It's not about the Draft

And now that the Democrats won the elections, everyone is asking of their fate...the elections were more popular than Saddam's sentencing...If the Americans pull out now and leave us amid this chaos, we are all dead. We wont even be able to get jobs elsewhere, we will be seen as the "traitors" the "collaborators". If the Americans leave, Iraqis will eat each other, literally eat each other. If the Americans leave us now, there wont be an Iraq left on the face of the earth...it is a hopeless situation....Iraqi Wife.
http://cyberray-rays.blogspot.com/2006/11/dont-let... ( http://cyberray-rays.blogspot.com/2006/11/dont-let... )

Who was it who said that young men (soldiers) pay with their lives for the mistakes of old men (politicians)?

Jim Heivilin

Actually, Conan, I welcome comments whether I agree with them or not--in fact, I prefer comments that dispute or challenge my posts. They keep me honest. As always, though, I discourage personal attacks or slights. Let's stick to the issues and keep the jabs out of it. This isn't the O'Club, where you 'dis someone and then buy him a beer.

Ok, Nelle, point taken, I'll try to soften my presentation a bit. I had no idea you were so sensitive when reading your posts on the other subjects. I guess I just figured that since this blog is listed as a military issues blog that the level of discussion would be a little more intense. No reason to stop engaging in discussion on this blog. In all honesty, my comments shouldn't matter that much to you anyway.

By your own admission you are not very familiar with military history and you were shocked after discovering who fights our wars. I just found this a bit strange for someone who opines so strongly on a military issues blog, that's all. But, admitting those things is part of the process and you shouldn't be chastised for it. It's admirable that you're trying to understand.

As far as PBS, I hope it works for you and presents you with all of the information that you want to hear.

As for the blogher comment, I did ask Kim for permission to post (a bit belatedly) and recieved it. When it comes to the alpha male stuff, I can assure you that Kim will give no quarter to any contributor to this blog with whom she strongly disagrees and that she has the capability to be brutally honest and tough as nails. The warrior spirit you know!...and she's no alpha male!

My humblest apologies.

conan

You have questioned my news sources, have asked me if I am waking up to who fights our wars, told me to turn off PBS, (I guess for Fox?) And whilst not personal attack, you have stated you were giving me a history lesson, asked if I knew something in a condescending way, hated to break something to me, etc.

IMO, this is all decidedly male behaviour and straight from patriarchy. If I wish to engage with alpha males there are other places I can do so without having to run into it on blogher. As such, no further comments from me in this thread.

Nelle ( http://liberalfeministtranniedyke.blogspot.com/ )

You're right about poor Mo'. He became little threat after he had a big dose of iron dropped on his noggin. (in response to his deadly involvement in the deaths of many Americans....a threat?) Anyway he gave up all hope within a few days of Saddam's downfall and gave up his nuke program.

I never advocated war with Iraq at that specific time. Shucks, we only had troops containing Saddam for 10 years, just think what 60 years and trillions of dollars could have done to prevent war...(a la Korea and Europe). We barely even got started pissing away resources in Iraq compared to those two areas. But, hey the Commie hoards needed to be kept at bay...and still do I suppose, although not so much in Europe these days. Those hundreds of thousands of troops over the years used to keep the evil empires at bay could have just been expanded to cover Iraq. Our grandkids could have sent us gold trinkets, rugs and exotic spices 40 years from now while spending their off time in the quaint middle eastern cultures.

Welcome to the "single mindedgreedexecutivewhateverthatthingis" world. What else is there really in an economic system. Adam Smith..... my hero...I guess we could try "from each according to his means, to each according to his needs" but that's been done and human nature has seen to it that "that dog won't hunt").

But alas, free market economics has worked well in the gasoline business. That's why those greedy so and so's still go out and find the stuff and bring it to us. We long distance commuters will find ways to get where we're going using alternate means when the need arrives...just not enough pain yet. Mobility is important in NYC and all over Europe too, but you don't need a Hummer or Escalade to get around....a lesson in there somewhere?

