If he becomes president Senator McCain has promised he will:
* Further weaken the military by continuing the Iraq war indefinitely against the advice members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the commanders of the Army and Marine Corps who are stating our military is overstretched to breaking point
* Bankrupt our country with a war costing United States 3 billion a week
* Make us a debtor nation in hock to the Chinese and other governments
* Jeopardize the economic future of the United States
* Continue the Bush administration policies based on the misinformation and outright lies which McCain has embraced, in his words; "now [that we can] look ahead to the genuine prospect of success [in Iraq]..."
* Do nothing as America's international credibility slides into oblivion
* Empower the Iranians who are the only actual winners in the Iraq war
* Fail to fight Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan and put us at risk from more terror attacks.
Why don't people protest McCain's lack of patriotism? Because, the all-volunteer military means that civilians have to play the game of military hero worship. Most civilians never volunteer, and so they are hesitant to be critical of military policy articulated by military heroes like McCain. (Of course that didn't stop Bush/Cheney from ignoring the best advice of our military leaders when it didn't suit them.)
Since my son joined the Marines (in 1999) I have written books and articles about and supporting the military. Since the publication of these books I have gained a backhanded insight into how the military community feels about the civilian world. I keep hearing from military and former military personnel who compliment me on "getting it," or on "not being like most civilians."
One of the books I wrote, this one with a co-author, Kathy Roth Douquet, who formerly worked in the Clinton administration, was AWOL: The Unexcused Absence of the Upper Classes From Military Service and How It Hurts Our Country. In that book Kathy and I wrote about, and agreed about despite our different politics, the need for military service to be broadly spread throughout our society. Ultimately, however, we disagreed about bringing back the draft: I was pro, she was con.
Kathy and I never did resolve our argument, but I have continued to learn more about the military family. What I didn't know when I started to write on the subject of the military was that I would find that some people in the military perceive themselves as having been forgotten, underrated or disparaged by the larger society, even while at the same time there is a sense of superiority. I can't help noticing a real "we" against "them" edge, even a chip on the shoulder. For instance, in the midst of an email to me in response to one of my Washington Post pieces, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel wrote this to me:
"Problems [in the military] are only exacerbated by the propensity of Congress to micromanage and meddle, by media and academia seething with overt, relentless hostility, by political correctness, and by an irresistible tendency to treat the military as no more than a playpen for social engineering experiments."
The growing disconnect between the military and the rest of society has increasingly caught the attention of sociologists, political scientists and others who study contemporary society. Samuel Huntington, in his study, The Soldier and the State, said the armed services have "the outlook of an estranged minority." More ominously retired Admiral Stanley Arthur has suggested that, "The armed forces are no longer representative of the people they serve. More and more, enlisted as well as officers are beginning to feel that they are special, better than the society they serve." Thomas Ricks echoes this concern in Making the Corps, asserting that "U.S. military personnel of all ranks are feeling increasingly alienated from their own country, and are becoming more conservative and more politically active than ever before."
A recent poll found that two-thirds of armed service members think they as a group have higher moral standards than the nation they serve. The unintended consequences of the all-volunteer force also includes:
* Wars of choice have become easier
* Civilian leadership of the military is weakened as civilian leaders without military experience are hesitant to tell those with experience what to do, as is in pathetic evidence in Congress, while at the same time people in the military wonder if their civilian leaders have their best interests at heart
* Wars drag out since for most Americans, our wars -- out of sight and out of mind -- cost "nothing..."
* We are not, "all in it together." The military is no longer a level playing field contributing to the melting pot factor and integration of our society...
* We have created a military class that sees itself as more patriotic, more American and more decent than the rest of society and looks down on those who do not serve
* The all-volunteer military is in fact an all-recruited military with recruiters concentrating on the "most productive" parts of society with need-based recruiting that has less to do with patriotism and more to do with a paycheck, benefits and health insurance
* Patriotism and service have become the professionalized commodities of military "specialists..."
