Male only Draft ruled Unconstitutional

| February 24, 2019

On Friday  U.S. District Judge Gray Miller ruled  that requiring only men to register for the draft now that women can serve in the military in an unrestricted capacity… is unconstitutional.

Click on the expand button on the bottom right of the image to read the entire ruling.

As they say, “Whats good for the Goose is good for the Gander”.

Category: Breaking News, Diversity, Politics

94 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
5jc

So they are saying all 24 genders will be able to serve? Looking forward to that stew pot.

Skyjumper

5jc, you’re about 34 genders short.
There are actually 58 genders.
Yeah, let that sink in.

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit

Fun video to watch…
WARNING: Not SJW friendly. (grin)

https://youtu.be/bfFoZq_h5b4?t=101

Roh-Dog

Missed one, Lauren Southern identifies as an ‘attack helicopter’.

Commissioner Wretched

And if I had a $100 bill for each gender listed … I’d have $200 and a lot of counterfeits.

Pointyhead

Now that’s funny right there!

Green Thumb

You should get out more.

Try Happy Hour.

HMC Ret

I recognize three genders:

Male
Female
Fucked Up

Outcast

Ok, so 54 years late, with the odds here 10 to 1 against me that is all I safely will say, dang that garage is cold but also safe.

Roh-Dog

Equality, BITCHES!
You asked for this…
Come WW3 I bet the pregnancy profiles will be near 100%.
Great way to get the US citizens to breed again instead of bringing in illegals.

AW1Ed

Levonorgestrel implants, aka Norplant, among the other ‘welcome aboard’ shots on day two of boot camp should take care of that problem.

Roh-Dog

Until the lawsuits start.
The absolute clusterf*ck taffypull that was the anthrax shots…
Mandatory then optional then mandatory with threats of Article 15 then catch-up doses then optional. I’m glad I got the whole series, mostly so I could stop hearing the b.s.

USMC Steve

Naw, now we modify the UCMJ to define pregnancy as a self inflicted wound, and hammer them if they get knocked up to miss movement or avoid hazardous duty.

timactual

Don’t need to modify the UCMJ. Just classify pregnancy as a “non line-of-duty” condition.

Green Thumb

About time.

Dustoff

Yep, they can stop a bullet as good as any man.

MSG Eric

Wow, a judge with some actual balls for a change.

And done in Texas too, good thinking.

26Limabeans

Now they can suffer the same fate as men when it comes to Finacial issues such as Student Loans and qualifying for other things that require draft registration. Maybe security clearances? That would be nice.

Inbred Redneck

I’m thinkin’ along the same lines. No registration means no Federal jobs or student loans for those who so choose. Can we extend that to no dot-gov guaranteed loans of any kind, such as SBA and home loans?
BTW, has anybody ever discovered whether the most recent past C-in-C ever registered with Selective Service? If he didn’t, wouldn’t that void any and all judicial appointments, ExecOrders, and laws signed by said gentleman. Askin’ for a friend.

Ex-PH2

Okay, you bitches, you wanted equality?????

THIS IS WHAT REAL EQUALITY MEANS, YOU STUPID BROADS!!! (And I do include the trannies in that ‘broads’ category.)

And a Big Thank You to all the REAL women who volunteered before me and after me.

I’ll be over here in the corner, waiting for The Howling to start. (We have to what—??? But, I thought that it was only GUYS!!) I want to see how long it takes the 148 dysfunctional genders to find out they aren’t exempt from anything from now on.

🙂 Big smile!! 🙂 Big smile!! 🙂 Big smile!! 🙂 Big smile!!

Roh-Dog

The Howling…
I can’t wait for the Butthurt Wamens and their Socialist enablers to advocate picking up arms to fight being drafted.
Logic ain’t their strong suit.

Ret_25X

Read the document and it does not end the current registration nor require females to register. All this does is suspend current registration until congress amends the MSSA or creates a new law. Of course, congress could also decide that registration is an outdated concept and end selective service registration entirely–although I don’t see that happening.

The commission currently looking at this is merely the latest incarnation of the issue going all the way back to the 1970s. The divide between parties on this could not be greater than it is today.