Oil and war connected? C'mon, they wouldn't do that! Would they? Oh yeah, we'd better use up all of the oil we can, cause the Chinese will pay anything to get it...so they can have a booming economy and manufacture Marti Gras gee gaws for party animals to throw at nubile breast flashing young women..kinda like an obligation to get the poor downtrodden souls of New Orleans back on their feet.....oh, never mind..wrong venue! (that was no kidding the subject of a show I just saw today.. believe it or not..not the bare breast part, the Chinese manufacturing so much of the junk we consume part). I know what your thinking...could he possibly be that starved for entertainment?...Sunday without football, whatcha gonna do?

Conan

First off...no personal attacks have been leveled by me or will be in the future. That is not the purpose of this process. You may be offended because I present a different opinion than you are accustomed to. That is the same problem that occurs with news sources that always present stories which go along with your beliefs. Sources you find most in disagreement with you would be beneficial for complete understanding of a story...if that is your goal. Perhaps you came to this blog expecting to be able to rant and have the entire forum shared with like minded people. That's not what it's about, otherwise we would all be just blowing warm air up each others pant legs. I've enjoyed the dialogue.

The case I make is specific references to specific assertions made in this dialogue. I don't make any case for anything else. In stating that my case fails, you present no facts, just feelings....I'm not much about feelings. I never have attempted to make the case that this war was inevitable. My only point is that there were valid considerations for the use of force that must be considered.

I'm not sure what that last paragraph means, but nobody's opinions or outlooks are beyond debate in this forum. That's what we discuss here. As for demeaning, not my intent at all. Thicken up that skin and take all of this debate for what it is. Happy motoring, keep those hits coming.
Conan

Mata,

An egalitarian draft (if such a beast were even possible) might help with national consciousness, I agree, but it does no favors for the military, which has a hard enough time motivating people who willingly sign on the dotted line.

However, I would love to see a national service committment of say a year or two from every single capable person, even if they're working for the forest service or social service, or whatever.

Several comments. First off, my intake of news is more than NPR, but they are the American source I most trust. And since my work is done away from access to media, I've limited time in my day to endlessly scour various sources.

Secondly, in referencing history, the history we teach is a far cry from history in reality, and quite frankly, doubt either of us really have a good handle on the actuality of human events. There is a whole element of history missing, namely the history of women in this world, which was shoved aside and ignored for the recordings of glorious battles.

Thirdly, how we conduct ourselves most certainly is subject to modification. On a smaller level, witness how we have increased awareness of the ills of spanking children, and how many have moved away from engaging in such conduct.

And although Europe was very volatile and violent, much of the continent is no longer engaged in war.

You attempt to make a case for action in Iraq, but it fails. It fails in reality. It fails because of nationalism, and try as one might to assign noble cause to the venture, people tend to resent others saying they are screwed up and so we'll show you the way, or better yet, we will impose the way upon you.

As for women under Saddam and going forward, yes... in many ways women were better off. That is not to say the regime was not worthy of being cast aside, and that no one should make the attempt... that had to come from within, not by imposition. And now that we are there, now that we supposedly have brought democracy, why is it equal rights for women is still very much up in the air and uncertain?

Finally, the root of Nixon's fall lies in the Pentagon Papers, which indeed did play to his paranoia. And LBJ declined to run because of the results of the primary in this state, he could see what was about to play out. It was quite fascinating watching this play out all around me... at the age of 13, the first year of truly being politically aware.

Whilst you may chastise me on my news sources (note I have not inquired into yours, and could care less) please do not make light of my outlook, and from whence it is derived. Debate yes, go for it. Demean, no. Mkay? You have an opinion, as do I. We are not talking on either or subjects. And I don't take kindly to someone coming after me personally.

Nelle ( http://liberalfeministtranniedyke.blogspot.com/ )

I believe that the draft should be reinstated, but on equitable terms with no advantage for the wealthy. Watch the war end when the brokers of war have to see their own children used as fodder. Warch everyone rise up when they have a blood-stake in this war.

And puleeeease -- I hope no one out there actually believes we went to war with Iraq because we wanted to free them from tyranny and slaughter -- if that was the case it seems we missed a few dozen despots along the way, no?

Leave for a week and I miss the whole party. My point in the post was not only that "draft is bad"--pretty much everyone agrees on this point, but also, as a result, so few people have a real connection to the war. If you don't know someone fighting in Iraq, the war is nothing more than an abstract tragedy.

