Young People Deserve to be Drafted.

[Tmy]

I heard these stats this morning.

Young registered voters who showed up at the polls: 17%
Young voters who showed up for the 2000 election: 17%

Ya think with the war around they would be inspired to vote. God knows there was enough publicity for them.

Well when they get their draft cards they should have a picture of Nelson Muntz on the envelope saying "HAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAA"

[Ed]

Originally posted by Tmy
I heard these stats this morning.

Young registered voters who showed up at the polls: 17%
Young voters who showed up for the 2000 election: 17%

Ya think with the war around they would be inspired to vote. God knows there was enough publicity for them.

Well when they get their draft cards they should have a picture of Nelson Muntz on the envelope saying "HAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAA"

I'm with you on this one.

[Jude]

I'm sure you already noticed, but the draft bill failed. Really though, I don't know what the heck is wrong with the kids. Voting isn't a big inconvenience.

[Ed]

Originally posted by Jude
I'm sure you already noticed, but the draft bill failed. Really though, I don't know what the heck is wrong with the kids. Voting isn't a big inconvenience.

I sorta wonder about the parents. I mean, they nag about everything else, why not voting?

[HarryKeogh]

part of me (the part that's really angry right now) says yeah, they deserve to get drafted, serves'em right.

but dying for a stupid war is too severe a civics lesson, I think.

(not that I think a draft is going to happen anyway)

[ManfredVonRichthoffen]

I wouldn't ruin our military because 18-24 year olds don't vote.

[Ed]

Originally posted by ManfredVonRichthoffen
I wouldn't ruin our military because 18-24 year olds don't vote.

They can fill sandbags for the Corps of Engineers. Gotta do something with that Philosophy Degree.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by ManfredVonRichthoffen
I wouldn't ruin our military because 18-24 year olds don't vote.

So you march a bunch of undermanned troops to their death instead??

Im sure the military would rather not draft but there comes a point when they need too. Lets face it, Iraq requires alot of groudn troops. And with Iran getting lippy, who knows whats on the horizon.

[TragicMonkey]

I think most people have to grow up a little before they appreciate the real life impact of politics. For some reason, American adolescence seems to extend into the early twenties these days. I used to work with several twenty-year-olds. They were very knowledgable about celebrities, but couldn't find Afghanistan on a map during the whole US versus Taliban thing.

It makes me feel very old. And angry.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by Tmy
So you march a bunch of undermanned troops to their death instead??

Im sure the military would rather not draft but there comes a point when they need too. Lets face it, Iraq requires alot of groudn troops. And with Iran getting lippy, who knows whats on the horizon.

Oh brother...

Fewer than 2000 dead after a successful invasion and government overthrow and a continuing occupation is "marching troops to their deaths"?!?! :eek: :rolleyes:

Read a little military history for some comparisons. I suggest you start by checking out some of the enemy's attacks against US troops during the Korean conflict...

[ManfredVonRichthoffen]

Originally posted by Tmy
So you march a bunch of undermanned troops to their death instead??
That's not the only option.

[Kodiak]

I'd rather someone not vote at all than have them vote with ignorance and apathy...

[Tmy]

The "marching" comment was in responce to the "ruin the military" comment. I was talking about drafts in general not specifcally whats going on in Iraq.

Everyone seems to have this idea that drafts are terrible for the military and will never be used. If thats true why did we use them in the past?

If the military is so well stocked why do we have all this stop loss, tours extension by all these reservists, and reserve call backs. Seems like on one hand they says things are great, and on the other hand they grab every free person they can get ahold of. That doesnt make sense to me.

[Jude]

Originally posted by Tmy
Everyone seems to have this idea that drafts are terrible for the military and will never be used. If thats true why did we use them in the past?
Because those wars were large enough to need sheer manpower, rather than equipment and armor like Iraq.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Tmy
The "marching" comment was in responce to the "ruin the military" comment. I was talking about drafts in general not specifcally whats going on in Iraq.

Everyone seems to have this idea that drafts are terrible for the military and will never be used. If thats true why did we use them in the past?

If the military is so well stocked why do we have all this stop loss, tours extension by all these reservists, and reserve call backs. Seems like on one hand they says things are great, and on the other hand they grab every free person they can get ahold of. That doesnt make sense to me.

Politicians don't like drafts because people resent being forced into warfare. That costs votes, especially when the draftees start getting killed. As a result, the draft is only used when it's considered absolutely necessary. It's an act of desperation, an admission and recognition that there simply aren't enough people to effectively carry out the military goals.

In fixing the shortage, they start with the least offensive-to-the-voters measures and work their way up. Stop-loss, then reserves, then National Guard. The draft is the last step, one that no sane politician wants to be involved with.

