« INTERBLOGATORY TRAVELS | Main | U.N. Watch: The U.N. vs. Zimbabwe »
July 25, 2005
"Progressive" Reasons for a Draft
Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that the anti-war left, which expended so much energy back in the Vietnam War days opposing the military draft, now sees it as wonderful and necessary?
David M. Kennedy writes an oped in the NY Times today calling for the return of compulsive service:
The life of a robust democratic society should be strenuous; it should make demands on its citizens when they are asked to engage with issues of life and death. The "revolution in military affairs" has made obsolete the kind of huge army that fought World War II, but a universal duty to service - perhaps in the form of a lottery, or of compulsory national service with military duty as one option among several - would at least ensure that the civilian and military sectors do not become dangerously separate spheres. War is too important to be left either to the generals or the politicians. It must be the people's business.
Let's be honest here. Kennedy doesn't really support the idea of national service. It's just an attempt to gin up the anti-war movement by convincing college kids that it's their rear ends on the line. I remember attending a speech by Timothy Leary in the mid-1970s where he was asked why the youth movement of the 1960s died out so rapidly in the 1970s. He attributed it to Kent State, which showed the protestors that they could die for their actions. He's close; it's more likely the end of the draft in 1972, which showed the protestors that they were not likely to die for the lack of protest.
Kennedy hints at that:
Some will find it offensive to call today's armed forces a "mercenary army," but our troops are emphatically not the kind of citizen-soldiers that we fielded two generations ago - drawn from all ranks of society without respect to background or privilege or education, and mobilized on such a scale that civilian society's deep and durable consent to the resort to arms was absolutely necessary.
Just in case we didn't get the message, the Times publishes another oped from a former WWII Marine:
Only 135,000 men and women in American uniform are fighting - volunteers, members of the National Guard, reservists. There is no draft. No threat of a uniform hangs over the citizens of a nation of nearly 300 million who, in polls, support the invasion of a remote country upon whom our government would pin guilt of 9/11 ... and then attack. An invasion that was ordered by an expertly trained but combat-innocent fighter pilot and a draft-deferred character with "other priorities" during the Vietnam War.
No matter how many times we say that Iraq was largely uninvolved in 9/11, while still retaining ties to Al Qaeda, the idiot left (and this Marine, despite my respect for his WWII service, obviously qualifies) continues to claim that the administration blamed Saddam for 9/11.
The Left has had a lot of fun with their "chickenhawk" characterization of those who, despite being in favor of the war in Iraq, have not served in the military. Perhaps it is time to turn that around, and start referring to the folks who opposed the draft when it was their time, but support it now, as "Draft Codgers".
Captain Ed has a post up on this as does columnist (and former Marine) Jack Kelly of Irish Pennants.
Posted by pat at July 25, 2005 11:03 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/1165
Comments
How very interesting! To push for a draft in order to scare prospective draftees into becoming anti-war is a very desperate measure indeed.
Posted by: Pam M. at July 25, 2005 02:14 PM
The left IS desperate Pam. And if we don't know by now that they will do ANYTHING in their power to defeat the will of the American people (who ELECTED and then RE-elected George W. Bush), then we haven't been paying attention as closely as we should!
Pat - as always, brilliant and incisive writing based on clear and common sense thought processes!
Posted by: Gayle at July 25, 2005 04:34 PM
Last year during the election the liberals had the "Bush Draft" signs. There was a bill in the house and in the senate for a draft...
both were sponsored by democrats!
Posted by: DoubleU at July 25, 2005 05:59 PM
link for those bills:
H.R.163
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR00163:@@@P
S.89
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquerytr/z?d108:SN00089:
It is amazing how well the liberal fool people.
Posted by: DoubleU at July 25, 2005 06:02 PM
I see their point, but I hate it when politicans waste timeon stupid votes to make an idiot point.
Posted by: paul at July 26, 2005 09:21 AM