Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Why We Need A Draft
Why We Need a Draft: A Marine’s Lament
He was in the firefights of Fallujah. He saw gaps in America's arsenal that he believes can only be filled when America's elite puts its sons on the battlefield. A plea for selective service.
Web-exclusive commentary
By Cpl. Mark Finelli
Newsweek
Updated: 11:20 a.m. CT Aug 28, 2007
Aug. 28, 2007 - “Maybe we would have only lost those three instead of 13,” I thought to myself on a dusty Friday in Fallujah in early November 2005. I was picking up the pieces of a truck that hours before had been blown apart by an IED, wondering why our equipment wasn’t better and why three more Marines were dead. Ramadan had just ended, the period in which a suicide bomber gets double and triple the virgins for killing himself in the name of jihad, and my weapons company, Second Battalion Second Marines, had lost 13 men in the last two weeks—not from firefights but from roadside bombs likely being imported from Iran. The insurgents were ramping up their technology, and here we were in the same old trucks. At least these didn’t have cloth doors like the ones last year. But seriously, was this the best technology we have?
Just then I noticed a big vehicle driving by, one owned by a private contracting company. This thing made our truck look like a Pinto in a Ferrari showroom. It was huge, heavy, ominous, indestructible. I wanted to commandeer it. I wanted to live in it. If only we were in one of those, I would definitely come home, and a lot of the guys who won’t would too. As it passed I stared at what I would later learn was called the MRAP vehicle (Mine Resistant Ambush Protective Vehicle). I never thought I would see something in Iraq that enticing, but there it was, rumbling past in all its glory.
I looked at my platoon sergeant. “Staff sergeant?”
“Yes, Finelli?”
“Why are the private companies driving around in these things and not the Marine Corps?” He looked at me and gave the universal sign for money, rubbing together his thumb and forefinger. And suddenly, I understood. It became clear on that November Friday in Fallujah that America’s greatest strength, economics, was not in play. A sad realization.
According to the Pentagon, no service personnel have died in an MRAP. So why isn’t every Marine or soldier in Iraq riding in one? Simple economics. An MRAP costs five times more than even the most up-armored Humvee. People need a personal, vested, blood-or-money interest to maximize potential. That is why capitalism has trumped communism time and again, but it is also why private contractors in Iraq have MRAPs while Marines don’t. Because in actuality, America isn’t practicing the basic tenet of capitalism on the battlefield with an all-volunteer military, and won’t be until the reinstitution of the draft. Because until the wealthy have that vested interest, until it’s the sons of senators and the wealthy upper classes sitting in those trucks—it takes more than the McCain boy or the son of Sen. Jim Webb—the best gear won’t get paid for on an infantryman’s timetable. Eighteen months after the Marines first asked for the MRAP, it’s finally being delivered. Though not nearly at the rate that’s needed. By the end of the year, only 1,500 will have been delivered, less than half the 3,900 the Pentagon had initially promised.
It’s not hard to figure out who suffers. The 160,000 servicemen and women in Iraq are the latest generation of Americans to represent their country on the field of battle. And like their predecessors, they are abundantly unrepresented in the halls of power. As a result, they’ve adopted what I find to be a disturbing outlook on their situation: many don’t want the draft because they believe it will ruin the military, which they consider their own blue-collar fraternity. They have heard the horror stories from their dads and granddads about “spoiled” rich officers. Have no doubt: there is a distinct disdain for networked America among the fighting class of this country. When a politician would come on TV in the Camp Fallujah chow hall talking about Iraq, the rank-and-file reaction was always something like, “Well, I am blue-collar cannon fodder to this wealthy bureaucrat who never got shot at and whose kids aren’t here. But I know I am making America safer, so I’ll do my job anyway.” And they do, and have been for the last three and a half years, tragically underequipped but always willing to fight.
The real failure of this war, the mistake that has led to all the malaise of Operation Iraqi Freedom, was the failure to not reinstitute the draft on Sept. 12, 2001—something I certainly believed would happen after running down 61 flights of the South Tower, dodging the carnage as I made my way to the Hudson River [I worked at the World Trade Center as an investment adviser for Morgan Stanley at the time]. But President Bush was determined to keep the lives of nonuniformed America—the wealthiest Americans, like himself—uninterrupted by the war. Consequently, we have a severe talent deficiency in the military, which the draft would remedy immediately. While America’s bravest are in the military, America’s brightest are not. Allow me to build a squad of the five brightest students from MIT and Caltech and promise them patrols on the highways connecting Baghdad and Fallujah, and I’ll bet that in six months they could render IED’s about as effective as a “Just Say No” campaign at a Grateful Dead show.
