The real problem is a psychotic executive branch, which - as I understand it - has ignored the usual rules about declaring war and gone right ahead and started a war (sic) without oversight or accountability.
The lack of oversight and accountability, together with the delusional beliefs of a unitary executive, are the real problems. If those are solved there's no need for a draft, because there isn't going to be a war to draft anyone into.
If the situation changed in the future and a real threat appeared, a draft could always be organised to order. But instituting a draft without a real threat just to score a political point - and Iraq certainly isn't a real threat - makes no sense at all.
But I am afraid it would be irresponsibly* wishful thinking to rely only on a "commitment"/"directed effort" to solve these and to trust that their resolution will prevent further militaristic madness down the road.
That is why changing the stakes of the game would help. In two ways:
(1) As Rangel says, concentrate the minds of would-be war-mongerers.
and
(2) Arrange matters so that if the American people is ever gullible/stupid/vindictive enough again to follow its leaders into a disastrous military adventure, then the price of that mistake should be much more fairly distributed among the entire population.
* I say "irresponsibly" because "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
Militarisation affects the entire tone of a culture, and its a dangerous thing to do in a culture that's already so heavily militarised.
If such a draft were in place before Bush II appeared, I can't see any way that it would have made Iraq less of a fiasco. And I can see a lot of ways it could have made things much worse. Because with a pre-existing draft it's likely the US army would now be in Iran, Lebanon, Syria - and probably also Milton Keynes. And Paris.
And as for making everyone fight - deferments happened before, and you can be sure the rich and powerful would find ways to make them happen again.
It may just be me, but during my 4+ years in California I came away with the impression that the US has a very militaristic society and culture. And it begins with the large amount of veterans one interacts with in civilian life. Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
While I think that is a good point, I would go one step further: If and when the government goes psychotic again in the future (God save us all), it will be immoral for Americans to let things stand in a situation where only "career" military personnel are forced to put their life and limb on the line to carry out such military policies.
Yes, these professionals "volunteered" for the job. But I believe that a significant number of these volunteers signed up because they had few other if any attractive job opportunities. That may be a false myth, and I welcome being corrected on it. However, the U.S. Defense Department's own 1998 Population Representation in the Military Services report suggests that many recruits enroll for lack of more attractive economic opportunities:
Because the U.S. economy has enjoyed a spate of economic success the past few years, with low unemployment rates and increased job opportunities for more and varied groups, the supply of quality military applicants has been tight. The economic detractors from recruiting are compounded by growing college enrollment rates among youth of enlistment age. Without the draft to press youth into service, the military must compete for qualified recruits. While a military career, or even one term of service, offers many tangible and intangible benefits to include pay, job training, educational opportunities, adventure, discipline, and pride, it carries significant burdens not the least of which include separation from family, danger, and other routine hardships. <...> Without the draft to call varied segments of society into service, the over- or underrepresentation of various ethnic/racial and economic subgroups in the military is to be expected. <...> The military may find that as Blacks have more economic options available to them, fewer numbers may enlist. <...> Because the military relies exclusively on volunteers for its personnel, it must recognize and work with these societal trends. Understanding the economic opportunities available to different groups, the population projections of ethnic and racial minorities, and various other population trends will provide the military with some of the information necessary to understand its future recruiting and personnel needs.
<...>
Without the draft to call varied segments of society into service, the over- or underrepresentation of various ethnic/racial and economic subgroups in the military is to be expected.
The military may find that as Blacks have more economic options available to them, fewer numbers may enlist.
Because the military relies exclusively on volunteers for its personnel, it must recognize and work with these societal trends. Understanding the economic opportunities available to different groups, the population projections of ethnic and racial minorities, and various other population trends will provide the military with some of the information necessary to understand its future recruiting and personnel needs.
Before this asinine war, I would never have believed that the U.S. could be so demented as to get involved in another military adventure like this. But now that it has demonstrated otherwise, it is only right to prepare for the grim likelihood that brutes and boneheads in the upper echelons of power will yet again try to move the U.S. into war, and if they succeed, then the costs of that mistake should not be borne disproportionately by those unfortunate enough to have little choice but to join the military in order to obtain a decent* livelihood.
Once such arrangements have been put in place -- i.e. the institution of a draft that would make all able-bodied young men and women eligible regardless of education, wealth, connections to power, etc. -- hopefully that will concentrate the minds of any would-be warmongerers in the future. However, even if they succeed in going forward with war anyway, well then it won't just be the poor and otherwise socioeconomically disadvantaged who will have to pay for the mistakes of our militaristic leaders (and those of us who supported them.)
*(Although even that is subject to debate.) Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
