| | Selective Service is Selective Slavery.
- It is involuntary servitude and therefore unconstitutional,
- It is impractical as a way to staff a highly motivated and highly technical army,
- it is not even economically practical (I've seen figures on recruitment and training costs lost with high turn-over in draftees),
- The new military doesn't want it,
- But worst of all it is such a blatant moral contradiction to even consider enslaving people to go fight for freedom.
I've seen these arrogant attempts to reintroduce some kind of "service" every so often from both the left and the right. They've made all kinds of pathetic excuses. They've even said we should force all young people to go serve in the peace corp for the good of their character and to improve conditions in down-trodden, diseased third-world areas. As if getting degrees, starting careers and beginning families had no importance. As if some corrupt slime in Washington DC had the right to dictate what someone else will do with their life!
Rep. Rangle is quoted as saying, "There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way."
So, if you just enslave some kids and start sending them to their deaths in foriegn countries it will make their parents stand up to the administration. Wasn't that congresses job? Aren't they supposed to declare or not declare war! That bastard! I almost believe there could be one clear exception for a draft: anyone who actively participates in putting a bill before congress proposing any kind of draft or votes for such a bill should instantly be drafted regardless of their age or other conditions and immediately put on the front lines.
Nixon ended the draft on advice of Greenspan and Friedman. Friedman beat General Westmoreland into intellectual submission when the general tried to argue against a 'mercenary' army. (pointing out that the general was a mercenary general and that he, Friedman, was a mercenary economist, etc.) Nixson didn't go far enough because he left the machinery in place and didn't attack it as immoral and didn't attack it with the fervor it deserved.
|
|
