fodder. So unless Beijing starts issuing snorkels to the People's Liberation Army, I wouldn't worry about it.

If the US was invaded by a numerically superior force, I expect you'd have more volunteers than you'd know what to do with...

[CaptainChewbacca]

I think it was Zhukov who said "You cannot invade the United States because it has too many gas stations and too many coke bottles."