Which means that the US military is currently undermanned, but only to a point. We're not desperate....yet.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Jude
Because those wars were large enough to need sheer manpower, rather than equipment and armor like Iraq.

I could see WW2, but was Nam really like that? the current Iraq situation isnt an army vs army fight. Its more of the gurilla type hit n run, pockets of unsecure zones, who the hell is the enemy, kinda fight.

[Jude]

Originally posted by Tmy
I could see WW2, but was Nam really like that? the current Iraq situation isnt an army vs army fight. Its more of the gurilla type hit n run, pockets of unsecure zones, who the hell is the enemy, kinda fight.

We lost nearly 60,000 US soldiers in Vietnam, so yeah, it was really like that. Couple that with today's modern military technologies, and it's not difficult to see why we no longer need a monstrous standing army.

[nightwind]

Yes, it is pretty much disgusting that the turn out for the young people is so weak.

What is also disgusting is that it seems that no matter how eccentric or bizarre a president acts, they can still be blindly followed and elected by adults.

There is some kind of saying that I have heard. It goes something like "Never under estimate the collective stupidity of large masses of people."

These are going to be a very scary 4 years.

[AtheistArchon]

We lost nearly 60,000 US soldiers in Vietnam, so yeah, it was really like that. Couple that with today's modern military technologies, and it's not difficult to see why we no longer need a monstrous standing army.

- That's absolutely true if we're talking about killing the enemy, but it's a little more complex when we begin talking about taking and holding ground. That area has always been the domain of the infantry, and it's the area we're hurting in in Iraq.

- I need to find some stats on the recruitment trends recently. If recruitment falls off dramatically, then whether or not the politics of a draft look good or bad, it will begin to loom as a necessity.

[gethane]

From what I understand, although the percentage numbers of young voters didn't change, the voter turnout was so much higher in general that that 17% did represent a pretty significant jump in young voter turnout.

I have a 13 year old son that could suffer from mistakes made in the next 4 years. I'd really rather he didn't have to pay for the mistakes of the voters of 2004.

[ManfredVonRichthoffen]

Originally posted by Tmy
Everyone seems to have this idea that drafts are terrible for the military and will never be used. If thats true why did we use them in the past?

If you talk to someone who was in the military in the vietnam draft era, and stayed in until now, they would tell you the army is far better as all volunteer.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by ManfredVonRichthoffen
If you talk to someone who was in the military in the vietnam draft era, and stayed in until now, they would tell you the army is far better as all volunteer.

Of course it is.

But few people will actually admit that we are understaffed. Its like having a business and saying "we dont need to hire nee people. We have a sufficient workforce." But if your workforce needs mandatory overtime and a vacation freeze to do the work, is it really sufficient?

[ManfredVonRichthoffen]

Originally posted by Tmy
Of course it is.

But few people will actually admit that we are understaffed. Its like having a business and saying "we dont need to hire nee people. We have a sufficient workforce." But if your workforce needs mandatory overtime and a vacation freeze to do the work, is it really sufficient? We are most certainly understaffed for the number of wars we want to get into.

The problem is that the average taxpayer doesn't want to pay for soldiers to sit around between wars. Never mind that they are training and becoming more effective.

I think we should keep a large enough volunteer army to get us into and out of reasonably sized conflicts. They keep pitching a new kind of warfare fought by small groups of special forces, but we end up with 110k manforce occupation. Time to expand the military.

[Snide]

Originally posted by nightwind
There is some kind of saying that I have heard. It goes something like "Never under estimate the collective stupidity of large masses of people."


As I posted elsewhere, my dad used to tell me that 80% of the world are idiots. Actually, he'd sometimes say as high as 95%. I have a newly found respect for my dad's wisdom.

People can collectively make a good consensus for being a lifeline on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? But when the answers aren't so black and white, they sure can be collectively stupid.

edited a fragmented sentence

[Snide]

Originally posted by gethane
From what I understand, although the percentage numbers of young voters didn't change, the voter turnout was so much higher in general that that 17% did represent a pretty significant jump in young voter turnout.

I have a 13 year old son that could suffer from mistakes made in the next 4 years. I'd really rather he didn't have to pay for the mistakes of the voters of 2004.

I feel for ya. I have a ten-year-old son, and despite my ex and I both supporting Kerry, he "liked" Bush. The next election will be so important to me, probably even more than I realize now.

But of course, now that the "stronger candidate on terror" has won, I have nothing to worry about, right? :nope:

[DaChew]

Maybe (I'm just saying maybe) the youth weren't really worried that there'd be a draft. You know, since both candidates said flately that there would be no draft under their administration. It's just possible that the kids actually heard them both say that. I know, I know, kids don't listen to anything the old folks say but maybe they just happened to hear that bit of information like, right between the time they turned on the TV and then booted up the PlayStation.

