Is a drafted army just an army of slaves?

[jammieg]

"Draft"=Army of Slaves

It just occurred to me, and maybe I'm getting a bit too far out there but doesn't a drafted army seem a lot like an army of slaves, I mean if you don't go to war willingly is this not the basic idea of slavery? You say a person could choose to go to prison or leave the country and pay the other severe penalties, but what kind of choice is that? Just like Black Americans could have choosen to run away and abondon their families and civilized life to be free and live in the woods, or stay with family and work long hours but have food clothing shelter and company of freinds and family(those were the real shackles, becaues mental shackles are far harder to break than physical ones) but what kind of choice is that? It's simply the best one can choose given the imposed situation, but it is certainly not free, and don't lie to yourself those Black Americans may not have been educated but they were smart, and probably better off spiritually that the more "educated" whites.
I don't mean to say that this is some big deal, there is a tremendous amount of unfairness in life in general, if all of our armies where entirely volunteer we would likely lose every war, and we can't afford that, so we have to "control" our citizens to keep a place for our citizens to live in relative "freedom", but someday I think we may be able to afford being able to see a drafted army as a slave army, and a pure volunteer army as an army directed by the hand of God, because the more willingly they go and honestly understand the situation, the harder they fight, like the ancient Greeks against the persians at that one cliff.
There ought to be a law in the United Nation's human rights that states if someone does not want to kill other people or risk being killed they shouldn't have to suffer punishment for it by their government regardless of what country they are born into. When I put it like that doesn't it seem like we live in the dark ages? Can't even love who you want to without other people trying to control or impose unfair restrictions on even that, for the greater good of course. I'm very intersted in what other people think about this.

 

[member 5645]

United Nation's human rights that states if someone does not want to kill other people or risk being killed they shouldn't have to suffer punishment for it by their government regardless of what country they are born into

And this will be enforced how?

 

[jammieg]

What do you mean? How does law enforcement work in general? Or do you mean to suggest that all laws are unjust because their enforcement takes away from the individuals freedom, thus law is a form of slavery as well?

 

[BobG]

I don't mean to say that this is some big deal, there is a tremendous amount of unfairness in life in general, if all of our armies where entirely volunteer we would likely lose every war, and we can't afford that, so we have to "control" our citizens to keep a place for our citizens to live in relative "freedom", but someday I think we may be able to afford being able to see a drafted army as a slave army, and a pure volunteer army as an army directed by the hand of God, because the more willingly they go and honestly understand the situation, the harder they fight, like the ancient Greeks against the persians at that one cliff.

The US military has been all-volunteer since the late 70's.

Considering the importance and sophistication of a lot of the technology involved in war today, a drafted army wouldn't even be very effective.

In other words, I'm not sure who your post is aimed at.

 

[Kerrie]

Considering the importance and sophistication of a lot of the technology involved in war today, a drafted army wouldn't even be very effective.

I don't think a draft would be effective also because of the reason for the war. If there was an attack on America right now, I could see the necessity of a draft, and those who would be willing to be drafted.

 

[jammieg]

BobG, my post is not aimed at anyone but to hopefully dispel my own ignorance through discussion, I should also have added that people should also be allowed to go kill for justice and peace and even paid well in the process if they want, unlike Vietnam we see the soldier as a target from all sides which probably made the war last longer, that's just as wrong I think, because it's just as biased to tell people they have to go to war as the can't go to war for their country, it is their own life after all. Something that might surprise you is that most of the mercenaries our government hired to fight in Iraq abandoned a lot of contracts(30% is my foggy memory of it) from the U.S. that were then given to the U.S. military in which only about 1% or less of soldiers refuse to do their duty, but it makes you wonder, if they had that option like the mercenaries without penalty, would they take it? It's more like piece work to me, live a little longer and making a little more money, I think I would rather be a mercenary personally.

 

[mattmns]

I think if you have any moral objections(this is in the US btw) then you could be exempt from the draft. For example, if it was against your religion or if you just did not want to kill anyone.

Beliefs which qualify a registrant for CO status may be religious in nature, but don't have to be. Beliefs may be moral or ethical; however, a man's reasons for not wanting to participate in a war must not be based on politics, expediency, or self-interest. In general, the man's lifestyle prior to making his claim must reflect his current claims.

CO is Conscientious Objector in case you did not know.

http://www.sss.gov/FSconsobj.htm

 

[jammieg]

It appears to be an improvement thanks for that information mattmns, I'll think about that for awhile.

 

[sid_galt]

It just occurred to me, and maybe I'm getting a bit too far out there but doesn't a drafted army seem a lot like an army of slaves,

I don't think you are going far at all. A compulsory military conscription i.e. a draft army is nothing but an army of slaves and according to the 13th amendement unconstitutional as it represents involuntary servitude (if the person doesn't want to go).

