Being Less Than They Can Be
More cries of trouble with U.S. troop strength and management (of the sort that, I argue here, make more U.S. wars of choice this year unlikely, or at the very least terribly unwise) coming from Army Reserve chief Lt. Gen. James Helmly in a memo to the Army's chief of staff, says Reuters, via MSNBC. There may, of course, be a fair amount of bureaucratic squeaky-wheelism going on, (he was saying the same thing a year ago as well) but Helmly says the Reserve--200,000 strong, with 52,000 in active duty and 19,000 of those in Iraq or Afghanistan (says the Reuters story--this Baltimore Sun via Newsday story refers to 30,000 reservists in Iraq and Kuwait)--is "degenerating into a 'broken' force"
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
-
Has anyone else noticed that there seems to be a lot more recruiting ads on television?
-
More cries of trouble with U.S. troop strength and management (of the sort that, I argue here, make more U.S. wars of choice this year unlikely, or at the very least terribly unwise)...
I'm not putting out any alert, I'm not saying it's likely, and I'm not endorsing any fear-mongering about Charlie Rangell's favorite issue, but against Brian's confidence I must posit a line I just read in the introduction to The World of Randolph Bourne:
In 1916 Bourne thought "Compulsory military service would require decades of Napoleonic political evangelism to introduce," but within a year conscription was the law of the land.
Not saying it's likely, or probable, just saying it's easier than people think. -
it's easier than people think.
amen. vigilance, people -- and passports handy! -
especially as we're in the midst of
decades of Napoleonic political evangelism -
Y'all aren't even the least bit interested in helping out, are you?
Here are some arguments in favor of conscription.
Conscripts, even unenthusiastic ones, can at least draw fire away from the rest of us, especially me.
Without conscripts, I won't be able to win any campaign ribbons for Syria, Iran, North Korea and Manchuria.
They'll never let me retire until they can get some more soldiers.
We can bring back some good songs. "Got a letter in the mail, go to war or go to jail ..."
C'mon, guys, we're counting on you. -
Y'all aren't even the least bit interested in helping out, are you?
Here are some arguments in favor of conscription.
Conscripts, even unenthusiastic ones, can at least draw fire away from the rest of us, especially me.
Without conscripts, I won't be able to win any campaign ribbons for Syria, Iran, North Korea and Manchuria.
They'll never let me retire until they can get some more soldiers.
We can bring back some good songs. "Got a letter in the mail, go to war or go to jail ..."
C'mon, guys, we're counting on you. -
Ooops, sorry for the double post.
-
Hey, Trooper, how about this:
I knew a lady from Paris France,
had a big hole in her....
What?!!! Who comes up with this filth? Well, here's one that's clean AND educational:
I don't know, but I've been told,
The Parthenon is mighty old. -
"at the very least terribly unwise"
Yeah, that'll stop them. Lessee. Do they draft during your 34th year or until you turn 34? Because I've turned 34 but I'm in my 34th year.
I suppose showing up to the draft board in a dress is a little hackneyed. I can pull off a credible Richard Simmons impersonation. -
Lessee. Do they draft during your 34th year or until you turn 34? Because I've turned 34 but I'm in my 34th year.
Comment by: Brian at January 6, 2005 08:55 PM
You're in your 35th year. Your first year was 0 - 1; your second year was 1 - 2; your third year was 2 - 3;...;your 34th year was 33 - 34; your 35th year is 34 - 35.
34 is a cardinal number, 34th is an ordinal number. -
Jesus, now Cavanaugh is throwing his crap into other people's topics!
-
Heinlein's thoughts on the subject:
Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let damn thing go down the drain!
have to say I agree with him -
Jesus, now Cavanaugh is throwing his crap into other people's topics!
Would you be happier if he created an alias? He could always claim to be a French Marine or an unborn angel... :->
Just kidding! -
Jesus, now Cavanaugh is throwing his crap into other people's topics!
Rude and inaccurate. Tim Cavanugh's articles are certainly not "crap". Also, we should be appreciative of a blog where the editors are engaged with these issues to the extent that they contribute to each other's threads. -
As I am now forty years of age and in possession of my DD-214, I foresee personal gain from bringing back the draft... Of course, I would oppose it on principal.
-
"Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let damn thing go down the drain!"
You people just don't know how to think outside the box. If a volunteer force isn't sufficient to the task, conscription isn't the only alternative - we can just hire a bunch of mercenaries. I expect we could get a bunch of ex-Soviet soldiers who're now out of work on the cheap.
Contracting out govt services and outsourcing are part of the new world order.
LOL -
if you're worried about the draft, it's easy to be 4F.
or do what they did in guthrie's "alice's restaurant" and jump up and down, yelling, "kill".
i'd bet some of ben stein's money could also be used as a bribe to grease yerself out of there...
gil - you're on to something here. -
My plan is to tell them that I'm a French citizen.
-
You people just don't know how to think outside the box. If a volunteer force isn't sufficient to the task, conscription isn't the only alternative - we can just hire a bunch of mercenaries. I expect we could get a bunch of ex-Soviet soldiers who're now out of work on the cheap.
Contracting out govt services and outsourcing are part of the new world order.