* The line between and all volunteer force and a mercenary force has blurred
* The democratic tradition of citizen participation is going out the window
*The use of "contractors" in Iraq, where there are 160,000 contractors as opposed to 140,000 troops, means that the mercenary aspect of our military is being formalized with a second shadow military made up of those who have served in the official military becoming freelance mercenaries for much higher pay. (It also means that actual American casualty rates are much higher than reported because our contractors don't "count").
The result of these changes is a threat to American democracy. There won't be a coup, but the all-volunteer force is a threat because fewer citizens are involved hands-on in participating in our democracy at one of the most meaningful levels -- military service. It also gives a free ride to military religionists such as John McCain who can place themselves above criticism by simple virtue of service, something that used to be widely shared and is now regarded as special.
If you want to know why the war in Iraq has dragged on, the answer is simple: it doesn't involve you or your children personally. If you want to know why McCain is called a patriot, even though he is planning to bankrupt America and kill more of our children, it's because today in the all-volunteer era he can claim special exemption from common sense (even economic reality) in the name of past service that is seen as exceptional.
The most fundamental question about our military (and how to avoid more dumb wars) is this: should military service (or some alternate form of service to the nation) be included in the circle of those civic duties that all citizens owe, like paying taxes, voting and jury duty? If not, why not? And would a draft restore sanity to calculations about when and where to use force?
If the case against the draft is that the military doesn't want one, so what? Since when is military policy determined by anyone except our civilian leaders and those they represent? What the military wants is beside the point. The issue isn't what's good for the military, but what is good for the country.
America was founded by farmers, tradesmen, statesmen (and bankers) who were military men when circumstances called for it. Washington, Jefferson, Madison and others did not want a country with a military culture, but they expected their countrymen to serve the nation when needed, when asked legitimately, without reservation.
Throughout the country's history, the story of military service has been a story of "plus-up" during crisis, and "draw-down" in the immediate aftermath of peace. The country maintained a navy and its marine corps, but not a standing army. This continued until the mid-twentieth century.
For most of this time, American citizens moved in and out of military duty when called, regardless of party and less constrained by class than today. There was no "military constituency" per se, nor could either party lay claim to it. In fact, it was popular to refrain from voting while serving in the military as a matter of principle, a way to demonstrate that all things military were unrelated to politics.
It is easy to forget how thoroughly common the experience of soldiering was among all classes once. In her diary Eleanor Roosevelt wrote: "I think my husband would have been very much upset if the boys had not wanted to go into the war immediately, but he did not have to worry very much because they either were already in before the war began, or they went in immediately..." The Roosevelt sons were in the military already, before the war began. And they were not in coddled positions. They were exposed to real risks. And so were the sons of many powerful families.
Progressives need to push for the reintroduction of the draft. It is fair, it is democratic, it will help prevent stupid wars. And that is why people who are determined to start wars don't want the draft back. A draft will confiscate their toys.
Frank Schaeffer is a writer and author of "CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
freedom requires choice. a draft is not a choice. it is fascism.
McCain has truly bled for the nation. Please attack his ppatriotism! Please!! Also, bring up Alzheimers and ensure all white and hispanic men over 55 will vote for him! Pleeze!
I am a liberal democrat, in 1981, I protested signing the draft registration form. I have come to believe that a draft (with an option for alternative service) that includes all citizens is a good thing. Why, it instills a value of service to ones nation. As a country we seem to have lost the ideal that we exist to make this country work, that the government (what ever that means now days) exists to make the country work while we get to carry on our lives. While not a McCain supporter, I find it admirable that his sons did join the military, he clearly taught them the value of serving one's country.
Once the Dems get through chewing on each other and the media has to sniff elswhere for blood, McCain will implode, and show himself as the semi-senile, cancer-ridden, dodderer and sell-out he is.
He is an American Hero, as soemone on MSNBC or CNN say every single day. But there are many thousands of American heroes who suffered valiantly in war and to whom we owe respect and gratitude. That doesn't necessarily qualify them for the presidency.
I thank him for the footage of him hugging Bush. Looking forward to seeing that in the fall.
How many children of neo-CONS in our government are currently serving in the military?