Trillions in debt? Ok, whatever that means. Being trillions in debt hasn't hurt my quality of life, so it all must be okay--THAT's my issue. Because it's not okay. We are, like it or not, going to have to account for the ill-planned war we continue to prolong. Conan--whether we needed to attack Iraq when we did is highly debatable. Saddam was little more dangerous to us than Qaddaffi after we worked on him for a few years.

Oil tycoons: yes, Conan, if I look through my 401K I'll probably find some energy stock. Perhaps that means I'm swept up in the single-mided greed of the executive-industrial complex so staunchly in place...but taking a glace at my surroundings, it sure doesn't seem like it. The reason free-market economics hasn't worked with the price of gas is that we long-distance commuters have become so dependent on this resource that our options for change are few. Driving habits will change, I believe, but the change will be very slow. Mobility is way too important to the American way of life, and nobody knows this better than the oil people.

Oil and war. Do you think they're connected? Hmmm.

Just a few thoughts on the new post. Yes, we absolutely teach our children that you must fight some times. History teaches us so. Human nature teaches us so. To do otherwise would no doubt make victims out of them. We must strive to use wisdom when using force though...that we can train many humans to do, but not all. Lets see here I think it goes "speak softley and carry a big stick"...and I don't think that came from PBS. I've seen you reference PBS at least twice now. I believe you would be well served to dump PBS for a while and try some other media outlets for a fresh perspective. (no not the NY Times)

If "my way" whatever that may be, has been that way for 10,000 years then there is probably a lesson about reality in there somewhere. Human nature is not subject to change! Reality lesson number one. Once you accept this fact understanding the ways of the world becomes easier. You don't have to like it but don't delude yourself into believing that you can some how prevent humans from settling their differences through warfare. It can frequntly be avoided, but not forever.

Do you actually believe that women were better off in Iraq under the previous regime because some wear head coverings now? Please reference the sexual appetites of the Hussein boys and then get back to me. (hint...their advances weren't subject to negotiation). Please reference missing husbands, sons, uncles, cousins granfathers, sisters mothers daughters...you get the picture (to the tune of hundreds of thousands)of these women and then get back to me. Finally, you may have missed it on PBS but several of Iraq's female elected officials spent last week shadowing female legislators in DC. Suffice it to say, their comments do not support your position.

As for being the leader in peace...lofty platitude, unmeasurable as a goal. We are the most generous nation on earth however.

Saddam was a threat to the tens of thousands of Americans who spent 10 years containing him after his defeat in the first Gulf War. If he would have lived up to his obligations he would never have faced this situation...but that's for a different thread.

Wow, you did all that work ending the war 30 years ago and took out two presidents and your just now waking up to the reality of who fights our nations wars..?? Turn off the PBS and go visit The Wall on the mall in Wash. DC and then check out the Vietnam War section in the American History Museum at the Smithsonian. Take a stroll through your nearest national cemetery.

Finally, a history lesson... if you find yourself penning phrases such as "never before in our nation's history" you are rarely going to be correct in whatever comes next. Nice try, but our Presidents have been villified plenty throughout our history. Just for the record, Nixon was brought down through his own bumbling paranoia and it had little to do with Vietnam (per se). You do know who got us out of Vietnam don't you?

I hate to be the one to break this to you but Cindy Sheehan is a.....well let's just say she's not the most highly respected person in America. She has accomplished absolutely nothing. ACCOMPLISHED being the operative word. She will not accomplish anything because she has made herself the wrong messenger through her ridiculous behavior. This is not meant however to make light of her loss. For that she has my utmost respect. This nation does owe her a debt of gratitude as well as an accounting for this entire conflict when it has drawn to an end.

In human nature and history "I believe."

Conan
(Crushing my enemies, seeing them drawn before me and listening to the lamentations of their women... for 10,000 years!!) ok, ok, I just couldn't resist.

I'm starting over, casting aside my initial response.

War means failure. It's as simple as that. When we fight, it means we failed. We failed to work it out without resorting to fighting. What is it we teach our children? Do we tell them that fighting at school is at times inevitable?

The fact is this nation resorted to force because our leaders (as do many of us) believe we simply are unmatched in armed strength. It becomes not the final alternative, but a viable alternative. We move it up the list of possibilities, to the point where we did not make a full effort to exhaust all other possibilities.

We did not consider the regional impact, as his father did (and warned him on going it alone.) He did not consider the fracturing potential, the needs and demands of infrastructure, the social impact (see women having to cover now where they did not face this pressure before.) None of this was given much thought. We went in with the minimum necessary force, and thought it an easy conquest.