I wonder if it's true that 18-24 year olds didn't really vote in a large percentage. I wonder if you polled 18-24 year olds currently serving in the military and asked if they voted and who they voted for what their response would be.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by ManfredVonRichthoffen
They keep pitching a new kind of warfare fought by small groups of special forces, but we end up with 110k manforce occupation. Time to expand the military.

That'll be tough to do. Iraq doesnt have that patriotic draw. As for $$ incentives. Thats another tough area. There are plenty of economic opportunities back in the states, youd need quite an incentive to pull kids into the military. I can see lots finacally secure parents subsidising their kids rather than have them join the military to pay for school ect...

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by DaChew
Maybe (I'm just saying maybe) the youth weren't really worried that there'd be a draft. You know, since both candidates said flately that there would be no draft under their administration. It's just possible that the kids actually heard them both say that. I know, I know, kids don't listen to anything the old folks say but maybe they just happened to hear that bit of information like, right between the time they turned on the TV and then booted up the PlayStation.


Lol. If these kids actually believe campaign promises, they're in for a shock.

[shuize]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Lol. If these kids actually believe campaign promises, they're in for a shock.

Exactly. Now's the perfect time to draft them. They'll never suspect it. Plus it would be really funny.

Bush: I'm not running for office again. Why should I care?

[Nikk]

Originally posted by ManfredVonRichthoffen
We are most certainly understaffed for the number of wars we want to get into.



And with a $7.4 trillion national debt how many can you afford?

[Khalid01]

Tmy believes that because 80% of my peers by age didn't vote, I should be drafted, despite the fact that I voted, and that I'm damn-pissed at the result of the election?

Appalling logic... if voter responsibility should be accounted for by age, then why don't all of the older non-voters drop into Iraq? Surely they should know by that time in life what non-participation entails, punish them.

Looks like you lot are searching for a scapegoat. I can't blame you, but don't threaten my college education over our mutual anger.

[DaChew]

Originally posted by Khalid01
Tmy believes that because 80% of my peers by age didn't vote, I should be drafted, despite the fact that I voted, and that I'm damn-pissed at the result of the election?

Appalling logic... if voter responsibility should be accounted for by age, then why don't all of the older non-voters drop into Iraq? Surely they should know by that time in life what non-participation entails, punish them.

Looks like you lot are searching for a scapegoat. I can't blame you, but don't threaten my college education over our mutual anger.

It's ok. You don't have to pretend anymore. You can admit it - You only voted because P Diddy threatened to kill you if you didn't right? I can't imagine what else he could have meant by "Vote or Die".

[bennator]

As I stop lurking for a bit, I can tell you that comments like this do a disservice to every person in this age group who actually took time out to vote. At least in my class (Senior in HS), there was a lot of optimism that the people voting would make a difference in this election, and it was overwhelmingly pro-Kerry (in Ohio). Today, we hear about the low turnout, and some Kerry supporters blaming our age group for losing the state to him. All that does is make the people in the age group who did vote wonder why they should vote again, if people complain when they vote, and when they don't.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Tmy
I heard these stats this morning.

Young registered voters who showed up at the polls: 17%
Young voters who showed up for the 2000 election: 17%

Ya think with the war around they would be inspired to vote. God knows there was enough publicity for them.

Well when they get their draft cards they should have a picture of Nelson Muntz on the envelope saying "HAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAA"

They know they won't get drafted, they just won't let anyone quite who is now in the armed forces. There's a lot less of them.

[glsunder]

I'd say there will only be a draft if the US gets into another large conflict. If you want to be a conspiracy believer, since that furthers both the causes of the neocons and Osama, the odds are fairly high of having another major conflict soon.

A bigger, more realistic threat in my eyes is the national debt. Modern republicans seem to spend just as much as democrats, just on different things. Someone threw out $7.4 trillion. Thats about $25,000 per person in the US. The closest figure for average wealth per person in the US was $49,000 in 1997. When do we get to the point where the country is too far in debt? At $14.8T? At $20T? $30T? Do we start paying attention when the interest costs more than education? The military? Bush said he too would cut the deficit. I guess we'll see.

[Frostbite]

Nice thinking. Not interested in politics? Go get killed in battle.

Keep up the good work!

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Tmy
I heard these stats this morning.

Young registered voters who showed up at the polls: 17%
Young voters who showed up for the 2000 election: 17%
I would have voted if I could...

Looks like Rock to the Vote was a bomb...
A gun-toting P. Diddy's "Vote or Die" campaign just aint hardcore enough...
Kerry's promise to raise the minimum wage to US$7 an hour wasnt convincing...
And voting is for the conformists...

Idiots.