Tuesday, December 29, 2009

How to stop the war (and future wars too)

Comrade Physioprof's witty post titled Rejection of Reality in its entirety:

Rational response to terrorism necessarily includes giving serious consideration to the fact that *our* actions as the biggest imperial military power on Earth have a massive influence on the *desire* of wackaloon nutjobs to blow themselves to smithereens while taking out one of our civilian aircraft. Of course, this consideration is absolute taboo in our depraved and toxic political culture because ARE YOU SAYING AMERKUH *DESERVES* TO BE ATTACKED??!?!?!?!!111!!!1!!!!???!!?!?!???
Yeah. (sigh)

A fellow named Thomas Joseph replies:
Ok, so we’ve now come to this realization? Now what the fuck are we, your average citizen, supposed to do about it?
And here was my reply:
Thomas Joseph, organize marches on the Pentagon, as in the old days? Oh wait, you need to have a draft army for that kind of indignation, yes?

Didn’t anybody learn anything from Richard Nixon?

Here it is:

Re-institute the draft; ALL overseas adventures will henceforth require 100% military conscription for every able-bodied person, up to the current age-limit (which I believe is 42?), no deferments except for pregnancy (major baby-boom will be an unfortunate but temporary side effect), medical personnel and EMTs, cops, fire-fighters and a few other occupations. NO DEFERMENTS FOR COLLEGE and certainly, NO DEFERMENTS for intellectual jobs. In fact, if I may sound like Chairman Mao for a moment, I’d ship all the neocon book editors out to Afghanistan FIRST.

One thing the American people are quite populist about, is the make-up of the military and how the affluent avoid service. The loudest people objecting will BE the affluent, which is why hardly anyone in congress has kids in the military.

Follow these directives, and ALL soldiers from ALL overseas adventures (including Korea, et. al.) will be home by lunchtime.

I’m just sayin.
And I am repeating my comment here, because yes, I meant it.


sheila said...

Yikes, as the mom of three closely approaching (one past) the recruitment age. Or draft age, I say...Um...no. lol. Because, as you said, it's the affluent that do NOT go. The powers that be wouldn't be affected by reinstating the draft. Their kids don't go now, and that's why we'll never reinstate the draft.

But I've been saying this (from your first paragraph minus the draft idea, lol) for years. It's our stickin our nose in everyones affairs that has put us in the situation. Plain and simple.

History shows that when countries do this, they will fall. I hope that doesn't happen with us. I hope we can get back to pre WWII thinking. We didn't get into that war until we were literally pulled in . We didn't get in for YEARS even with BEGGING by all the other countrys to help them. We kept out.

Restraint is good. It shows strength, not weakness.

CrackerLilo said...

War is over, if you want it. I love this.

*raises glass to you*

Jon said...

You forgot the dollar for dollar tax. We should be taxed immediately and in full for the cost of war. No deficit spending. Do that for social programs. That and a return of the draft would end all foolish imperial adventures in time for lunch.

white rabbit said...

I tell you how to organise the new draft:

1 Lower - not upper age limit - 42

2 No ethnic minorities - it's a white person thing.

3. No poor people - anyone unemployed, on benefits etc automatically disqualified.

4. No uneducated people (except Republican uneducated persons - yes Sarah, you're drafted - you're seriously qualified - see above!!!)

That would liven things up considerably...

JoJo said...

"All we are saying, is give peace a chance....." I happen to agree w/ you that a draft is going to be imminent if we can't wrap up that mess in the middle east. How can it not be? Those kids over there are serving multiple tours and it's not good for their mental health. In Vietnam, didn't they only do 13 months?

Happy New Weir Daisy! I love that holiday/wintery Stealie you used in this post!

LarryE said...

At the top, just in case it's necessary, none of what follows in intended to minimize or even downplay the stupidity, immorality, and destructiveness of the Iraq War. It is meant only to address this particular point: I don't agree that the presence or absence of a draft is what matters in generating sustained protest.

Leaving aside the fact that there have been a number of protests against the Iraq War even in the absence of a draft, what appears to be needed for that level of intensity to remain is not a draft but sustained casualties.

We tend to forget that Vietnam was by pretty much any measure a much bigger war than Iraq. It lasted longer than Iraq (so far, that is), involved more troops (peak US troop strength in South Vietnam was four times that in Iraq - and Iraq is 2.5 times the size of what was South Vietnam) and significantly more casualties.

In the seven years of the Iraq War (2003-2009 inclusive), the official US military death toll has reached 4,371. For the 10 years of Vietnam (1963-74), it was 58,177. The yearly average for Vietnam was over nine times higher than for Iraq. Put another way, the average yearly death toll for American forces in Vietnam was over six times higher than the highest yearly death toll for American forces in Iraq (904 in 2007).

That mattered more than the draft. The draft was a convenient point of protest (which is one of the reasons it was suspended) but it wasn't the driving cause. The cause was that, as I wrote some time back, even for those of us unaffected by the draft by reasons of age, sex, or deferment, the war "was always there, swirling around us like a fog, pulling at us like an undertow, ignored only by being repressed."

Anonymous said...

So, Larry, why do the Vietnamese and Iraqi deaths not count as "casualties", again? Documented civilian deaths in Iraq are over 100k now, but I guess those lost lives aren't worth mentioning... wonder why that is.