On a macro level, we are logistically weakened by the lack of a draft. It takes six to seven soldiers to support one infantryman in combat. So, you are basically asking 30,000 or so “grunts” to secure a nation of 26 million. I assure you, no matter who wins the 2008 election, we are staying in Iraq. But with the Marine Corps and the Army severely stressed after 3.5 years of desert and urban combat in Iraq—equipment needs replacing, recruitment efforts are coming up short—you tell me how we're going to sustain the current force structure without the draft? The president’s new war czar, Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, essentially said as much earlier this month, when he announced that considering the draft “makes sense.”
Of course, the outcry was swift and predictable. America has rejected selective service before, though always in the guise of antiwar movements. But they should really be viewed as antidraft movements, and they existed, en masse, when the wealthy could buy their way out of serving—as Teddy Roosevelt’s father and his ilk did during the Civil War, or as countless college kids did during the deferment-ridden Vietnam conflict. Not every draftee has to be a front-line Marine or soldier, but history shows us that most entrepreneurial young men, faced with a fair draft, almost always chose the front. A deferment draft, however, is a different story, and ultimately counterproductive because of the acrimony it breeds. By allowing the fortunate and, often, most talented to stay home, those who are drafted feel less important than what they are asked to die for. At the end of the day, it was this bitterness that helped fuel the massive antiwar movement that pushed Nixon to end the draft in ‘73.
I don’t favor a Vietnam-style draft, where men like the current vice president could get five deferments. I am talking about a World War II draft, with the brothers and sons of future and former presidents answering the call (and, unfortunately, dying, as a Roosevelt and a Kennedy once did) on the front line. That is when the war effort is maximized. Quite simply, the military cannot be a faceless horde to those pulling the purse strings of our great economy.
The draft would even hasten a weaning away from foreign oil, I believe, if more Americans felt the nausea that I do every time I go to the pump and underwrite the people who have nearly killed me five times. This war on the jihadists needs to be more discomforting to the average American than just bad news on the tube. Democracies at war abroad cannot wage a protracted ground operation when the only people who are sacrificing are those who choose to go. This is the greatest lesson of my generation. Young Americans: you may not want to kill jihadists, but they are interested in killing you and your loved ones. Wake up.
Cpl. Mark Finelli is an inactive, noncommissioned Marine Corps officer who served in Iraq from July 2005 to February 2006. He is currently writing a book about surviving 9/11 and fighting in Iraq.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Ideally pulling out of Middle East would be the most favorable option. However, he does make a valid point that despite whoever does win the 2008 election, we'll still be there. Bush has put us in a situation that one can't just bounce out of. As for reinstating the draft, if things really are becoming grim and prospects are low, then I agree a draft is in order. Definitely a World War II type draft, because then everyone will have to go, not just the poor. As to talks about women being drafted, I believe that is strictly wrong on more than one level. I'm as big an equal rights supporter as any, however there are some places where men excel more than women and war happens to be one of them. And yes I am aware that sounds sexist, but I am a female, and the thought of killing someone, or being shot at, I honestly don't have what it takes.
I don't know how I feel about the draft. I would like tp think that I would rise to defend my country to the death if I was called, but no one wants to patrol the dangerous streets of bagdad. The draft would be a good shock to the american system. I hear my grandparents talking about how society today isn't involved with the war. To the it was your duty to save money for war bonds and use food stamps. They say, witch is hard to disagree, that we have the mind set that the war is all the out there. I can't help but agree the draft would unify and empower but at what cost?
Phonebook you are ignoring the part where he says: "It takes six to seven soldiers to support one infantryman in combat." A draft that ignores women is unjust, but this does not mean that women have to be on the front line or even near the front line. There are many different jobs that women could fill without being put in harms way.
It sounds to me that Mark Finelli wants to reinstate the draft just to get money for the military. Of course, he did talk about wanting to maximize the war effort and ending the war sooner; but it's almost like he is saying that the way to do this is by drafting the wealthy then forcing their parents to pay to keep them alive. I know we need new equipment to keep our troops safe and I want our troops to come home alive just as much as any other American but there has to be a better way to raise money. If we are going to reinstate the draft, I think it should be strictly because we need the man-power to resolve this war and keep Americans safe.
