The Army We Need
The US Army and Army National Guard have failed to meet recruiting goals most of this year, probably because potential enlistees fear being sent to Iraq. ( The other branches of the Armed Forces have met their goals)Rep. Rangel (D, NY) has even suggested re-instuting a draft, which was abolished in 1973. How many soldiers does the US need, and how should we get them?
Q. What incentives might boost enlistments?
Raising military pay and benefits are the most obvious answers.
Some young people, such as pacifists or those ideologically opposed to use of US military power, would never enlist under any circumstances. Such people would not make good soldiers anyway. But I believe that there are enough healthy young adults in this country who would enlist, despite the dangers, if the rewards were high enough to outweigh the increased risks.
Q. How can the Government improve career options of honorably discharged veterans?
By giving veterans first crack at federal jobs such as postal workers, FBI and Secret Service agents, and US Marshalls.
Congress could also change federal employment laws so that veterans preference programs by private employers would be exempt from challenge on the basis of gender-bias.
Q. Women are recruited by all the armed services, but barred from combat units. Should this be changed?
Yes. Although most women are less physically strong and aggressive as most men, individual differences can be more important than sex differences. (1) This means that some women would outperform the average man on the battlefield, so the best usage of personnel would be to give them a chance to prove it.
Today many women serve ably on police forces, where the use of force and weapons are required. Women soldiers in Iraq, although assigned to support units, have wound up in battle anyway, so they already face most of the risks of combat right now.
Q. The US military discharges any soldier found to be homosexual. Is this policy in our national interest?
No, because we always need good soldiers, regardless of their sexual orientation. There is an important difference between orientation and conduct; the military has every right to punish forbidden conduct, but should not exclude people for the way they feel.
The same rule should apply to "straight" soldiers who may be pedophiles or have other kinky desires.
Q. Under what circumstances would a draft be appropriate?
It was necessary in both World Wars, because the US had to field huge armies. (2)
The " War on Terror" and the present war in Iraq combined do not require the millions of soldiers that a draft could produce, and it is not likely that the US will be fighting any big country anytime soon.
Since making a draft effective requires a major enforcement effort (prosecutors, judges, marshalls, prisons, etc.), it is also an extremely inefficient way of raising an army.
Q. If a draft were necessary someday, should women be included?
Yes, because today women enjoy all the benefits of citizenship and have proved that they can serve well in the military.
However, since women can get pregnant ( and men cannot), it would be foolhardy to draft women into combat units. If women were ever drafted in the future, they should be given the option of trying-out for combat units. I believe that very few would do so, and an even smaller number would be accepted into combat units. The vast majority of military women would be assigned to computer operations, food preparation, and other non-combatant tasks, which would free the men to fight.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Anyone who has taught at a public middle-school knows that nowadays some girls can be very physically aggresssive.
(2) If military pay and benefits had been generous enough, I believe we could have fought both the Korean and Vietnam Wars without a draft. In the case of Vietnam, the draft caused a great deal of the anti-war protest activity, and brought into the Army large numbers of unmotivated and unruly men.
Q. What incentives might boost enlistments?
Raising military pay and benefits are the most obvious answers.
Some young people, such as pacifists or those ideologically opposed to use of US military power, would never enlist under any circumstances. Such people would not make good soldiers anyway. But I believe that there are enough healthy young adults in this country who would enlist, despite the dangers, if the rewards were high enough to outweigh the increased risks.
Q. How can the Government improve career options of honorably discharged veterans?
By giving veterans first crack at federal jobs such as postal workers, FBI and Secret Service agents, and US Marshalls.
Congress could also change federal employment laws so that veterans preference programs by private employers would be exempt from challenge on the basis of gender-bias.
Q. Women are recruited by all the armed services, but barred from combat units. Should this be changed?
Yes. Although most women are less physically strong and aggressive as most men, individual differences can be more important than sex differences. (1) This means that some women would outperform the average man on the battlefield, so the best usage of personnel would be to give them a chance to prove it.
Today many women serve ably on police forces, where the use of force and weapons are required. Women soldiers in Iraq, although assigned to support units, have wound up in battle anyway, so they already face most of the risks of combat right now.
Q. The US military discharges any soldier found to be homosexual. Is this policy in our national interest?
No, because we always need good soldiers, regardless of their sexual orientation. There is an important difference between orientation and conduct; the military has every right to punish forbidden conduct, but should not exclude people for the way they feel.
The same rule should apply to "straight" soldiers who may be pedophiles or have other kinky desires.
Q. Under what circumstances would a draft be appropriate?
It was necessary in both World Wars, because the US had to field huge armies. (2)
The " War on Terror" and the present war in Iraq combined do not require the millions of soldiers that a draft could produce, and it is not likely that the US will be fighting any big country anytime soon.
Since making a draft effective requires a major enforcement effort (prosecutors, judges, marshalls, prisons, etc.), it is also an extremely inefficient way of raising an army.
Q. If a draft were necessary someday, should women be included?
Yes, because today women enjoy all the benefits of citizenship and have proved that they can serve well in the military.
However, since women can get pregnant ( and men cannot), it would be foolhardy to draft women into combat units. If women were ever drafted in the future, they should be given the option of trying-out for combat units. I believe that very few would do so, and an even smaller number would be accepted into combat units. The vast majority of military women would be assigned to computer operations, food preparation, and other non-combatant tasks, which would free the men to fight.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Anyone who has taught at a public middle-school knows that nowadays some girls can be very physically aggresssive.
(2) If military pay and benefits had been generous enough, I believe we could have fought both the Korean and Vietnam Wars without a draft. In the case of Vietnam, the draft caused a great deal of the anti-war protest activity, and brought into the Army large numbers of unmotivated and unruly men.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 3:51 PM
0 comments