You can diss my words and call for change, but your way has been the way for 10,000 years, and it's time for change.

We should know by now far too many wars are avoidable, far too many rooted in insecurity, in ignorance. We have actually lost ground over my lifetime. 45 years ago, a good chunk of this world considered our president someone they looked up to and admired. You would not find that sentiment today. Why?

Because a nation that should lead the way in peace, in encouraging peace, is instead engaging in warfare, engaging in abuse. Saddam was no threat to us. We were not in imminent danger of attack.

Twice in my lifetime we have been taken into major conflict through irrational leadership (and I speak of LBJ, who was responsible for the major escalation in Vietnam) it's simply too easy a choice for a leader, and we need to change our laws to make this a whole bunch more difficult.

The only way is for people to start realising who the hell is sent to put their lives on the line. I needed a wake up call, even as I opposed this war. It hit me square between the eyes, in a very stunning way. It was no longer a story in print or video, it was in front of me, represented by a human being a year older than my eldest daughter, who was a child not too awfully long ago, riding upon my shoulders.

You can shrug and accept this as the way it is, get caught up in the game, the chase, whatever... but not me, no more. I'm not playing this game. Things will only change if we demand it. The power of one can become the power of two, and four... Cindy Sheehan knows this. I've seen it work, we ended a war 3o+ years ago, and took out two presidents in the process. It can be done.

As says the NPR program, *this... I believe.*

Nelle ( http://liberalfeministtranniedyke.blogspot.com/ )

I can't argue with you there, but that wasn't really the focus of my post. Sometimes reality needs to be injected into discussions especially when the tangent turns toward nebulous concepts. To adequately examine a topic one must consider the reality of an issue rather than just "wouldn't it be great if.."

I just don't buy the concept of "greedy oil tycoons" being a zero sum game benefiting only the rich. I also don't by the concept that we can change who does the fighting when we do go to war. (not Kim's point by the way)

Kim's points seem to be (quite validly) that a military draft would be a bad thing, that the average American is disconnected from the ongoing war effort and that people are making money from that effort and continuing on with their lives. My point is there is nothing new in any of that.

I believe that only one conclusion can be drawn from the fact that "average joes" aren't marching in the streets.....they aren't that against the war. It sounds overly simplistic, but if sentiment ran wide enough and deep enough against the war, people would become involved. On the other side, you may not hear about efforts to support troops (aside from the yellow magnets) but you would if you looked for it. Maybe you can choose just to get involved in a couple of those unhearalded efforts that are going on in so many places...which conveniently brings us full circle back to your last sentence...so I guess this means we sort of agree.

Conan

I may not be understanding your points, Conan, but I took Kim's post to be about disconnects between those involved in combat and combat support in Iraq and those of us "back home" who are not.

My comments were meant to provide one solution: Get involved with the families who do have members serving. I do not think things like gas rationing are enough. Many of us have pocketbooks that can sufficiently take such hits, or we can make adustments in other ways. But real emotional connections with service members and their families is something else entirely.

Well, change can be good or bad but what's not going to change is the demographic who will be called upon to fight a nation's wars. 23 is not "extremely young", it is the prime of life. The age at which people are most physically capable and most trainable. You're not going to find wars (in most cases) being fought primarily by any other group.

Another thing that will not change is warfare as a means of settling differences. Sometimes people must be defeated and many on both sides of an issue must die. Sad, and terrible, but reality. We can certainly debate the point when warfare is justified by a society, but we can't stop it.

Back to your question...is it somehow right?? Well, quite frankly, yes it is. In this world, war is inevitable, people who fight war will be a nation's most capable and nothing else makes sense.

The words "out for change" then somehow ring hollow. A slogan of someone frustrated with reality. Hey, I'm all for change in many ways too. Change can only be made by specific action taken to affect it.

So what action is to be taken? Vote for the Democrats? Vote for the Republicans? Who? Take to the streets? Burn candles? Which of these will change the demographic that fights our countries wars?

"change", "our greater glory", "rationalizing our leader's abhorrent conduct".....all slogans...words with no real substance, born of frustration with the way things are.

Conan

While I make no claim to be a student of war, I am pretty well versed in twentieth century European history. And yes, am quite well aware of the extremely young ages that have traditionally fought in all wars. This does not make it somehow right, now does it?

