Draft Dodgers: Traitors?

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Rex Little
A question for the pro-draft crowd: would you be in favor of drafting policemen? After all, the survival of our country depends on them fully as much as on soldiers, and their lives are at greater risk than the lives of soldiers (except soldiers serving in the front lines of an actual shooting war).

If you favor drafting soldiers but not policemen, can you explain why?

No, because policemen are over the optimal age for good combat soldiers.
Again, not particularly in favor of conscription as it allows the presense of whimperers and whiners.
Sometimes things we don't like are necessary though.

[Rex Little]

You misunderstood my question, Slow. (My fault; I can see that my wording was ambiguous.) I meant, do you favor drafting people to serve as policemen, the way people were drafted to be soldiers in Vietnam and other wars?

[SlowwHand]

Ok, I see. And that answer is yes. Police is a career field too.
Not everybody who got drafted ended up in rice paddies and jungle, and it wan't just draftees who ended up in rice paddies and jungles.

[Alexander's Horse]

Hey Sloww, those figures are meaningless. Give us the figures for the combat units - who was at the sharp end?

[SlowwHand]

Probably the ones that died were at the sharp end as you put it.
Let me cull the figures some and walk you through it.

70% (and I even double asterisked it for you), were of n.w European descent. (As in white.)
75% were above poverty level and
50 % were middle income (not trash, unless you are of Infatuation-like background, in which case it's you who's the snob, not the others who are trash).
23% of Vietnam vets had fathers with professional, managerial or technical occupations. (Again, not exactly trash).

[Zylka]

Slowwhand = Rough n' tuff hardcore McStars&SpangledBurger no-whiner

[TCO]

AH...you're spouting bull****. Go read Stolen Valor and ditch the myths.

Myth #1: Casualties were disproportionaltely minority.

Wrong. Blacks and Latinos had casualtie rates slightly lower than their proportion in the male target age group.

Myth #2: Casualties were disproportionatley poor.

Wrong. Analysis showed 31% of casualties were from bottom 1/3 socioeconomically. 26% were from the top 1/3.


Oh...and regarding the South. It's not so much an economic thing as a cultural thing. When was the last time you were over here?

[SlowwHand]

Well gawd, Z.
It's a little stupid for an Aussie to try and tell me about the U.S. involvement in S.E. Asia.

I mean, I'm Past Vice Commander for the American Legion, marching with the V.F.W. in the Christmas parade, and some Aussie is going to tell me about the U.S. military?
I don't think so.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Probably the ones that died were at the sharp end as you put it.
Let me cull the figures some and walk you through it.

70% (and I even double asterisked it for you), were of n.w European descent. (As in white.)
75% were above poverty level and
50 % were middle income (not trash, unless you are of Infatuation-like background, in which case it's you who's the snob, not the others who are trash).
23% of Vietnam vets had fathers with professional, managerial or technical occupations. (Again, not exactly trash).

Those figures are so rubbery "75% were above the poverty line" That makes them Middle class?

Where did you get these figures from anyway. I'd like to see the breakdown for some infantry battalions thanks.

[TCO]

Want another myth exploded, AH?

Myth: Troops in VietNam had less education than their countrymen.

Fact: 80% of troops in Viet Nam had high school diplomas. Of military age youths in the U.S., only 65% did.

[TCO]

Regarding the minority myth: blacks made up 13.5% of the draft-age population. And were 12.5% of the fatalities

(I'm not sure why Slow and I have a .4% difference...but you can spot us that.)

[TCO]

Median education level of enlisted men in VietNam was 13 years.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by GP
Regarding the minority myth: blacks made up 13.5% of the draft-age population. And were 12.5% of the fatalities

Are you trying to say blacks are smarter than whites? That's a pointless statistic.

[TCO]

The statistic shows that black deaths were not disproportionate. A young black American was not more likely to die in Viet Nam than his white counterpart.

Hey go read Stolen Valour. It was written by a US vet from Texas who has the "world record" for Freedom Of Information Act requests from the government.

It was a best-seller and explodes a lot of the tired myths.