On the one side are the science deniers who believe that there “are no biological or psychological” differences between males and females. On another side are the “there are infinite genders” proponents. Then there are the realists who understand that there are, in fact, biological and psychological differences between men and women and that those differences result in different observed outcomes.

in the end, I believe that the recommendations of the committee will either be a restating of current positions, or so radical they cannot be implemented. This will put our congress in a position we have seen them in throughout the past 40 years. Dealing with a problem they are not capable of understanding, and have no ability to resolve. That will not stop them and we can be assured that the replacement to the MSSA will be a set aside program to reward current favored groups and punish current “bad” groups. In other words, hold on to your hats!

Reddevil

True. This is a judgement, so it is limited in scope- for now. We should soon see a discussion in congress leading to a new Selective Service Law.

Keep in mind that registration and an actual draft are worlds apart. In my humble opinion, if we are in the world of $#!+ that makes a draft necessary, the rule of the game will change drastically. The notion of picking your MOS will be a quaint artifact of the past.

In reality, even now the Army is the only service that ‘guarantees’* an MOS-

*subject to price and availability, your experience may vary

Ret_25X

The other problem congress must come to terms with is the multiple mobilization options given under Title X USC.

Because Title X offers multiple mobilization options to the President as CiC, there could, therefore, be many different scenarios that could or would produce different draft outcomes.

In any case, it is not clear why a general registration system is necessary in the current tech climate or social conditions of the USA. In 1972, general registration made sense, but it less clear (to me, at least) that this is still true.

On the other hand, a general registration of all 18 year olds could be useful for more than just mobilization for wartime contingencies.

Last factor is that there is no way our congress is ever going to accept the responsibility of declaring war and engaging in a draft, so one might question the utility of registration on that basis as well.

In any case, I don’t see a way ahead that actually works for the stated purpose, and I don’t see a workable way to mobilize a nation for a war in the manner of WW2 either, as time to mobilize, train, deploy, and utilize a drafted army is unlikely to be part of that environment.

Outcast

Any one got a tank for sale, between those that are in the wind and all the women that are pissed off from reading some of these posts here it has gotten kinda unsafe for this old goat to go out on the street. You youngsters do know that some of those contrary critters do conceal carry as well sometimes seem to have a curse that makes them even more touchy as to some things. Now if you don’t mind I am going to close garage doors from inside and shut off the lights as I hide way in the dark back corner.

Mike Kozlowski

…On the one hand, I’ve been waiting to see this for decades. On the other hand, i would bet the rent that Congress will kill Selective Service registrations before any woman ever HAS to sign uo. “Equality ” was never meant to include putting your ass on the line, and no politician, right or left, is going to risk their careers by requiring women to sign up. Look for the ‘Selective Service is an outdated relic that we really don’t need anymore ‘ rhetoric to start any day now.

AnotherPat

Am interested in what others think of this idea based on a 2016 Military Times article:

“Lawmakers Move To Abolish the Draft”:

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2016/02/11/lawmakers-move-to-abolish-the-draft/

“As Congress begins debate on whether to force women to register for the draft, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers has a compromise solution: Get rid of it altogether.”

“On Thursday, a group of four representatives — Mike Coffman, R-Colo.; Jared Polis, D-Colo.; Peter DeFazio, D-Ore.; and Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif. — introduced new legislation to abolish the Selective Service System, calling it an outdated and unneeded program.”

“Maintaining the Selective Service simply makes no sense,” Coffman, a Marine Corps veteran, said in a statement. “In 1973, the last draftee entered the Army and since then, despite the first Gulf War and subsequent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon has never considered reinstituting the draft.”

Reddevil

Purely a political move. If we go to war with China or Russia and lose a carrier and a BCT within a month, it is either a national mobilization or subjugation.

Remember that within 6 months or so of Pearl Harbor we had lost 2 fleet carriers and entire battalions of troops- thousands killed, more wounded, and 75,000 or so captured. At that point, the nation faces a choice. It’s either all in or capitulation.

Most senior military leaders feel that we have one battle- if we lose it, the nation does not have the political will to fight.

NEC338x

Sadly, we no longer have the excess shipbuilding capacity to replace losses at the rate we did in WW2. You start losing capital ships and they’re gone for the duration of the naval campaign. I sometimes wonder if we could even push out Higgins boats at anywhere close to 700/month.

5th/77th FA

Careful what you wish for SJWs. Karma is a cast iron bitch with titanium teeth.

OldSoldier54

Those aren’t teeth, dude. Those are adamantine saber tooth fangs, as those clueless fools will probably learn one day.

Commissar

Long overdue. Though I am against the use of the draft to fight wars that do not involve an existential threat to our country.

