Draft Dodgin'

I recently went to dinner with several friends, including one who now lives in Germany and was in Detroit on business. As usual, when an American spends time overseas, talk turns to how our country is perceived on foreign soil. In a nutshell: not so good. Our topics of conversation meandered from the economic rise of the European Union to George W. Bush and the Iraq War. And that’s when we started talking about the draft.
With the democratic victory in the midterm elections, Representative Charles Rangel of NY will now head the House Committee of Ways and Means. This is the committee that determines whether to reinstate the draft. Rangel, a democrat from Washington Heights, represents a district that is demographically Latin American and working class. It is his constituents that fight our battles. By reinstating the draft, he hopes serving our country becomes less about the economics of opportunity and instead the responsibility of all Americans.

On one side of the debate, it seems plainly apparent that our military is stretched beyond its capacities. Most military strategists argue that Bush’s “surge” to quell the violence in Iraq is far too little too late. To achieve the surge, in addition to new soldiers, troops that are overtaxed will be asked to extend their tours of duty. This may address the issues in Iraq, but what about in Afghanistan? And the Sudan? And the burgeoning crisis in Somalia? While some Americans may balk at the idea of U.S. entanglement in foreign civil unrest, the Bush administration argues these areas, once unstable, become havens for terrorists and therefore, cannot be ignored.

Unfortunately, we don’t have the manpower to go in and stabilize these regions. So instead, we outsource. We allow the Israelis to handle Hezbollah, even though all intelligence suggests Iran was behind last summer’s war. We let the Ethiopians usurp the Islamists regime in Somalia, in spite of the risk to the stability of the Horn of Africa. We let hundreds of thousands of people die in Darfur and leave the Sudan in the hands of a government that has active ties with Al-Qaeda.

Could more troops help? Absolutely. But what if they’re the wrong types of troops? Currently the people who serve in our military are volunteers. They fight because it’s a calling, its generational or its money for college. In their eyes, the military creates opportunity.

If instated, the draft would put more men in harm’s way. Men who have no interest in serving or have not been mentally and physically prepared to serve. And what of the loss? Had Albert Einstein been drafted and then killed in WWI, would we understand quantum theory today?

Some argue that our poor shoulder the responsibility of protecting this nation. Reinstating the draft would even out the socio-economic divide that mars the armed forces. The draft would make it the responsibility of all Americans, both rich and poor, to protect this nation.

The draft could also promote congressional responsibility. While many congressmen would undoubtedly pull strings to keep their offspring from the draft, they can’t do the same for all of their constituents. If all of the lives of America’s sons were poised on the tip of the blade, perhaps pre-emptive war would be considered with greater caution.

At dinner, we wrestled with this subject for the better part of an hour. It led to a spirited debate that prompted this blog entry. No conclusions were drawn. Hopefully Charlie Rangel’s committee will consider all options before moving forward on this issue. Cause what we’re doing now just ain’t working.

Tomorrow talk of kitchen cabinets and Michigan ice storms resume: I promise.