<p>
…</p>
<p>precisely</p>
<p>our armed forces did not decline by 600,000 because those soldiers walked away and could not be replaced without a draft, the decrease came as a direct result of a conscious decision by our political leadership to reduce forces. As a consequence of that reduction we find ourselves in a situation where we have to demand, not ask, for sacrifices on the part of the few; and that has lead to people walking away from military service. If each of them was not asked to do the work and tour of two soldiers, there is no doubt in my mind that many of these men and women would still be in their respective services. </p>
<p>I have no problem with the idea of a draft, I think service of some type should be compulsory, but that concept is not shared by many, even less at a time of war, and not at all politically viable. On one hand a draft brings in a more diverse group of people and points of view and distributes the responsibility for service over a broad spectrum of citizens (though there will always be some with the ability to obtain deferments). The flip side of that is people that don’t want to be there are going to leave first chance they get and turnover is expensive and not very helpful when your goal is to maintain your armed forces at a high level of readiness. Take your pick…to me the greatest danger we face comes from the disconnect much of our nation has from the military and the war as a whole. In the end the kind and quality of life we enjoy will ultimately be a reflection of our national priorities… If people are more interested in what Paris Hilton is up to these days than President Ahmadinejad then we’re SOL. </p>
<p>As to inability to sustain ourselves without a draft, the United States has conscripted its armed forces for only 35 of its 230+ years — nearly all in the 20th century.</p>