The fact is, we don't like our children marrying at 16. We don't like them drinking at 18. Hell, we don't let them drink until they are 21, yet we are quite willing to let them take one for our greater glory.

I'm out for change, Conan, not rationalising abhorrent conduct by those that purport to lead.

Nelle ( http://liberalfeministtranniedyke.blogspot.com/ )

Rosie the Riveter in WWII...gas rationing...Food rationing? People gave. People supported. People suffered. Yes-we (all right, they) all gave to the war effort in small ways.

Yes, but in large part these were also people with spouses, children, siblings, friends and others who were directly involved in combat and combat support.

There is a huge disconnect between the (largely) working class folks who have first hand experience with the military and the middle class. That is too bad. It results in assumptions that folks who volunteer for the military are neither "liberal" nor "intellectual."

I am not for the draft either, since I believe that it will only further hurt the poor and working classes, while most every one else will find ways to get out of or lessen their service requirements. I agree with you that there needs to be some direct support and sacrifice. If there is a military base or a mobilized guard unit near where you live, you might try there.

runs in more than one direction. Forgive me, I'm fresh off a rant on the violence in Iraq...

Our leaders are disconnected. Oh, there was popular support three and a half years ago, we were fresh off 11 September and we believed taking on Iraq was essential in staving off a repeat of that horrible day.

Except it was more about stretching the limits of power. More about blindness towards the limits of our power, and over the role nationalism can play in a nation when a foreign country is on it's soil. See Ho Chi Minh, ally one day, enemy the next.

Some of us never wanted this war, saw the myriad of potential issues that would be created once the door was opened.

America no longer wants this war. And yet it is being fought, and a small minority of us carries the burden. Last week, a co-worker's son came in to meet everyone. He left Thursday morning, and in a week or two will be back in Iraq. I was stunned upon meeting him, goddess... he looked so damn young. OK, he's 22 or 23, and I'm too old, but this is who is there with their lives on the line. Our children.

Our next opportunity comes in November. I hope America is ready to speak up.

Nelle ( http://liberalfeministtranniedyke.blogspot.com/ )

Kim: You bemoan the fact that we haven't suffered gas rationing and in the next paragraph bemoan the "Oil Tycoons" and their companies for earning record profits. A couple of points...first, I don't recall ever having had to search around for a station that had product available to the consumer(supply of a limited resource was abundant at a price the consumer was willing to pay)...second, gasoline prices declined quickly because consumers altered their driving habits (prices fell because the consumer was no longer willing to pay)...the free market worked. As for "Oil Tycoons" I'd bet that if you have a 401k or other investments you are an "Oil Tycoon"....record profits translate to profits for investors. (DOW nearing record high levels)

Nellenelle: I am amazed at your seemingly limited understanding of the history of war...you're shocked that a 22 or 23 year old...one of "our children" is the poor soul fighting on the front lines of Iraq. Who did you think was doing the fighting? Do you believe this is something new in our nation's history?

Kim, you referenced Ike a few blogs ago and I too would like to reference him. After being taken for a tour of Nazi death camps during the last days of WWII Ike commented (I'm paraphrasing here) "I can't show our soldiers what they're figthting for but I can show them what they're fighting against". As the savages of Iraq continue to behead, slit throats and otherwise vaporize and maim the Iraqi population, we would be wise to consider those words. This wanton slaughter by Islamic extremists and delusional fanatics is designed to foment civil war in Iraq plain and simple. (By the way, civil war does not yet exist in Iraq...previous blog not withstanding..). These are the people with the same goals as so many other tyrants...dominate the world, slaughter those who don't agree with them, keep the race pure, deny freedom to the people etc.. In other words, they want to see us and our way of life gone.

As for the draft, the most effective method for a rapid end to this war would be a true leader with the ability to show the free world that it does indeed have a dog in this fight. (The Iranians just might be setting loose the old "Clue Bird" on Europe even as we discuss this very topic).....I'm not holding my breath though! Unfortunately the entire free world is suffering from a leadership vaccum....and I don't see any hope waiting in the wings! (The not-so-free communist Chinese seem to be doing pretty well at this point however.....oh never mind)!

Conan

ps. You want pain? Just wait till the Chinese quit buying our debt! That's gonna leave a mark!!