Vietnam was a bullshit use of the draft.

26Limabeans

“Vietnam was a bullshit use of the draft”

Sure as hell came up with some damn fine Warriors.

rgr769

Too bad we can’t use a time machine to send the commie cuttlefish back to “Vietnam times.” Bet he would have made a run for the border rather than serve in the military, even if they offered him some REMF MOS like the one he has now.

Commissar

WTF? You comment is utterly baseless.

I volunteered and served almost my entire adult life including deployments and always chose jobs that made is likely I would be on the ground.

You don’t have to like or respect me but I absolutely more than proved my willingness to serve and willingness to accept direct risk of combat.

It is one thing to claim that someone who never served would have dodged the draft but to accuse a triple volunteer of being someone that would dodge the draft is bullshit.

Skyjumper

Just curious Commissar, where/when did you serve and what was your MOS or AOC when you served “on the ground” or “direct risk of combat” as you stated?

If memory serves me right, you were in the Reserves where you attained the final rank as a Major with some deployment time.

Not out to nail you, just curious.

Commissar

Since the question it about my willingness to serve on the ground in high risk jobs I will highlight the jobs that I served in that were regarded as high risk…

Enlisted;

LLVI team member
SOT-A team member (1st SFG (A))

Also served in other less coot enlisted jobs; TCAE, S-2 NCO, SOT-B

But the bulk of my enlisted time on active duty was LLVI and SOT-A

As for officer I was a 35D MI officer, 11A infantry officer, 38A Civil Affairs officer.

My two just shy of 1 year deployments were Civil Affairs.

While a lot of people do not really understand what they do and there is a lot of misinformation the fact is CA teams are exposed to a great deal of risk. They operate in areas where the community does not like the US and 4 out 5 missions are coordinated with local government officials so the bad guys not only know you are coming but know when and ultimately where you are going.

Additionally most of the local leaders in hostile areas ARE the insurgent leaders. Which I know for a fact from the biometrics.

So while it is not the kind of respect door kickers get because I walked through the front door and had dinner with them surrounded by THEIR armed guards my team and the poor infantry escort platoon took a hell of a lot of risk during our missions.

In addition my team and I were on the ground during cordon and searches resolving conflicts with locals that came up due to the intrusion of all the raids on theirs homes throughout the night. Pissed off locals.

We also had a huge information collection role…

AnotherPat

Commissar wrote:

“While a lot of people do not really understand what they do and there is a lot of misinformation the fact is CA teams are exposed to a great deal of risk.”

I do understand the risks that US Army Civil Affairs (CA) teams are or were exposed to.

Had to work with CA Officers & NCOs while in two different Sandboxes during OEF and OIF. Sadly, some of them lost their lives from IEDs while I was still in the AOR.

Skyjumper

I’ll be honest here, Commissar

I’m not a fan of yours by any means. You come across very arrogant, argumentative & condescending in the majority of your posts and I also don’t agree with any of your philosophy concerning government.

I don’t get involved in those conversations, because it is way out of my lane and also because others here have put my thoughts into words better than I can or possibly could.

I don’t know what kind of NCO or Officer you were when you served. However the fact remains that you served.

Thanks for the get back.

Commissar

Just to be clear, I am sharing this after being attacked for being a draft dodging coward in rgr769’s bullshit fever dream alternate timelines.

How many veterans do you know would take kindly to being called a “draft dodger”?

No veteran who proved their willingness to serve should have to deal with bull shit like that. Especially from another veteran.

Toxic Deplorable B Woodman

99.99% of the time, I just try to ignore you. If you get too ignorant, I’ll either shut to door in your face, or shoot you. Either one.

Commissar

Fantastic, you should keep doing that thing you do 99.99% of the time. But just do it more often.