 

[member 5645]

What do you mean? How does law enforcement work in general? Or do you mean to suggest that all laws are unjust because their enforcement takes away from the individuals freedom, thus law is a form of slavery as well?

No, it's a outright question. Tell me how that will be enforced.

 

[jammieg]

Phatmonky, I am not very knowledgeable about law enforcement but suppose that if you take each person in this world and inform them if they would like there to be an added human right that states that anyone for whatever personal reason has the right to not fight in a conflict that involves killing people, I'll bet most people would democratically decide to have that right, as to it's enforcement I suspect most laws today are enforced through enormous amounts of paper work and contracts and sanctions and embargoes and "civilized" stuff like that, politics basically, so whichever nation is the most cooperative toward each other and their people is likely to rule this paper work world, economic power is greater today than military power, and if that doesn't work well as time goes by people have a tendency to move to countries that are "better", so if I'm free to not go to war in a U.N. country as opposed to a U.S. country well that might be enough for me to move, and if there is enough unfairness like that people in general will start moving to what they percieve as better or more free countries, and there needn't be violent law enforcement for laws to work.

 

[Grogs]

I tend to agree with jammieg about the whole concept of the draft. If a country faces a serious enough threat, it will get the volunteers it needs. If it *can't* get enough volunteers, that should be telling the politicians something about the war.I can't think of a much truer sense of democracy than citizens telling their leaders that the war they started isn't worth dying for. IMO, the Vietnam War was an egregious abuse of the draft system. Not only was the draft implemented, but certain socio-economic groups were targeted more heavily than others to see how an army composed primarily of kids from the 'ghettoes' and 'backwoods' would perform.

OTOH, I don't find the concept of some sort of mandatory service like the Israelis have objectionable. If everybody has to do it, be they the son of a Senator or a cotton farmer from Alabama, then it's a right of passage to live in a particular society rather than being called up as cannon fodder to fight in an unpopular war.

 

[member 5645]

Phatmonky, I am not very knowledgeable about law enforcement but suppose that if you take each person in this world and inform them if they would like there to be an added human right that states that anyone for whatever personal reason has the right to not fight in a conflict that involves killing people, I'll bet most people would democratically decide to have that right, as to it's enforcement I suspect most laws today are enforced through enormous amounts of paper work and contracts and sanctions and embargoes and "civilized" stuff like that, politics basically, so whichever nation is the most cooperative toward each other and their people is likely to rule this paper work world, economic power is greater today than military power, and if that doesn't work well as time goes by people have a tendency to move to countries that are "better", so if I'm free to not go to war in a U.N. country as opposed to a U.S. country well that might be enough for me to move, and if there is enough unfairness like that people in general will start moving to what they percieve as better or more free countries, and there needn't be violent law enforcement for laws to work.

You make no sense.
How will this be enforced in [insert any small ass asian/african country that has consscripted military]? You think that sanctions and embargoes will have an effect? By your own reasoning, countries that DON'T have the possibility of a draft currently should be where people are flocking to. This will have almost NO effect on where people move to.

UN vs US country? what is that? WE STARTED the UN.

This is all disregarding your perception the sanctions aren't "violent" - they can, and have, killed far more than war in specific cases (even with consription involved). And guess that, those that died didn't have a say in the matter.


This whole philosophical conversation is interesting, but a toothless UN can't back any such resolution, and any enforcement will have the exact opposite effect of what you are intending.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

I believe that the war-starters put the possibility of a draft far beyond the possibility of nuclear war on Iraq. So long as they remain in charge (Rummy, Cheney, GWB), I don't think that there will be a draft. However, there has been & currently are measures in place to enact compulsory military service s/a the backdraft. Also, hidden in the no child left behind law is a provision for compelling high-schools to provide contact & vital information about every student to the military forces. They'll definitely max out all other options including nuclear war before implementing a co-ed draft. We can only hope so anyhoo.

 

[member 5645]

I believe that the war-starters put the possibility of a draft far beyond the possibility of nuclear war on Iraq. So long as they remain in charge (Rummy, Cheney, GWB), I don't think that there will be a draft. However, there has been & currently are measures in place to enact compulsory military service s/a the backdraft. Also, hidden in the no child left behind law is a provision for compelling high-schools to provide contact & vital information about every student to the military forces. They'll definitely max out all other options including nuclear war before implementing a co-ed draft. We can only hope so anyhoo.

I'd rather be called up for a draft than begin a nuclear war. Perhaps I see a bigger picture than you do, or vice versa?