I think the draft should be considered because I think Mark brings up a good point when he says a troop of MIT students compared to a troop of high school drop outs would be much more affective. and unless we institute a draft similar to the WWII draft those people won't be sent over. it is also true that the only realistic way to get more money in the military is to send the rich kids unlike what Suzie j said. there isn't any other realistic way to raise that amount of money short of raising taxes and I know you don't want that
I think not pulling out of the Middle East is a matter of pride for Bush. I think he doesn't want the public to see what this war really is: a waste of time, money, and innocent lives.
What are we fighting for again? Peace? Is it just me, or is that ridiculously ironic?
The draft is something that should never EVER have to happen. I am appalled that it was used in history, and even MORE appalled that it is possibly going to be used now. Suddenly the land of the Free* doesn't seem so free, does it? Why should I have to fight and risk my life for a war that I don't believe in? I would risk my life for a noble cause; the war in the Middle East is NOT, in my opinion, noble.
*some restrictions may apply.
Reinstating the draft should not be the top thing on America's list nor do I believe it should be reinstated. From this article I gathered a draft like WWII would bring people of money to the lines and therefore would bring money to the troops... but I have to think even if it is a draft resemebling the WWII draft instead of the Vietnam draft that small percentage of the American population that would have enough money to fulfill the needs of our armed forces, would be using their money to pay off and keep their sons and/or daughters out of the war. I know that it seems to be if we use the WWII type of draft vs. the Vietnam one then we will be more likely to have everyone involved but in todays society it's all about who you know and how much money you have so it would still be possible for the rich to stay of fighting therefore defeating the whole purpose of the draft and sending more middle and lower class people overseas.
On the point that the draft would make Americans feel the war more or be more affected by it therefore having more action taken and bringing an end to the war, I have one thought. This thought is that troops are sent over to fight to keep America safe and at this point we are feeling safe and therefore not feeling the severity of the war so it seems to me that the troops are doing a pretty good job. Plus bringing an end to the war doesn't lie in the people of America's hands, it lies in the reconstruction and the ability of the people in Iraq to grasp the concept of rebuilding their country to the point we feel comfortable enough to leave.
I have one last thing... the only way I would feel the draft justified is if it was used so we were able to continue our work in Iraq and take soldiers to Darfur and such places and begin to help the people there, for I believe there is a situation that needs to be solved. We study history so we can try not to repeat the disasters and I believe it was stated we would never let anything like the Holocaust happen again and in Darfur it has happened again and our military and government has taken very little if any action to solve and rescue these people... And that is the only cause I believe would be reason to reinstate the draft.
I definitely support the draft. I mean if i was old enough, i would join no question abotu it. I think its because in my view we live in a country that was basically given to us on a silver platter, everyone already fought the wars for us. i mean world war one and two were both wars were people were drafted, and thats what showed our superiority. The reason we are all stuck up today though is the result from vietnam, and the corporal is right, there shouldn't have been any deferments, because that leaves a loophole, and only the men that truly respect this country and understand freedom isn't free went to fight. The other people were cowards in my mind, and they need to wake up to see that for once in their life, they have to fight to perserve something that people take for granted way to much. But then again thats just my opinion.
In response to ms. courtney- well written, but the views are a tad skewed in my opinion.
The land of the free has not always been free, generations of people fought and gave their lives in order for us to have the freedoms we do today. So yes, it sure is 'the land of the free', perhaps you take it for granted because you didn't have to sacrifice anything for it to be this way.
so, why shouldn't we have to fight for our country? both men and women are taking advantage of the freedom of America, therefore both men and women should have to fight to keep them. The only reason you would not fight for your country is because the war is not effecting you personally. Sounds a little selfish if you ask me?
I've read all of the comments and prolly half of you didn't read the article, you just answered the question.
The author is saying that the troops aren't sufficiently funded and the draft would cause the government to better fund and supply the troops. Also a draft would help to back up the toops already there.
I disagree with any form of any draft. Like Ms.Courtney said, the land of the Free with restrictions. We, as high school students are the targeted age, we are about to graduate (which is when they come out to "pluck" us out and into war). I for one am not at all ready to go and die for a war that I believe strongly never should have happened. We should get out of there as fast as we can.
draft=bad
cuz we haven't deployed our full strength against them in the beginging of the war means that half a decade later we are in deep need of troops? hardly
Post a Comment