Outcast

Being one of those draft dodgers as Ken and Barry might have also done, we seen what was coming as to Army service and we opted to go in on our terms as to how best we thought we could serve our country. Ken and Barry went the route of the Marines and I went to what every one classes as the most worthless, USAF. In Ken and Barry’s case someone of your position, know it all with medal on their shoulders, sent them on a suicide mission of being under manned and hoping for backup from others and they never returned in Feb 68. In my case someone of your ilk also decided to teach mortar operation to locals but due to their expert skills they were about 3 seconds late, 15 – 20 yards short killed a tree behind me, you might work on sharpening your aiming skills. AS to the bullshit statement by you, like I said after McNamara got the IQ level lowered the services experienced 2 things, below standard personal and increased traffic to Canada. We that served before, during and short time after TET, served with honor and side by side those that were drafted or enlisted worked together to the best of our ability, the officers were the bullshit dealers. As to your draft dodger problem, we were told by a senior NCO as how to handle the problem. As to your poor infantry escort platoon, you got what your rank deserved, when did they stop teaching officers and his team how to use fire arms. Koreans were much better taught how to handle town leaders who were also insurgent leaders, but wimpy Americans have a tendency of not wanting to fill cemetery’s and hanging is deemed deplorable.Oh and lastly for your brass ass crowd, look around as to some of us deplorable people that you look down on have far more education than any college ever will be able to teach you. Now if you will pardon me this low life scum shall return to the depths of the earth in his… Read more »

TACCO

Dude, you need to chill out.

Outcast

Who, me, why it is fun to come out of the ground into the sunlight. Just seems to me that someone spent almost 2 years and had 4 assignments in that time that he considered dangerous, puts down his security detail and most of all got to choose his assignment. Sounds like what I heard during that so called Bullshit war, brass and higher ups of enlisted, based out side Nam, 7 day TDY orders for fact finding in Saigon. Top secret daily meetings and debriefing at various bars, massage parlors, high class houses of ill repute, then back to safety out side country and qualified for combat pay for 3 months. Yeah they really had it hard. Now if you must disturb me anymore, bring a couple of top shelf bottles of booze down to my subterranean abode, them $1.00 bottles 5th sends are getting kind of stale and tasteless and tell the fellows in charge to increase my bologna and cheese sandwich allotment, they are getting awful cheap with their supply’s down here at the bottom.

Ex-PH2

Get over yourself, Scuttlebutt.

The draft began with WWII and ended in 1973, when you were still wet behind the ears.

This ruling handed down makes it OK to demand equal responsibilities from women if they want such things as federal school loans, i.e., registering with Selective Service.

It would be a good idea if you took the time to read the ruling. It would also be a really, REALLY good idea to knock off the personal crap and grow the EFF up. You bring the bulk of this lashback on yourself, so GET OVER YOURSELF!

Commissar

I have no idea what you are so wrapped up about.

I was not criticizing or saying anything negative about the ruling.

And the draft did not begin in WWII

We have been conscripting Americans to fights since the War for Independance. We created a selective service system in 1917 so we could draft personnell for WWI.

Since 1940 we have maintained and continuous registry with mandatory registration for all males 18 and over both even during times of peace.

This ruling overturns the previously ruling that exempted women from the requirement to register for Selective Service.

I am not sure what you thought you were explaining esplaining to me but I have my head around it.

Ex-PH2

GEEZO PETE, you really ARE so stupid you don’t even know you are alive!! Here you go, you moron:

“The Draft and WWII

On September 16, 1940, the United States instituted the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, which required all men between the ages of 21 and 45 to register for the draft. This was the first peacetime draft in United States’ history. Those who were selected from the draft lottery were required to serve at least one year in the armed forces. Once the U.S. entered WWII, draft terms extended through the duration of the fighting. By the end of the war in 1945, 50 million men between eighteen and forty-five had registered for the draft and 10 million had been inducted in the military.” – Source: https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/draft-and-wwii

What you DO NOT KNOW would fill the entire British Library, the Congressional Library, and cover the surface of Pluto and still leave so much for storage we’d have to send it to Proxima b.

When I refer to the draft, UNLIKE YOU, I am NOT referring to shanghaiing people out of their homes, you idjit. I am referencing the Selective Service Act which, as indicated by my source quote, started a little over a year ahead of Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor.

Do try to find a way to be accurate instead of an irritant, Squishadoodle.

rgr769

How could you be a draft dodger? When there was still a draft you weren’t yet born or were wearing diapers. But you do clearly sympathize with those that Jonn liked to characterize as “stank-ass hippies.” Also, stop trying to imply you were Special Forces Qualified. You weren’t; that is why you didn’t give your enlisted MOS on an SOT-A which stands for Support Operation Team-Airborne, which is staffed with non-18 series (Not Special Forces qualified) intel and commo MOS’s.

