Since ancient times nation’s have built their defense upon the young men who were conscripted, but in our nation today we are trying something new, voluntary service. With the birth of an all volunteer military came an unexpected consequence; nonmilitary individuals dread the draft. The draft has been employed throughout our nations history to meet the needs of our military might, and with great effectiveness. By looking at the history, economics, and benefits of the draft we will see that it would greatly improve our nation, because it would improve the quality of our soldiers and citizens alike, while simultaneously promoting patriotism within future generations. “Civil governments are voluntary associations for mutual defense” (page
…show more content…
“long service professionals fight more effectively and are far less likely to die in combat than amateurs” (Scales 21). While this is true of soldiers a volunteer army is not the same as a career military. Regardless of how long people decide to stay in the military there will always be young, green enlisted soldiers who fall under the command of their more senior noncommissioned officers and college educated commissioned officers. Many who argue against the draft like to point out how volunteer soldiers are more effective because they are “more eager to train and fight” but according to “Military Draft” ninety-three percent of all americans who fought in World War II were draftees. (Wagner 28). We do not need a volunteer Army to have good soldiers, we just need that seven percent of career military to be able to lead the fresh soldiers in times of war. The argument for a smaller and more selective military is enticing but it is not very practical in real world scenarios. It is imperative that we fill our active duty and reserve ranks with capable soldiers who can be called upon if need be, but many National Guard units are “poorly trained or lacking key personnel” (Berger 13). National Guard units are often regarded as inferior to their active duty counterparts, so they receive very little attention and funding even though they are often called upon to fulfill similar
“long service professionals fight more effectively and are far less likely to die in combat than amateurs” (Scales 21). While this is true of soldiers a volunteer army is not the same as a career military. Regardless of how long people decide to stay in the military there will always be young, green enlisted soldiers who fall under the command of their more senior noncommissioned officers and college educated commissioned officers. Many who argue against the draft like to point out how volunteer soldiers are more effective because they are “more eager to train and fight” but according to “Military Draft” ninety-three percent of all americans who fought in World War II were draftees. (Wagner 28). We do not need a volunteer Army to have good soldiers, we just need that seven percent of career military to be able to lead the fresh soldiers in times of war. The argument for a smaller and more selective military is enticing but it is not very practical in real world scenarios. It is imperative that we fill our active duty and reserve ranks with capable soldiers who can be called upon if need be, but many National Guard units are “poorly trained or lacking key personnel” (Berger 13). National Guard units are often regarded as inferior to their active duty counterparts, so they receive very little attention and funding even though they are often called upon to fulfill similar