Comment by: Gilbert Martin at January 7, 2005 09:06 AM
Back in the mid-1990s, Col. David Hackworth proposed the creation of an American Foreign Legion (it was the cover story of Soldier of Fortune, I don't remember the exact issue). The AFL would allow the U.S. to use military force when risking American lives would not be politically popular. Upon completing a term of service in the AFL, members would be granted American citizenship. -
Heinlein's thoughts on the subject:
Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let damn thing go down the drain!
have to say I agree with him
Comment by: Dave at January 6, 2005 10:57 PM
As long as we're quoting Heinlein, do you also believe that people should serve two years in the military before being granted full citizenship? -
Has anyone else noticed that there seems to be a lot more recruiting ads on television?
Comment by: Ken Shultz at January 6, 2005 04:48 PM
"Join the Navy and see the world (just remember that it's 75% water)." -
Hey Nobody,
The quote I used came from a Heinlein speech in the late 1960's. Your idea comes from a novel we wrote. Many say Troopers is an ode to the Marines, Heinlein being a former Naval Officer who attended the Naval Academy. I think mine more accurately reflects his view.
Regardless of how actually felt about it, I disagree with the draft on that principle. -
we can just hire a bunch of mercenaries
except that a) we're already doing that -- they're called "contractors" in the euphamistic dialect; and b) we already borrow every nickle we spend on this misadventure -- making it more expensive is unwise. -
"except that a) we're already doing that -- they're called "contractors" in the euphamistic dialect;"
Really.
Perhaps you'd care to supply some detail as to exactly what company is providing front-line combat troops, how many of them there are, where they're stationed and what major combat operations they've been directly involved in.
"we already borrow every nickle we spend on this misadventure -- making it more expensive is unwise."
Cash is fungible. We're not "borrowing every nickle" on Iraq expenditures any more than we are on anything else the government spends money on - such as farm price supports. -
"My plan is to tell them that I'm a French citizen."
But then you might get drafted into the french marines. :) -
Gilbert-
Although I'm not aware of many contractors being used for infantry or other front line duties, many of them are playing support roles to free up soldiers for the front lines. Not that there's anything wrong with it. And contractors are being used to perform "security" functions, as I recall.
The more desperate we get, the more contractors we'll move closer to the front lines, and the more responsibility we'll give to "security" contractors.
Oops, sorry, America doesn't get desperate. It's the insurgents in the weeks before the election who get desperate. My bad. -
"Although I'm not aware of many contractors being used for infantry or other front line duties,"
I'm not aware of any at all.
" many of them are playing support roles to free up soldiers for the front lines. Not that there's anything wrong with it. And contractors are being used to perform "security" functions, as I recall."
Yes I'm aware of that - and yes there is indeed nothing wrong with that.
It is the supposed shortage of frontline regular army troops that this thread is about and presumably that function is where any mercenaries would be applied if they were going to be hired.
"The more desperate we get, the more contractors we'll move closer to the front lines, and the more responsibility we'll give to "security" contractors."
We shall see. -
And contractors are being used to perform "security" functions, as I recall.
while much of the behind-the-lines functions are contracted to mercenaries, mr thoreau, these "security" men are ex-military, combat ready and in fact do front-line fighting as well as officer protection. they routinely get into firefights and are killed, frequently without the direct oversight of military command. they have no rules of engagement and are accountable to no one for who they kill and why.
mercenaries are the second-largest "coalition" partner -- yep, more of them than there are british soldiers -- and are consuming about a third of all the expenses of the war. (mercenaries are much more expensive and uncontrollable than soldiers, of course.)
here's the brookings institution's peter singer:
"The U.S. military is stretched thin right now," Singer said. "Do we expect a world in which there will be fewer demands on it? No.
"What we're seeing private companies doing isn't just logistics like serving food," he added. "It's incredibly important things like the supply chain. It's military recruiting and training. It's actual weapons operation."
President Dwight Eisenhower warned in 1961 of the "unwarranted influence" of the so-called military-industrial complex. "The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist," he observed.
"Eisenhower is probably rolling over in his grave these days," Singer said.
I'm not aware of any at all.
that's because, perhaps to a greater extent than anyone else on this board, you're incapable of seeing what you don't wish to believe, mr martin. -
"that's because, perhaps to a greater extent than anyone else on this board, you're incapable of seeing what you don't wish to believe, mr martin."
What I see is that you cannot provide any detail as to what company is providing any front-line troops, how many there are, where they are stationed and what military operations they've been directly involved in operating as front-line troops.
There is no "Halliburton 101st Airbone Division". -
What I see is that you cannot provide any detail as to what company is providing any front-line troops, how many there are, where they are stationed and what military operations they've been directly involved in operating as front-line troops.
did you read any of those links? i sincerely doubt a sensible person could have and come away with the notion that contractors aren't serving as soldiers in the field. not that you particularly have to be sensible.
there's no shame in it, mr martin. every imperial army for ages has resorted to it. you yourself were advocating it earlier in the thread, remember? -
" i sincerely doubt a sensible person could have and come away with the notion that contractors aren't serving as soldiers in the field. not that you particularly have to be sensible."
Sensible people know that contractor personnel who are tasked with security for ancillary support functions and/or personl protection of individuals are not an equivalent to front-line troops who can be (and are) tasked with major offensive military operations as any explcilitly hired mercenary army units would be - as the Hessians used to be to the British Empire. -
Gilbert, in a guerrilla war the difference between
"contractor personnel who are tasked with security for ancillary support functions and/or personl protection of individuals"
and
"front-line troops who can be (and are) tasked with major offensive military operations"
is still real but not as large as it is in other types of conflicts.