Outcast

Hey wait a minute here, as the resident, most worthless McNamara Moron REMEF deep cellar dweller I should have some say in this, I like it down here by myself. Officers, yes I have met a lot of worthless ones, need a special place in the REMEF ranks and as the ranking resident down here, at the very bottom most cellar, I revoke his status and stationing here in this hallowed chamber. Now as to the very astute statement that “Vietnam was a bullshit use of the draft”, yes in part it was such as the time that came after McNamara got the IQ level lowered in an effort to increase the draft pool, had to protect the rich folks kids so they did not get yanked out of college to serve. As to the others who came to the party before that many were of the type that took to heart “Ask not what your country can do for you- ask what you can do for your country” and went willingly and often eagerly as well as those who volunteered. Now someone (AH) is telling me that this statement and all that occurred during that time is all bullshit. Damn now the next time I go to see Ken and Danny and if I try to locate him Barry ( he is known as Carlton B.) as well as Gary (my next door neighbor) that their legacy is now Bullshit. We were sent to battle the further spread of Communism in their ongoing attempt to take over the world. For this Herr Commissar I wish to thank you for putting on me the increased sense of failure to 12,000 + names who are not able to tell me to my face. Thank you for being their spokesman.

Outcast

What next Commissar, Kennedy is bullshit also, don’t even come at me with that.

Commissar

Kennedy did not implement the draft for Vietnam. He was assassinated in 1963 and everything he said and did prior to that, including establishing US Army Special Forces and the Peace Corps indicates he highly valued volunteerism in military and public service. And valued Americans choosing how best they can serve.

Ret_25X

The draft “for Viet Nam” had existed before Kennedy and after Kennedy. In fact, “the draft” never really ended after WW2.

The blame is on congress for not performing their job, not on “the draft”.

Commissar

Conscription has existed since we the War for Independance. Selective Service (draft) since 1917.

But it was not used for Vietnam until 1969.

Long after Kennedy was dead.

Yes, the requirement to register for the selective service system has continued even during times of peace since 1940.

But that is not what I am referring to when I said that Kennedy did not implement the draft. What I mean he he never drafted anyone. When you register for the draft you are not “drafted”.

Stacy0311

Call me crazy but I’m pretty sure we were drafting people before Vietnam. Elvis did a couple years when he was drafted.
As for Vietnam draftees/volunteers, I would like to recommend Nofi’s excellent work “Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War”.
He does actual research and doesn’t just pull facts out of his ass.

Commissar

Please reread what I wrote and check my facts. Yes we drafted during WWII and during WWI and conscripted before that.

But I am talking about Vietnam.

I never once denied that we drafted BEFORE Vietnam.

Ex-PH2

YOur rate of accuracy is SO low, Scuttlefishbutt, that you might as well stop defending your offhand, inaccurate and snotnosed responses.
The draft was NOT ramped up in 1969, you moron. Richard Nixon was voted into office on his campaign promise to end the war in Vietnam, and followed through. I do not know where the hell you get your information, but since you weren’t even ALIVE during the period of the Vietnam war, you would do yourself a real favor if you just shut your flapping yap and keep it shut.

Commissar

I never claimed anyone’s service or legacy or things they did was bullshit.

Don’t spin what I said into something I didn’t just to give some excuse to be outraged. After all, isn’t that what “libtards” and “snowflakes” do?

I said the federal government using a draft to force US citizens, by definition against their will, to fight and die for a cause or enemy that is not a genuine existential threat to the US is a bullshit use of the draft; aka abuse of power.

Remember that small government thing so many like to claim they believe in?

The draft is not small government. Abusing it in unnecessary foreign entanglements is arguably as bad as big government gets.

A Proud Infidel®™

“I never claimed anyone’s service or legacy or things they did was bullshit.”

Uuhhhhm NOPE, remember your screeching at me that I never was worth a damn and tasked to be the CSM’s Driver and absolutely worthless at everything else?

Commissar

Yes, I remember. I stand by that. Though I was more specific about what you were likely worthless at. I did not accuse you at being worthless at “everything else”. Just more valuable as a CSM driver and supply than as a member of a squad.

And if you recall, that was a candid return volley to things you said about my and your perception of my contributions.

The post above was referring to this specific thread about Vietnam being a bullshit use of the draft.

Ex-PH2

Squishfish, if you weren’t so confoundedly ignorant of REAL history, you wouldn’t stick out like a sore thumb.

There were MORE VOLUNTEERS for military service during the 1960s and 1970s, in re: Vietnam, than draftees. Yes, there were, and nobody cares whether or not you agree with that bit of REAL history.

