opendoug wrote:

Goose wrote:

We've been there since shortly after 9/11,
2001.
But we believe that sending another 3,000 men will solve the problem?
We never learn.

As we come up on high school graduation time, just think that this group of high school seniors - born around 1998/99 - has *never* known a time that we weren't at war in the middle east.

1984 comes to mind. "Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia."

Sad.
 

Good observation. It is indeed sad.
I'd like to think that we blundered into Afghanistan with the best of intentions.
But as our 15th year there unfolds, it does seem like we remain, we bomb, we sacrifice young men all for leaders to create an air of progress or toughness, and to indulge in the two minute hate.

Just Fred wrote:

Good one, Goose.  But, I know you understand my point.  The draft forces all of us have a stake in what the hell is going on military-wise.  Right now it's something like 1% or less of the entire population.  If it weren't for the draft, we'd probably still be screwing around in Vietnam.

rongone could probably speak to this better than than me.  My number was 291 in that 1969 lottery.

 

I didn't make it to the lottery. I was drafted, and I didn't have anything like a nasty 'bone spur' in one of my heels to grant me a 4F exemption. The problem I have with the military draft is that influence led to exemptions in many cases. I would favor a program of required public service with no exemptions like some other countries have instituted. After you reach a certain age you must perform at least 2 years of service to your country. Whether that is military service or some other form of approved public service would be mandatory for every young person, male and female. No exemptions on religious grounds. No exemptions for medical reasons unless the person is determined to be permanently physically disabled. Even somebody with bone spurs or asthma can perform less physical strenuous job in the military or as an aide in a rural school district. Participants could receive credits and possibly grants to further pursue their vocation in a trade school or college after completing their two year service.

I'm tired of politicians with no blood in the game and citizens who never served one day in the armed forces content with sending young men and women in uniform into wars with multiple deployments giving little consideration to strategy or an end game. We've been utilizing that losing strategy since Korea. One way to turn the table is to require a declaration of war, complete estimate of cost and funding, and formulation of military strategy with a game plan and exit strategy prior to sending troops/military advisors/special ops personnel etc. into a conflict.

You are correct that less than 1% of our citizens are in active duty in the armed forces and less tha 2% of our population ever served in the armed services of the U.S. So, it's easy for most folks to just sit back and let the conflicts go on, and on, and on. It certainly doesn't encroach upon their daily life style.

In the case of the 16+ year conflict in Afghanistan, let's not forget that we financed, supported with arms, special ops, and military intelligence the 'freedom fighters' in that country that were fighting against the Russians there. After the Russians bailed, the 'freedom fighters' evolved into al Qaida and later the Taliban. You know, those Islamic terrorists we're trying to get rid of in the mid-east. So, in a sense, we created the monster we're now trying to eliminate. This is just another example of a lack of planning, strategy, and follow through from a military perspective.