I bet they could be counted on one hand. If that.
Neo-CON philosophy-"We'll start the wars, you guys go and die in 'em."
magen
I think you have things backwards - I dont know about neocons (thats a pretty subjective judgement as to what a neocon is), but the last time I saw figures on it, the military was far more Republican than the general public, and the officer corps was up to 80% self identified politically conservative. The problem with the all volunteer military, from the Progressive point of view, is that political conservatives volunteer, and become career professionals, while progressives dont.
Oh, and FWIW - McCain has two sons in the military - both officers, at least one's a USNA grad and both likely to spend time in Iraq or Afganistan
80% conservative officers. Thank you for proving my point about the military being a conservative indoctrination machine. Why progressives would want their children to be brainwashed into a conservative ideology is beyond me! If liberals reinstate the draft I will NEVER vote for that party again. Period! The 'Greens' will have all my future votes. Bet on it!
I am against the draft and a progressive. What I am for is a progressive war tax that demands we right now pay for the war in Iraq with tax dollars. If we can't fund it out of pocket, then let's get the farm out. It's bad enough we have engaged in this disaster and stretched our military to its limits, but let's stop taking it out on the young in the way of a draft or a future tax burden.
I think Frank has some basic concepts wrong - the only moral excuse for a draft in America is military necessity - you only conscript troops when you can't get the numbers you need any other way. Americans have never "liked" the draft, although they have usually been willing to accept it when the national stakes are high enough. Sometimes not even then - there were draft riots during the Civil War and major protests in WW1.
I don't know where folks get the idea that getting the elite and powerful to serve in the military is going to inhibit the use of war - most societies that go that direction have some form of military aristocracy which increases a governments tendency to resort to force.
Right now, the Army would love an additional 50,000 motivated volunteers who would sign up for a 4 year tour, and be likely to re-up at the end of it. The Army would have no idea what to do with 500,000 reluctant draftees who would only be around for an 18 month hitch.
I do have to laugh at the claim that a draft would make things more equal - since when has the military been "equal" from a Progressive point of view? You might get the rich and powerful to serve but they won't be enlisted Army infantry . They'll go ROTC or the Academy route, become officers and fly fighters for the Air Force or drive ships in the Navy.
Amen. "Military necessity." People forget that the military serves a purpose. Its purpose is not served by people who don't want to be there.
This is a free country. Draft is unconstitutional involuntary servitude. Sorry bud. A better idea is closing our 750 overseas military bases, bringing every last soldier home, and adopt peaceful coexistence as a foreign policy, instead of war. Minding our own business, instead of the business of every other country in the world, should be the basis of our foreign policy. Then we can spend the money wasted overseas right here at home on schools and infrastructure.
I think that we need a draft, we should be prepared militarily. But I can't support a draft because of the reckless and irrresponsible way that our military has been used.
The solution is not re-instating the draft; but rather de-mystifying the military. As long as military might is treated as a sacred icon, whether the force is volunteer or conscripted, the military will always think of itself as just a little better than the rest of society. On the day it becomes just a little embarrassing to mouth the great mantra "Support The Troops" - on that day, all humanity will have taken the first step away from the inevitable doom awaiting us.
If, as Schaeffer argues, the reason why the Iraq war has gone on this long is that it doesn"t directly involve members of the educated, left-leaning classes, why did Vietnam go on so long? The Iraq war is plenty unpopular already. Vietnam didn"t end when there was a sizable peace movement that protested loudly and regularly, when the police were beating protesters and the National Guard was killing college students. Those days were years gone by the time we finally accepted defeat and went home. Even a huge cultural movement, taking place during the TV era, involving scads of celebrities and shocking incidents, during a war (with a draft) that was so unpopular it forced an incumbent president to drop out of his own party"s primary, was in the end unable to sway war policy. So it is flimsy logic that we should to force more people to fight immoral and illegal wars because it might make the people who are already opposed to it more opposed to it.