Please take your butthurt crap some place else.

Perry Gaskill

Yours seems like a fairly narrow perspective, Lars. Something to consider is that at the end of World War II, the fall of the Japanese empire left a big vacuum on the Pacific Rim. People such as Ho Chi Minh were both trying to prevent a return to colonialism locally, and acting as part of a larger movement to achieve communist domination globally. Back then, there were strong indications that the domino theory wasn’t just somebody’s off-the-wall graduate thesis.

What was also an issue were the insurgency tactics used by the Viet Cong in the South. VC cadres made it very clear when moving political advisors into a village that you could either get with the program or they would kill you. Even the simple choice of being neutral was no longer an option. Or a matter of democracy.

Now that it’s 50 years on, we can argue about whether the draft was needed to halt the domino theory effect; my own view is that U.S. intervention in Viet Nam did indeed stop the spread of forced communism in Southeast Asia. Therefore, the draft was justified if the end game required that level of manpower.

Commissar

I generally believe in the domino theory of ideas and communism is an idea. But I do not think ideas can be killed with military forces.

Laos and Cambodia would have fallen to communists whether we lost blood and treasure in Vietnam or not.

I also believe in power vacuums and how leaving a void for hostile powers to fill is a bad thing.

The US lost credibility by escalating in Vietnam (the draft was a consequence of and fed that escalation). We also lost credibility by losing so much blood and treasure for so little empirical gains.

That loss of credibility increased the international credibility and influence of the Soviet Union globally and China regionally.

It was a mistake to escalate in Vietnam, something Kennedy rightly opposed. And it was an abuse of power to implement the draft to feed that escalation.

Kennedy had a very astute understanding of future of warfare as unconventional and decided by not merely the strength of forces on the ground but the spread of ideas in a society.

Which is why he saw troops like Special Forces as essentiall to the future of our military and efforts like the Peace Corps and other soft power as critical to our influence globally.

Imagine if we had invested in the Peace Corps as an additional opportunity/college access program for Americans wanting to serve their nation in peacetime?

We would have a network of soft power at every level of society in nearly every society in the the world and the best global human intelligence program imaginable.

Hondo

In general, I agree that Vietnam was a war the US need not have fought. Frankly, IMO there was no US vital interests at stake in Vietnam; we wrongly assessed that there were, but never articulated them clearly nor did we establish a strategy to secure those “vital” interests.

Viet-Chinese historical antipathy would have prevented a China-dominated Vietnam had Vietnam become a united nation any time after World War II. And had we told the French to shove off in 1945, there’s a good chance that neither the Soviets nor the Chinese would have been involved in Vietnam after World War II. Ho Chi Minh very well might have become a second Tito – and might even have turned to the West for support against his historical enemy China.

Regarding Laos and Cambodia – post-1962, you’re probably right about Laos; Kennedy in effect gave that nation away by forcing the Royal Lao Government to accept a coalition government including the Pathet Lao in 1962 and ending the US military mission there. (Though in fairness, Kennedy may well have had little choice in 1962 short of a war in Laos that would have been of similar scope to the Vietnam War circa late 1965 but which would also have been logistically harder to support than the Vietnam war.)

However, absent US involvement in Vietnam IMO it’s questionable whether Cambodia would have ever been taken over by the Khmeer Rouge. My guess is no.

Without US involvement in Vietnam (and Vietnam thus not beholden to China), it’s difficult to see how the Khmer Rouge would have attracted the foreign support from both Vietnam and China necessary to overthrow Cambodia’s government, or how a coup against the Cambodian monarchy would have taken place giving them the opening to seize power with Sihanook’s blessing. China was historically closest to the Khmer Rouge, and a united Vietnam would have been quite unwilling to support China’s interests there absent a common foe (e.g., a conflict with the US).

Ret_25X

Perhaps, but in fairness to the DoD at the time, the Army was a conscript based Army. The draft filled all units except special unit types that one had to volunteer for.

The Army that fought in Viet Nam was not drafted for Viet Nam, it simply was the Army that existed.

The real crime of the VN era draft was the unfair methodologies that allowed those with deeper pockets to draw on to defer forever or hide in compos 2 and 3 (a problem created by not using the ARNG and USAR as envisioned in their creation).

Overall, Viet Nam can be questioned for legitimacy in hind site, but the use of the draft to fill units was not “bull shit” because of that. No draft would have meant that the much smaller RA of the time would simply have stayed in VN for the duration while draftees only served in Europe or CONUS. A state of affairs that would have been completely unworkable in the end.

