Is it right to send the same soldier into battle 3 or 4 times? Does it make sense from a "best practice" standpoint? Are we setting these individuals up for failure?

 

If we're truly committed to sending troops into Afghanistan and Iraq shouldn't we do it with those that haven't been there 3 or 4 times already?

 

Is it time to bring back the draft?

 

If we're all saying that we need to be there shouldn't we be setting our country up for the best chance of success? Shouldn't we be adding to the numbers and having "fresher" troops over there?

 

Isn't it time we pull our kids out of college and send them over there?

The military is a volunteer unit. Once you sign on the dotted line I think you are to do what is asked of you as a soldier. For many that is several tours of duty over several years. I respect our troops to the Nth degree, but this is also a profession they have chosen. I do not think we are at the point yet where the need to reinstate the draft.

The military is a volunteer unit. Once you sign on the dotted line I think you are to do what is asked of you as a soldier. For many that is several tours of duty over several years. I respect our troops to the Nth degree, but this is also a profession they have chosen.

 

Individuals choose it. We, as a country, need to ensure that those individuals have the support they need. These soldiers are coming back mentally and physically wrecked in record numbers. We need to support them and we've only got one place to go for that. The draft.

 

We're trying to win, right?

This is one of the more out there things I've read on here in quite some time...

This is one of the more out there things I've read on here in quite some time...

 

OK.

 

Care to tell me why we shouldn't consider bringing back the draft?

 

You're OK with us sending soldiers back that are often mentally stressed? Is that good for the country? Do we owe those that are in proper support with more bodies?

OK.

 

Care to tell me why we shouldn't consider bringing back the draft?

 

You're OK with us sending soldiers back that are often mentally stressed? Is that good for the country? Do we owe those that are in proper support with more bodies?

 

Is the solution to send more/different American's so they come back mentally stressed?

 

Also, do we really want to force people to go overseas and fight? I don't see that turning out pleasantly.

OK.

 

Care to tell me why we shouldn't consider bringing back the draft?

 

You're OK with us sending soldiers back that are often mentally stressed? Is that good for the country? Do we owe those that are in proper support with more bodies?

 

Because if people are forced to go over there they will be far more inefficient IMO. I know if I'm a soldier over there that is in a proper mental state, I'd much rather have someone who volunteered that is stressed out than some kid that has zero desire to be over there.

 

The costs would be much greater to train and ship new recruits over then those who have already been there, so it doesn't make economic sense.

 

Many that are mentally instable because of the war are not sent back over from everything I've seen and read.

Individuals choose it. We, as a country, need to ensure that those individuals have the support they need. These soldiers are coming back mentally and physically wrecked in record numbers. We need to support them and we've only got one place to go for that. The draft.

 

We're trying to win, right?

 

I agree that the mental consequences of war can wreak havoc on the brain and these individuals should be afforded any medical treatment necessary. The hospital is where to support that percentage of soldiers who need help, I do not think the draft is near necessary yet. I am sure the commanders on the ground would be more aware of what we need than you or me, and if they think we do not have enough troops capable and ready for action then they will ask for a draft. We are not there yet and far from it I think.

Because if people are forced to go over there they will be far more inefficient IMO. I know if I'm a soldier over there that is in a proper mental state, I'd much rather have someone who volunteered that is stressed out than some kid that has zero desire to be over there.

 

The costs would be much greater to train and ship new recruits over then those who have already been there, so it doesn't make economic sense.

 

Many that are mentally instable because of the war are not sent back over from everything I've seen and read.

 

We've read differently.

 

To your first point I say "World War II."

 

To your second point, you're saying that if it costs too much too bad for those that are already there? That's got to make them feel loved.

I agree that the mental consequences of war can wreak havoc on the brain and these individuals should be afforded any medical treatment necessary. The hospital is where to support that percentage of soldiers who need help, I do not think the draft is near necessary yet. I am sure the commanders on the ground would be more aware of what we need than you or me, and if they think we do not have enough troops capable and ready for action then they will ask for a draft. We are not there yet and far from it I think.

 

So you would support the draft if it was necessary?

So you would support the draft if it was necessary?

 

Without a doubt! I would take up arms myself if necessary.

We've read differently.

 

To your first point I say "World War II."

 

To your second point, you're saying that if it costs too much too bad for those that are already there? That's got to make them feel loved.

 

Comparing WWII and this is comparing apples to oranges. Completely different times and types of war.

 

The government's job IMO is to run the country in the most efficient and effective ways possible. I don't let morality or emotion come into play when dealing with such.

Comparing WWII and this is comparing apples to oranges. Completely different times and types of war.

 

The government's job IMO is to run the country in the most efficient and effective ways possible. I don't let morality or emotion come into play when dealing with such.

 

So you're willing to let your country's leaders send young men and women into war but if it costs too much and hurts the deficit or the economy then you're against them spending more money on the troops? You're a little vague in your statement so I want to make sure I understand correctly.

 

I'll also challenge you to back up your point that this war and WWII are different somehow in regards to the issue of the draft.

I'm not sure that a draft is necessary at this point.

 

However if it becomes necessary, I would support it 100%.

If they do re-institute the draft there should be no college deferments , or deferments of any kind .