When the draft was in effect, it didn"t get activated until a war had been going on for quite a while and there was a need for a troop infusion. A draft is used to put a war on a kind of life support, to expand it when it might otherwise have to be scaled back or halted entirely. Schaeffer is arguing for the "pre-emptive strike" equivalent of drafting, and it just doesn"t make sense.
Actually, the draft was in place during VietNam and the reason so many protestors were on campuses was because the students in college were exempt from the draft as long as they stayed in school. The draft was in effect since WWII until the voluntary service was passed into law during Nixon's administration. Most young men served 24 months or if they volunteered the service was 3 years.
A critical benefit of compulsory military service is a nation well versed in military affairs. First of all, more Americans would have understood the commitment required to stabilize Afghanistan and would have not tolerated the distraction in going to Iraq. The bogus WMD lies would have gotten nowhere - general info on WMDs is standard military training. It would have not been a handful of generals but a chorus of ex-military civilians shouting back at the Bush Administration that the troop levels to invade Iraq were too low. They would have not bought the "we will be greeted as liberators" nonsense but have intimate knowledge from their own training of what it takes to maintain control of a hostile situation - an _occupation_. Our troops would have NEVER gone into battle without sufficient body armor and unarmored Humvees. Even after going into battle, the Bush administration would NOT be able to continuely move the benchmarks as it is doing today - people would have earlier recognized the escalating threat of an insurgency and not bought Rumsfield's dismissal of those fighting as "dead-enders". Folks would have questioned the wisdom of the sacking the entire Iraqi army without first taking a census of its members, their capabilities and securing the weapons. "The surge is working"? Try again!
However, as a result of having a US public massively uneducated about military affairs, this Iraqi tragedy drags on.
You ask, "should military service (or some alternate form of service to the nation) be included in the circle of those civic duties that all citizens owe, like paying taxes, voting and jury duty?"
The answer to this seemingly simple question is a resounding "YES". Despite my feeling almost like a hypocrite at saying it (as I am of an age when such a conscription was not required of me - thus I didn't do it). Whether it be military, civilian job's corps, a new WPA, a term as a teacher's aid, or healthcare aid,... we should demand something more of our citizens than just spending money.
I would have chafed at least a bit at it at the time should I have been the 'first' of the new teens to be required to do so - but the country needs them, and us 'older' folks to do our bit beyond just working, payying taxes, and occasionally serving on a jury of our peers.
And that goes for all the rich putzes and their offspring as well.
Pulling a draft in failing war Vietnam-style is a POOR example of how compulsory military service should operate. Having a compulsory militiary service does not mean _everyone_ who gets enlisted ends up going to war. Granted right now that would likely happen, but on the whole, if you look at nations that do have compulsory military service, most folks never see a battefield. Also, the military is used to do a lot of civil works _within_ the nation, like handling national disasters far more efficiently than FEMA-type bureaucracies, etc.
The deterrent aspect is often overlooked. Bush could have NEVER sold the bogus story about Iraq WMDs to a nation with compulsory military service - it's no surprise that nations WITH compulsory military service like France and Germany didn't sign up for the Iraqi misadventure. Their politicians would have to address a nation that was familiar and competent on military technology and the lies being told by Bush were patently obvious to anyone with weapons knowledge. Large-scale WMD labs in trailers? Moving and hiding these labs with ease? (Soil/air sampling easily detects this) Fighter jets with sprayer bars to dispense bio-chem warfare?
Finally, military service doesn't equate to "brainwashing" -it's more a function of how a military operates. Superior military training does not encourage blind allegiance but rather intelligent loyalty - understanding the principles of rule and freedoms in your nation, its history and why it is important to protect it.
I have been thinking that a draft should actually start at age 52 and work backwards from there. I calculate this roughly based on when the previous draft ended. It makes me uncomfortable that a large portion of the electorate who never had to face the draft should support it now. Obviously not all draftees will be fit for combat although many may be, but for two years they can bring a wealth of experience and education to support roles and other jobs currently being contracted out. There is no argument that I can see, other than an interruption of business interests (shall we put business above service to country?) that militates against expanding the pool in this way. Those of us who never had the chance to resist the draft would also get the chance to stand bravely for peace if we so chose, in imitation of the those patriots who went to prison in the cause of conscience.