It is easy to cast assertions over what people did 60 years ago now, but decision makers had to work within the system they had at that time. Pretending otherwise is BS.

Commissar

The draft made escalation possible. Escalation should never have happened and using the draft was an abuse of power so those in power could pursue an outcome that had no direct connection to the interests of the US or the American people.

Ret_25X

No, Congress made escalation possible.

For actual historical accuracy, the Democrats made it possible.

Had Goldwater’s bills been passed, no “escalation” would have occurred.

Again, “the draft” made no decisions, passed no budgets, and is not animate.

Like “gun violence”, blaming the processes or the hardware is popular, but stupid.

Please dispense with the revisionism and blame who deserves to be blamed: politicians.

Commissar

If you read what I wrote you will realize I am blaming the politicians….

“the draft was an abuse of power so those in power could pursue an outcome that had not direct connection to the interests of the US or the American people.”

You need both blood and treasure to wage war.

Congress passed the budget and implemented the draft = blood and treasure.

But ultimately you are right; the draft did not make the escalation possible but it did allow the escalation to be sustained longer.

Commissar

Just to be clear; you are right. I was wrong to claim that the draft made escalation possible.

They could and did escalate in Vietnam with the volunteer force.

However, I stand by my assertion themat the use of the draft was an abuse of power by the government.

I also believe the draft made the escalation sustainable operationally.

Though it likely made it less sustainable politically.

Hondo

That same “abuse of power” you’re speaking of (presumably the peacetime draft) was also used by Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and LBJ prior to 1969. And I can guarantee you that draftees were being sent to Vietnam during LBJ’s massive and intentionally-engineered escalation of the war in Vietnam in the 1965-1968 time frame.

Ex-PH2

Lyndon Johnson escalated the direct action of the US in Vietnam. What he did was bulldoze Congress into approving it.

Doc (FMF)

No one who hasn’t served in a actual combat environment should ever be in a position to make rules for soldiers. That means the REMF’s in the Pentagram with nothing but paper cuts and admin medals.

If you’ve never been shot at, you need to continue to push pencils, not battalions.

I don’t want women in combat. Not they lack the combat skills, but because they are emotionally and biologically wired different. Put a woman in a combat environment and it causes dissention and quarreling among the men. Combat is serious and not the place for adding more problems.

AnotherPat

“These 6 Women Earned the Silver Star For Valor In War”:

https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/these-6-women-earned-the-silver-star-for-valor-in-war

Some of us who have served in a combat environment also served at the Pentagon.

Rest in Peace, Lieutenant General Timothy Maude, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, US Army, who lost his life on 11 September 2001:

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/6603215/timothy-joseph-maude

Am sure there were other combat veterans who lost their lives that day at the Pentagon.

P.S. Eisenhower was a “pencil pusher” for about 14 years…

SEAL TWO

Which is why Eisenhower was nothing more than Roosevelt’s boot-licker who would do anything that socialist asked of him. That is exactly why he was selected for Supreme Commander Allied Forces Europe instead of George C. Marshall (who wanted that job). Marshall was most qualified, but Roosevelt refused to give it to him because he wasn’t Roosevelt’s “butt-boy.” Marshall refused to let FDR call him by his first name, refused to laugh at his jokes, and refused to bend over for him to enhance his career, which is why “Ike” was given the job. Even MacArthur said of Eisenhower “he’s the best clerk I ever had…” While “Ike’s” troops were fighting and dying in Africa, Italy and France, their Supreme Commander in theater was flopping between the sheets with Kay Summersby throughout the entire war, and Eisenhower was too stupid to realize she was working for British Intelligence the entire time (but we’ll never have proof; the Brits are too good at that kind of stuff). Eisenhower wrote to Marshal to tell him he was divorcing Mamie to marry his British mistress; Marshall responded “if you do that I’ll bring you back here and ruin you! If you even mention that again you are finished! Get work and do your job!” Simply put, Eisenhower was a simpleton and a turd. Kind of like that greasy-headed little fart Petraeus.

Perry Gaskill

The choice of Eisenhower as allied commander wasn’t up to just Roosevelt alone. Since it was an allied effort, the choice also needed to be able to work with the other allies. Once in place, Eisenhower needed to juggle a lot of balls. This included being able put up with both Bernard Montgomery, and a separate gaggle of British generals who were convinced that strategic bombing was all that was ever going to be needed.