You got some better statistics? Bring 'em on. We'll look at 'em. Otherwise...I don't know what else I can do for you.

I mean you can come in here and say that the sky is green if it gets your rocks off. We can give you evidence that it's not...but if you just insist it is...well hard to talk much. No?

[David Floyd]

Faelin-

CSA: First of all, we were merely taking back states that were rebelling. If this was a conquest, then so is the suppression of every other revolt in history. Oh, and if we had not had the draft, we would've lost the war. I suppose the millions of african americans who are alive today and are allowed to be citizens don't qualify as Americans who freedoms were saved? (Before anyone says, slavery was one of the leading causes. Initially there were several amendments which made the freed slaves equal with the rest of the country, but southerners had them repelased in the 70's. They did not gain full equality until the 60's. But irregardless, in a CAS which uses them as cheap labor, they'd never be anything greater than 2nd class citizens. At best).

Bull****. The United States of America was launching a war of aggression and conquest against the sovereign state of the Confederate States of America, comprised of 11 (would've been closer to 13 or 14 if the US hadn't illegally interfered with the will of the people) states formerly in the USA that seceded. Secession is a legal recourse for any state, for any reason, because nothing in the US Constitution prohibits secession, and nothing in the US Constitution allows the federal government to use military force to put down a legal secession. And no, the "millions of African Americans" DON'T count - they weren't alive at the time, and those who WERE alive at the time weren't allowed to vote, which was entirely legal. May not have been moral, but slavery and voting restrictions were certainly legal. The rest of what you say is not an argument, but rather an emotional appeal, so I won't bother with it.

WW1: US ships were being attacked. I suppose protecting american sailors is a bad thing? if Germany hadn't started attacking and sinking our ships, we would have remained neutral. Read some history. Please.

Really? Which ships? You possibly mean the Lusitania? That was a British ship, carrying munitions illegally from the US to Great Britain, and the German Embassy in the US put out warnings in newspapers warning against travelling in the Lusitania - warnings repressed by the Wilson administration. But if they were attacking our ships, it was justified, because they were either a)illegally supplying Britain/France with arms, or b)in a warzone carrying contraband. Either way, sinking of US ships by German U-Boats was justified - just as justified as the British blockade of Germany which starved civilians.

WW2: Okay, here you're being blatantly hypocritical. First you say that no region of the USA has never been attacked, then you talk about how there were only "minor threats" to "outlying regions." Hawaii is was a US territory. Its inhabitants were US citizens. Japan had plans in the works to invade Australia,Alaska, Hawaii, and go down the pacific coast into California. Are we still in outlying regions?
Then there's Nazi Germany. Without the draft, the USA couldn't have had the manpower to win a two front war. We would either have a Europe ruled by the Nazis ofr the Communists. Expect the destruction of the USA to follow sometime in the next 20 or 30 years.

I said, or at least meant, that no state or part of the Continental US had been attacked. Those colonies that were attacked, such as Wake, the Philippines, etc., were gained by the US through a period of imperialism, and I'd defy you to support the annexation and holding of the Philippines by the US when it was against the will of the Filipinos. However, I will grant you that Pearl Harbor was attacked - although that was legitimate self-defense and self-preservation on Japan's part fighting against FDR's economic embargo of Japan's vital strategic resources such as oil and scrap metal. Even with that in mind, though, I do support the war on Japan, once they attacked - a war which could have been fought by transferring the whole US Navy to the Pacific, relying on volunteers, of which there were plenty, and using the current and building US Navy to defeat Japan on the seas, possibly seize a few strategic outposts - which would be abandoned after the war - and then negotiating a peace among equals.
As to Nazi Germany, the US had no legitimate quarrel with them, although they certainly did with us due to things such as Lend-Lease and US warships escorting British convoys. But even assuming German victory over Russia and Britain (they had no way to invade Britain, that much was clear, and no way to logistically conquer and hold down Russia, which was equally clear - but just ASSUMING) then Germany STILL could not have directly threatened the USA, because all of Germany's resources were put into the Army, and to a lesser extent the Luftwaffe, rather than a surface navy necessary to bridge the Atlantic - and we still run into logistical problems with any invasion of the US you can dream up, it's just too far away.