"It makes me uncomfortable that a large portion of the electorate who never had to face the draft should support it now."
Very well said.
Bravo, Mr. Schaeffer, great article.
However, how can you be sure there won't be a military coup? Given America's current and possible future foreign adventures, I wouldn't be surprised if we see a remake of "Seven Days in May" that isn't produced by a movie studio.
Maybe that would restore a modicum of sanity to our foreign policy.
Part II
The government even back then said if our military leaves Vietnam they will have infighting for decades and look, they are doing fine.
We do not need better Military men they are already the best. We need better leaders which we never seem to get because too many people in this country choose to believe th false accusations thrown at them by the other side.
Our Country is falling way behind the rest of the world in everything from the value of a dollar to sustaining and or maintaining our infrastructure which is falling apart before our eyes.
To tell you the truth I do not believe any of the current crop of Presidential Candidates is either qualified or our best choice to be President.
Frank, A couple of things; First, I agree with you that their ought to be a draft. Too many in this country take their freedoms for granted and have no stake in this Country anymore. A volunteer Army is not sustainable in time of war which of course with the exception of Bush/Cheney is why all war should be avoided at all cost.
Second; Never ever ask or go by what a Marine says about military service. They are brainwashed from day one which is why they are marines for life. The Country and its leaders can do no wrong in their eyes. Ask an Army grunt about life in the Military not a lifer.
Third; I agree with those who posted earlier, I do not get why John McCain is considered a Hero. The word Hero is hioghly overused and abused in Our Country. I would be very interested in what George S Patton would have to say about POW's being Hero's. After all since he was a POW doesn't that say that he did something wrong, or screwed up?
I spent a year in combat in Vietnam and I can tell you with all certainty the only things I was fighting for was my buddy and myself.
Part II to follow
"...Too many in this country take their freedoms for granted..."
Interesting statement; however, the only Americans that have freedom are the members of interests groups, the greedy entrepreneurs: the pharmaceutical industry, .the food industry industry, the petroleum industry,and so forth. For example, the food industry has the freedom to put harmful additives in the food, without regard for the consumer's health, and the FDA looks the other way, the oil industry can poison the environment with impunithy. The pharmaceutical industry uses the American people as guinea pigs by throwing drugs--like BIOX--into the market without adequate testing, killing thousands of inocent people who trust what their doctors prescribe. Watch the PBS report , Our Meicated Children, and see for yourself that the freedom you are talking about, does not exist. Only the powerful magnates have the freedom to get away with the unthinkable. You don't even have the "freedom" to protest, because if you do, the guard dogs of those special interests, will tear you to shreds. That's why we need to elect Obama to end all this.
You say the only things you were fighting for were for your "buddy and [your]self." Why would you want to put more young men and women in that situation, where they, much like yourself then, would be forced to act out of pure survival and not due to a true belief in what they were doing for the "greater good," or "love of country," or, another misused phrase that those with an agenda like to thrust on us, in an attempt to manipulate, "freedom"? By the way, Sir, even if all you were fighting for was you and your buddy (like I am now), I think that's about as Patriotic as it gets. But Patriotism for it's own sake is akin to spread-eagleism and if that's the case, let the eagle spread it's wings closer to home and forget about a draft, and bring our troops home. Let's give them work, here, that's befitting of their sacrifice.
Also,
You say that "too many in this country take their freedoms for granted..." I agree, but for different reasons. Most Americans do take our freedom (but not our liberties, thanks to the misguided actions in national and foreign policy of this administration) for granted. However, I don't think that is a bad thing. I think it just means that we feel safe, and I think we have good reason to. If that is so, we have service men (and women), like yourself, to thank for that. So, Thank you. Because of people like you, Sir, most Americans do take our freedom for granted, but I don't think there is an American (a Patriot, in the true sense of the word, not in the jingoistic sense it is now so often used) could ever take for granted your sacrifice and those like you (and the sacrifices of our troops now). I don't say this to try and make you feel like by somehow showing gratitude that I could ever understand your experience in war, I only say it because I think you underestimate the "stake" people have in this country, or, at least, in the people of this country, including our soldiers now, off in some foreign land, not being used for what they were trained to do, but as pawns in some elaborate game, the details of which we'll probably never fully understand (much like Vietnam)...
