Senator says US may need compulsory service to boost Iraq force

[MORTARDUDE]

The article posted below is solely the work of the author. My personal views on the subject may or may not be the same. It is posted here for information only. Any questions or comments should be directed to the author. Thank you.

*******************************************

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...t_040420172423

Senator says US may need compulsory service to boost Iraq force
Tue Apr 20, 1:24 PM ET Add U.S. National - AFP to My Yahoo!


WASHINGTON (AFP) - A senior Republican lawmaker said that deteriorating security in Iraq (news - web sites) may force the United States to reintroduce the military draft.


"There's not an American ... that doesn't understand what we are engaged in today and what the prospects are for the future," Senator Chuck Hagel told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on post-occupation Iraq.


"Why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?" Hagel said, arguing that restoring compulsory military service would force "our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."


The Nebraska Republican added that a draft, which was ended in the early 1970s, would spread the burden of military service in Iraq more equitably among various social strata.


"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he observed.


The call to consider a imposing a draft comes just days after the Pentagon (news - web sites) moved to extend the missions of some 20,000 of the 135,000 US troops in Iraq.


Some critics of the US-led occupation complain that military planners used too few troops to subdue Iraq, and insist that more military muscle will be needed to restore order.


The US-led military coalition was put under further strain by the announcement this week by coalition members Spain and Honduras that they would withdraw their military contingents from Iraq.


Meanwhile, witnesses at the hearing, including academics and former US officials, expressed concern about ongoing flareups of violence in Iraq this month -- the bloodiest yet for US troops.


"I think it's clear that pressures in Iraq have reached the boiling point," said Samuel Berger, national security adviser during the Bill Clinton (news - web sites) administration, who called for an increase in troops there, and a "genuine, non-grudging effort to internationalize the enterprise in Iraq, both military and civilian."


"We've got to be prepared to give up our hammerlock on decision making in exchange for genuine burden sharing."


Richard Perle, a former White House adviser who currently serves as a fellow at a conservative think tank, advised against adding troops or extending the date of handover of Iraqi sovereignty beyond the currently-set June 30 date.


"It is essential that we not delay the handover of sovereignty set for the end of June, even if there is continuing violence by those who know they have no place in a decent, democratic Iraq," he said.


Perle also warned against entrusting the United Nations (news - web sites) with the post-occupation administration of Iraq, saying UN involvement should be kept at "an absolute minimum."


"A large UN contingent in Iraq ... would do more harm than good," Perle said.


"It would discourage the assumption of sovereignty by Iraqis themselves. It would drain resources urgently needed for the development of Iraq's economy," Perle said.


A senior Democrat meanwhile, lashed out at the White House for failing to send a top administration official to appear before the panel.





"I think it is outrageous that the administration has not provided every witness we've asked for," said Senator Joseph Biden, the highest-ranking Democrat on the committee.

"The fact that they are not prepared to send a witness means that they are either totally incompetent and they don't have anything to tell us ... or they're refusing to allow us to fulfill our constitutional responsibility" of congressional oversight, Biden said.

The committee's Republican chairman, Richard Lugar, also slammed the White House for "inadequate planning and communication related to Iraq."

It's probably coming but I am heart and sole against the draft EVER being re-introduced in this country.If this country cannot survive without it we do not deserve to survive at all.There is no such thing as a free country that practices slavery.

[colmurph]

I don't see much reason to bring back a draft when enlistments and re-enlistments are at an all-time high. Just because some politician who doesn't know his butt from a hole in the ground says so, it doesn't make it true.

[39mto39g]

Right now the military only excepts a small amount of the people that try to enlist. If they need more troops, first except the ones that want to join, This should more than be enough to fill needs.
The question of having everyone serve is a different question and maybe should be addressed. Why should the rich kids get off and the middle and pour serve.

Ron

[blues clues]

Ron it's the American way, but if we do start the draft back up it should be boys and grils rich or poor. was in when this VORA started so I've seen it from boht sides.

razz

[DMZ-LT]

Have thought for awhile now that when you turn 18 you should do some sort of National Service for two years.Everyone male and female. I believe this would strenghten our country. Look at the bond we have from our service. Wouldn't just be the service , could be the Peace Corps , CCC , vISTA , ETC.

[SuperScout]

What John said.

From the moment we suck in our first breath of American air, we have a debt to pay for the sacrifices of those that preceded us. Repayment of that debt should be in the form of service, some service to this great nation; obviously, not all are cut out to be in the military, but other forms of service are certainly welcome. Couple this service with some form of educational assistance, and we can then do away with the tear-jerking bromide the "a mind is a terrible thing to waste."

El Tee & SS-

Agree completely.Also a choice could be involved.They could refuse National Service but full citizenship(includeing right to vote,hold public office,recieve welfare or any other Fed. Gov. assistence could be contingent on honorable National Service of at least two years.

[Gimpy]

SuperScout said!

(can you believe I said that?)

Seriously, he AND John are right on the money with this one!

[David]

I agree, a two year national service requirement may be a good thing for many of our youth. I do not think for a second they would not rise to the challenge should it be laid before then in times of national crisis but for the majority of the time (peacetime) national service could instill many good attributes. I also think a four year national service requirement would be good for people immigrating to this country wanting to become citizens. I have heard so many times, mostly from mexicans living here, that they would never lift a finger to defend America. As it stands now they are simply required to stand in line for awhile and take a test. This is laughable to me.