As a Viet Nam vet and a veteran of BOTH the all volunteer services and a conscript military, I certainly agree that volunteers are preferable to draftees, but not invariably so - does anyone doubt the quality of the troops in WWI or WWII or Korea or, for that matter, the US Civil War? A truly FAIR draft (none of these deferments/alternative service arrangements) would theoretically allow the military to select qualified candidates and to exclude the "riff-raff". It was the rampant use and abuse of deferments during Viet Nam (a political ploy designed to ease resistance to an unpopular war) which made the draft a means of entry into the services for what were politely known as "Category 4's" (i.e., "riff-raff").

And it is the Viet Nam and post-Viet Nam experience which most argues FOR the return of the draft. Volunteer armed forces are an invitation to adventurism. You can go to war and not worry about securing popular support for the war if you have an all-volunteer force. I mean, they're just mercenaries, right? They volunteered, right? BUT, if Mr. and Mrs. America have to contemplate the possibility that THEIR little precious might have to do the dirty work and endure the dangers, you need a lot more compelling reasons to send in the troops. Chances are, as well, that we wouldn't have to fund any resultant war "off budget", either (the way the Iraq fiasco is being paid for), because the pocketbooks open a little wider when the flak jacket your tax dollars are buying is intended to keep your kid alive. Up-armored Hummvees? No problem, my tax cut can wait til Junior gets home...

And if you don't believe me, then ask yourself, if Barbara and Jenna were subject to the draft, would we be in Iraq right now?

THAT is one of the reasons why the Founding Fathers mistrusted a standing Army and put their faith in militias. Going to war is a lark if it isn't your kid getting on the troopship/airplane.