Rand Al'Tor-

No, I don't think the draftdodging is treason. Treason might be a good reply to the draft however. Any country that can decide to force it's citizens to work for them, ESPECIALLY the work being killing is not a free country and is not a country I would call my own.

Oh and regarding the rights. Something I DO agree with with the constitution (or was that the bill of rights) is that rights are not to be 'deserved' they are self-evident. EVERYONE should be able to speak freely, not just those who 'earned' it. if we start to say that you have to 'earn' your (constitutional) rights, where are you going to stop?

I agree completely.

Chris62-

WW I was indeed one by US forces, but it is still unlikely the Central powers would have won the war without them, only prolonged it. The revolts you speak of were mainly Russia 1917, France 1917, Germany and Austria 1918 (there was also a small mutiny in the British forces in 1918). For the Central powers the war was already lost, so it hardly mattered, it knocked Russia out of the war (into 5 years of bloody civil war, go figure), and the French were able to calm the troops with better treatment (after a few executions).

Chris, if you think that the Central Powers could not have won the war absent US intervention, you should really read up on Germany's Spring 1918 offensive. As a DIRECT result of the 2nd Battle of the Marne, and to a lesser extent Belleau Wood and a few other battles, all of which were fought at least equally by Americans as by Frenchmen and British, Germany was forced to cancel Operation Hagen, an even bigger offensive that could easily have forced multiple breaches in the French/British line, defeated the BEF, and enveloped and taken Paris. France was bled white, and the French military was sick of the war, whereas Germany was riding a morale high after knocking the Russians out of the war, and also having hundreds of thousands of new troops available from the Eastern Front. I DO think that the mutinies, on all sides, show how evil the draft was and is - forcing people to get into trenches and charge into machine gun fire for no reason concerning them is quite frankly morally reprehensible, outright murder.

WW II. Sorry, but the USA was directly threatened, revisionist history here on the part of the fellow who posted that.
If Russia and europe had been defeated, the axis would indeed have come to the USA, so conscription was indeed needed.

I've heard THIS bull**** before. Just explain to me HOW the Germans or Japanese could invade the US. Please. I'll probably end up laughing hysterically, but go ahead and try - impress me.

Korea was a war of recalls, many men were indeed drafted and made up most of the forces involved.

Vietnam is a war in two pieces, the first part, 65-68 is a war of volunteers, the second, 68-72 is a war of draftees.

That wasn't the point - the point was neither of these wars affected the freedom of those within the USA. And don't tell me that if the communists had won without a fight they would have invaded the US. Please don't tell me that.

GP-

I haven't seen too much courage out of David, yet. I think we need to set the bar a little higher Horsie. Sucking down chili dogs and soft ice cream "Blasts" at the Waco Sonic don't do it for me...

Dave lives in a theoretical world. If everything were perfect he'd go to West Point and amaze us with his leadership. But America has strayed too far from the righteous path for Dave. It's not worth fighting for. I understand his point of view. I just don't agree with it. And certainly...he hasn't shown courage. He may have it. But we haven't seen it.

Of course you haven't seen much courage out of me - they haven't tried to draft me yet. I promise you if that ever happens it'll be even money whether I move to Montana and join anti-government forces (stereotyping, you know what I mean), leave the country, or just go to Washington and start popping Congressmen.

Dr. Spin-

If you don't want to be drafted, that's fine. I would probably advocate the stripping of citizenship of anyone who avoids such a draft, rather than jail.

Fine. Just show me in the Constitution where it says a prerequisite for citizenship is agreeing to the draft and every other unconstitutional law the government tries to enforce.

che-

If the law is wrong, you not only have a right to break it, you have an obligation to break it.

Slow-

Another thing people forget are the Coast Guard.
You want to talk about people screwed? That's them.
Join the Coast Guard because they thought it would keep them from going.
wham! Patrolling rivers in country. Sitting ducks.

I really do hope you see a problem in using the Coast Guard (not to mention the National Guard) in fighting foreign wars.