Personally, although I like to imagine George Patton as allied commander, it’s probably fair to say that the first thing he might have done is to punch out Charles de Gaulle.

A Proud Infidel®™

As well as giving the Russians his middle finger every chance he got!

SEAL TWO

P.S. “Ike” was a pencil-pusher his entire life – he was a major for seventeen years; never heard a shot fired in anger.

Perry Gaskill

Eisenhower had volunteered for a combat command in Europe during World War I. He was turned down, promoted, and apparently sent to organize a new tank training unit stateside. The Big Green Machine does what it wants to do with those who wear the uniform, and by most indications Eisenhower was a gifted staff officer and logistics organizer.

What was also true back then was that after World War I, the Army had been drawn down to, if memory serves, around 185,000 which was barely enough to maintain institutional wisdom. It was normal for officers to spend entire careers at the lower company and field grades. It wasn’t lack of performance; there simply weren’t that many slots available due to funding.

Sparks

I think this is at least the fair thing to do. However, if it becomes law and we do have a draft again, expect national pregnancy rates to skyrocket.

Ex-PH2

In case you haven’t paid attention, Sparks, pregnancy won’t get women OUT of service. It will only keep them out of combat zones.

MSG Eric

BUT, females still have the option to separate when they become pregnant if they so choose.

IDC SARC

Not so sure about that. Last I checked, that was the case in the Marines. That has not been true in the Navy for years.

IDC SARC

…especially so if the woman has not paid back the requisite time for a school she has completed, bonus money was received or the general needs of the Navy at the time.

TopGoz
LCpl Rhodes

Good, now bring back the fucking draft so we aren’t wasting billions of dollars every year to convince people to join when we should be simply ordering them to do so.

Commissar

Well we know where you stand on big government.

NHSparky

Thanks, but no.

Sincerely,

Former Recruiter

IDC SARC

Rhoades, you really just post the way some people fart in a small room. Don’t ya?

MSG Eric

We’d probably be wasting billions more dealing with everyone being put into the military and finding things for them to do.

Even when an Army of 386,000 you know how much of a pain in the ass it is for 1SGs to find rocks for Soldiers to paint, dirt for them to mow, waxed floors for them to wax. Imagine if there were even 3,000,000 Soldiers having to be found jobs to do to keep them out of trouble.

Without a “total mobilization” level war, we can’t put everyone in the military for any number of years.

Granted, I could see people doing some sort of national service during their younger years, in any civil service job. Especially when there are tens of thousands of gummint jobs going unfilled on any given day. But, even that would be a huge undertaking and not be enough to cover the 20ish million 18-25 year olds in our population.

Hondo

Way overdue. And it shouldn’t have taken a change in DoD policy regarding opening all specialties to women. IMO the SCOTUS got it wrong years ago in upholding male-only draft registration.

Registration for the draft should ALWAYS have been for both genders; ditto the draft. The needs of the individual services should have always dictated the mix of specialties required. If some specialties were/are male-only, then all that means is either (a) a higher proportion of males would be drafted; (b) women would be assigned to the specialties open to them, or (c) both (a) and (b) would occur.

If that means a different number of males and females are required in a given year, that’s perfectly fine. Military needs dictate a lot of things that wouldn’t otherwise generally be permissible (incuding a whole lot of seemingly arbitrary and “discriminatory” physical standards), and the Courts have historically deferred to the military’s judgement in those areas. A draft covering both men and women with different numbers of each gender drafted could – and should – have been simply one other thing that the Courts allowed in furtherance of military necessity.

There was never any need to exempt women from draft/draft registration entirely.

Commissar

Agreed. Though I am not sure it helps the forum perception of your argument that I agreed with it.

David

As a Cold War REMF kind of volunteer who was 1A until my silly-high draft number was pulled, I barely have a dog in this fight. But I will say the Pavlovian attack-dog ad hominem attacks engendered by some specific folks’ comments certainly lowers the generally decent level of debate here to kindergarten levels. Give it a rest.

timactual

I’ll say it, and enjoy it; “TOLD YA SO”.

NHSparky

Sgt. Hulka: “Son, there ain’t no draft no more.”

Cruiser: “There was one?”

MSG Eric

“The reason why chicks dig me is because I rarely wear underwear and when I do its something unusual.”

Winger