Re: Yeah, It's that Bad »« Yeah Its that Bad


Did you know that in the two hours of the Cheney presidency, he reinstituted the draft?

Democrats finally got something right.

In 2004, if George Bush got re-elected, there’d be a draft.

Except… wait…. that didn’t happen. … and the only people asking for it, are Democrats.

Bringing back mandatory service has been the refrain of many who want to put the brakes on the Iraq war; if every young man is suddenly a potential grunt on his way to Baghdad, the thinking goes, the war would end rather quickly. It’s also an argument made by those who are uneasy that the burden of this war is being unfairly shouldered by the 1.4-million-strong U.S. military and no one else. But a new report from the Congressional Budget Office this week makes clear that resuming the draft would be no panacea.


The report, requested by Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., chairman of the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, says that drafting people could make it easier for the Army to reach its 2012 goal of 547,000 soldiers. It might also save some money if Congress opted to pay draftees less than volunteers. But the downside, the report claims, would be a less effective fighting force, thanks to a sudden influx of draftees who would remain in uniform for much shorter spells than today’s all-volunteer soldiers.


“Usually, greater accumulated knowledge and skills come with increased experience,” the report notes. “Because most draftees leave after completing a two-year obligation, a draft might affect the services’ ability to perform those functions efficiently.”

Flashback: Jack Murtha says “The draft is absolutely needed.

July 23, 2007 at 3:00 am
1 comment »

Commenting is closed