HuffPost's Pick
Sir,
With all due respect, you, as a veteran of what most now consider one of the most unjust wars, of all people, should really consider what you are saying when you say that there should be a draft. Don't you think that would only provide more fodder for the cannon as it did for the Vietnam War? Or put more of our already well-trained, volunteer troops at a greater risk, who would be surrounded by new "soldiers," ill-prepared, both mentally and physically for the immensity of such a task as "winning" the war in Iraq (the terms of which, the administration has never really defined)? Wouldn't that just amount to more lost lives for a senseless war in a foreign land, against a foreign people, that, practically speaking, are as much a threat to our freedom now as the Vietnamese Communists were to America's liberty during the Vietnam era?
You do a grave disservice to your country by insulting an entire branch. Yes, the Marines do it a little differently than the other branches, and it's true that they're often more motivated, but not by near as vast a margin as you're describing. Your experience in Vietnam is not consistent with the modern volunteer armed forces.
No, there should be no draft. The federal government has no authority to force a draft on this country's citizens; it has only the authority to summon the militia (often one in the same, but considering the neglect of the militia by Congress and the States they really aren't nowadays). The price of freedom is NOT forced service to your country, and it is NOT operating under the presumption that the government has permission to overrule your life. A draft is the robbing of one from their current daily lives, and is as deplorable as a conscript army and for the same reasons.
A volunteer army is more than capable of fighting A war. NO army is capable of fighting this current conflict the way we're fighting it.
Why a draft? To send more troops to Iraq? Invade Iran? Pakistan? Give me a break. The problem is that the US military is already too big and too powerful. Cut the numbers in half, keeping an all volunteer force. Stop throwing your military weight around. When, if, the country is attacked and war is formally declared, put the entire country on a war-footing: introduce the war-time draft; impose rationing; increase taxes; impose similar burdens on civilians as are required of the military. Let the people decide whether it is worth it. No draft can make an illegitimate war legitimate.
"No draft can make an illegitimate war legitimate." You're right, but a draft can make an illegitimate war difficult to wage. Think if Bush announced a draft along with his decision to invade Iraq; do you think our elected officials, media, and average Americans would have so easily allowed him to lie and manipulate us? If every American was invested in our country's decision to go to war personally, they would think twice about the reasons why they are sending their sons and daughters to war. Many countries have compulsory service. I agree with this. Every eighteen year old should have to give two years to the military OR to civil service. I know this is a very unpopular decision.
Military boot camp is a brainwashing regime. It has to be. The new recruit must go through a psychological breakdown induced by unrealistic physical demands. Because the new recruit is coming from a childhood of indulgence and relatively low demands upon their physical capabilities this regime creates a situation where the individual is forced to confront their own limitations. This breaks down the illusion that the person has no limitations (a common delusion of the teenage years) and leaves the individual grasping at psychological straws to maintain their sense of infallibility. The authority figure berates the recruit constantly in order to facilitate this breakdown. As the recruits muscle mass begins to build, and they become more capable of completing the regime, the authority figure begins to praise and reinforce the individuals self esteem while indoctrinating them into another set of behavioral response mechanisms and thought processes that support the new command structure. THAT is classic brainwashing.
Those who identify with 'conservative' ideological structures have dominated the military so this brainwashing regime has another goal, to indoctrinate the individual into a 'conservative' mindset and a future of supporting the 'conservative' political movement. A draft would only make this brainwashing mandatory for all citizens and we would end up, like all other police states, with a highly structured and calcified political process that would be oppressive and the very opposite of a democracy. We would be a 'republic' much like the United Soviet Socialist Republic.
Posted April 9, 2008 | 09:21 PM (EST)