Would a draft help the "anti-war" movement?

[theboss]

For the record, I don't think there is going to be a draft. I should say that up front.

But I visited my old campus this weekend and was reviewing the flyers and bulletin boards and postings...and saw nothing political listed. I read the school paper too and the war is largely absent from discussion there. In the 60s, the students went on strike.

And it struck me that the students protesting in the 60s faced the very real possibility that they or their friends would be sent to Vietnam and never come back. The average student today is not going to face that prospect unless they make a conscious choice.

And if they make that choice, they probably aren't going to protest.

So, would the self-interest of a draft wake up the kids?

[Shoeempress]

1. Yes and their parents too.

[DemsUnited]

2. What makes you think there won't be a draft?

I'm listening to Generals saying "we're gonna be in Iraq for a long time" against the reports of plummeting enlistment numbers and am beginning to wonder how the draft can be avoided.

And, as the parent of a teenager, I'd rather these kids get "woken up" by something other than the draft...

[theboss]

5. No politician is going to cast that vote

I don't see how you win re-election when your opponent can say, "He sent your sons and daughters to die."

[SteppingRazor]

3. Of course

It's what separates the 60s from today. If there were no draft in the 60s, would there have been that level of protest by draft-age Americans? I really, really doubt it.

[Goldmund]

4. Of course it would.

Not only that, but if the draft had still been on the books we wouldn't be in Iraq today.

Here's a short writeup I did for my website a little while ago:

I strongly believe that no entity has any ethical right to make a person go to war.

If you think that this is a statement of opposition to the concept of forced conscription, you're right.

But it could equally mean something else: no voter has the right to vote for a war in which only others will fight. Is that not just another way of making a person go to war? Or, to Iraqis in the case of the current war, make the war come to them?

Has it not become like a trigger, that voting ballot, with the voter safely behind the curtain making decisions which will bring misery to only others? How "solemn" is really that decision if death is only a blurb on CNN, like "Game Over" in a video game?

Think about it. The proto-Neocons in 1973 must have breathed a sigh of relief: "No more draft. Hold on now, Dick, it's not how it sounds! See, we will work to economically distance the classes. And then, we will offer the military as if not the only, then at least the easiest, way out for the lower class. And the beauty of it is that not only will war be as abstract to the middle America as are urban ghettos, but the fact that these kids volunteered exhonerates us from any guilt! They won't be victims, they'll be... Call them heroes, give them flashy funerals, but they signed up and only did their job, after all. "

"Leo, can I kiss you on the cheek?! Now we can finally do all those nifty adventures we've been dreaming up!"

[tabasco]

6. Hell yes.

And universal service would make this a less-warlike nation.

We should all share the sacrifice when we go to war. When freepers realize they might have to actually go to war, rather than watch it on tv, they will rethink their support for the profiteering corporate masters.

[LaPera]

7. Yes, absolutely! That's why there won't be...Republicans know very well

what happened in the sixties...They know as long as there is no draft...people won't get together in mass numbers and they can go on pretending like they have the people behind them via the corporate media and behind them in their fascist corporate agenda and policies...

No way does BushCo want a draft!

Let the soldiers fight & die undermanned, BUT NO Draft...A draft would unite the people against these fascist.

The mass closing of bases will help consolidate thousands of more troops to fill the ranks...they are not going to have a draft...it would ruin their whole agenda that is rolling along full speed ahead!!!

[damntexdem]

8. Opposing a draft would be good for the anti-war movement.

Having a draft would be good for no one. So, we need to hope that the rightwing proposes a draft and that the proposal gets the national so riled up that they not only cannot pass, or at least implement, it, they also lose elections over it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Need you ask? Facing having your ass shot off focuses attention.

Rather than worrying about "what's cool", today's generation would suddenly decide that being anti-war is very trendy.

[NoPasaran]

10. Without a draft there is no antiwar movement

Because without the draft there really is no war. Okay, I don't deny that there is some shooting going somewhere, but as far as the average American is concerned the war is just an occasional blip on the news between runaway brides and Wacko Jacko and American Idol.

[AndyTiedye]

11. The Threat of a Draft Is Good Enough!

For the record, I don't think there is going to be a draft. I should say that up front.

I would not be so optimistic. The regime needs more cannon fodder,
and they ain't volunteering no mo. Not after how foully ** has treated our troops.


So, would the self-interest of a draft wake up the kids?

Yes it would, but that won't help us if Democrats are seen as supporting the draft!
We can, and should OPPOSE THE DRAFT THAT BUSH IS SECRETLY PLANNING!
Bush** has lied about his reasons for getting us into the war,
we have every reason he is lying when he says he won't start up the draft.
The numbers don't add up. They are re-deploying the same troops again
and again, and they have no exit strategy.
They have been staffing up draft boards and making the SSS ready to deploy.
We were getting traction with this just before the sElection. They
were issuing denials and clearly getting unnerved by it.

A lot of parents don't want to trust their kids to this man,
who says he won't impose conscription, but otherwise appears to be
planning to fight at least two simultaneous wars without troops.

[mcscajun]

12. IN. A. Heartbeat.

nothing motivates better than the risk of your own life on the line.