Military Draft: Patriotism or Genocide

Forcing citizens to participate in a war that they have not opted to be in is unfair. Drafting people for war does not guarantee that there will be peace. Efforts by volunteers are more reliable than that of draftees. With important factors such as these, drafting would be foolish.

A decision as important as risking one's life for your country should be made by one's self, being obligated to participate is unfair. The draft, however, deprives the citizen of his or her choice on whether they should risk their life or not. Rangel believes that since some Americans are already in the war, others should be drafted so they can be equivalent to the soldier's already participating in the war. These lives that could be drafted are human, not chess pieces in a simple game for the President. He would be given an enormous amount of bodies to play with, which is just wrong. Politically wrong judgments such as this draft leave American citizens with a stained perspective on their country. -Patricia Smith p. 16

Furthermore, who is to say that a draft will keep peace? Drafting has the purpose to increase the amount of people serving for our country. Thus, more people to participate in the war would result in more casualties. Generals and admirals, themselves, already disagree with the draft, considering that it would develop structural and management problems. Also, draftees that oppose the war, combined with the volunteers who obviously care for the war, could create a clash. Arguments over opinions on the war could lead to more trouble within the army itself. Overall, the draft would be more of a hindrance than actual peace-keeping.-Tim Kane p. 2

Despite the increase in units, that does not mean that the army will be a better force. Draftees may enhance the size of the army, but are they as committed as the volunteers? No. If they were, they would have been volunteers, themselves. Volunteers dedicate themselves to their duty and may even consider careers in the army. Usually, volunteers have previously participated in the army; therefore, they have more experience and will do their duties more efficiently than draftees. Also, if there was no draft, it would be much easier to train since there would be fewer people than if there was a draft. As a result, a draft would set back the army rather than enhancing it.-Patricia Smith p. 14

In conclusion, the draft should not be reinstated. Fairness is violated by taking the people's choice on whether they want to serve for their country or not. Peace, a main objective in our world is not promised just because of a draft, it can actually add to the turmoil in this tough situation. Drafting people would not give the same commitment as those given by volunteers. As you can see, a draft is not the best of interest for America, considering it would do more harm than it would good.