I just want it to become an issue. If we had a draft, or at least a serious possibility there would be a draft, then the country would pay more attention to the stupid things the government does. People should be outraged at the things this government does in its' name, but for the most part the populace is opiated by fast food, electronic gadgets, and a flood of entertainment (I use that word loosely). If there was a draft, there would be resistance, and that would lead to increased scrutiny of the government (it's not just the administration, Congress seems incapable of challenging the president). If a draft was on the table, there would be protests and higher voter participation and maybe even accountability. Well, two out of three wouldn't be bad.

I nevert thought I would ever argue in favour of a draft (I was a conscientous objector in my European homeland) ... but after seeing the development towards the Iraq war, I am in favor. Going to war should be a last resort. All voters and all elected officials have to know: if we are going to war, friends and family members may die for this cause. The Iraq war happened in part because not many among the politicians and in the public discussion thought that injuries or casualties could affect their families.

i think you're on to something. let's change the "no draft - majority happy with this policy" to one which the voters don't want, just to increase voter unhappiness with the government.

that's inspired political thought. you could be the karl rove of the democrats.

but why stop with the draft? here is my own list of government policies which should be changed, if we want to accelerate the revolution:

• you can't go to private school - every kid is stuck in public school, until he drops out, gets assaulted, or his SAT scores are so low that he only qualifies for community college. no escape for the rich
• no federal income tax deductions/exemptions for things like state income tax, property tax, having kids, paying a mortgage, moving expenses, etc. just send us 25% of your income and shut up.
• strictly enforce the 65 mph speed limit. $10 fine and 1 point on your license for every 1 mph you're over the limit. not only will this save lives, but it'll save planet earth, too (the carbon thing)
• government censors rule - no howard stern. no movies higher than "PG" on cable, even late at night. all questionable websites out of business. Janet Jackson? - put a fatwa on her. and so on and so forth.
• no expedited passports, to build on the slate outrage thing - oops, my bad, we already give equivalently shitty service to everyone there.
• vote or die. hey - this worked in saddam's iraq. and he had like a 99.5% voter approval rating in his last election, despite 80% of the population being oppressed shi'ites and kurds.

are we there yet - would these measures be enough to cause a civil war? they seem well aligned with any military draft proposals, imho

I agree with you that the disconnect from active participation with and holding the government accountable is a problem. I find it odd that there isn't a mandatory military service prior to university entrance and that it should include ALL genders in the USNA. The world has never been a nice or safe place and it is a pragmatic government that realises that in the place of a standing army, its citizenry needs to be prepared and trained. The advantages of mandatory military service would become evident with natural disasters and tragedies such as 911. Service could also provide a foundation that is missing in the lives of many of the USNA's youth. Just some thoughts.

Not sure why I'm replying, I just thought some of your points were funny.

• Strictly enforcing speed limits is a good idea. At this point you're never sure whether the speed limit is really 55 or whether you won't get ticketed until 65. If we actually set the limits to something reasonable and strictly enforced them, people may actually pay attention. Of course everything wouldn't be 65, and it would be a state/local issue, not federal, but it's a good idea. Actually, this is how it works in Germany (except on the Autobahn).
• The government censors rule sounds like it would be more popular with social conservatives than the left. Who was outraged about Janet Jackson's nipple?
• Your no tax deductions idea actually seems to be the position of most of the Republican candidates. They want to "simplify the tax code" by setting a flat tax or "fair tax" and getting rid of all of the deductions that politicians play around with. I'm not sure this would be a horrible or unpopular idea as long as lower and middle-class Americans don't pay more in taxes and it is a progressive system (it wouldn't be under Republicans because they hate poor people, natch).

it is an issue -- Charile Rangel (democrat from NYC brought it up),and he is the only one yacking about it -- we will not have a draft -- will take an act of congress and a signature by the President to get one -- do you really think they have the b---s to try and put that on the table?

There is a difference between making the draft an issue for public debate and the suggestions you make - a veto-proof majority of Americans (well, greater than 60%, we obviously don't have a direct veto capability) want to end the "war". The only way the "war" can be successful is with a lot more troops than a volunteer military can provide. I use quotes around **war** because it isn't a war, it is an occupation of a foreign territory. It's not even a nation any more, which is why winning the war is not possible - there is no opponent that can give up. There is no entity that can surrender or say we won, so we can't call it a war. We can't even call it a stalemate.

I understand the Rove reference, but I don't believe it applies here. The point of debating a draft is to make the American public aware of the human cost of the occupation. Rove brought many issues to the public spotlight to deflect attention from the never-ending myriad of mistakes being committed by the Bush administration. That tactic worked almost every single time - except for the immigration issue. He thought it would be a rallying cry for Republicans, but it turns out that opinion on immigration "reform" is not divided among party lines, but rather on purely emotional reasons (there is no right or wrong solution, only one that you like or dislike). But I digress, we're talking about the draft, not the one political mistake Karl Rove made during his W project.

Congress has not held the bush administration accountable for all of its mistakes, in fact they have shared much of the blame. I WANT to see our government held accountable for their actions, and if that takes making the draft an election issue, I'm ok with that. I don't think it's going to happen, as all of the candidates (except for maybe McCain - is he still running?) will be against the draft, as part of the continuing "we're America, we can have whatever we want and not have to worry about paying for it" attitude. But for those who still favor a war and are against a draft, it would be interesting to hear them explain how "success" in Iraq can be achieved with the number of troops we currently have there.

funny, only one mention of the sexist and discriminatory practice of drafting only MALES...do you know that even now, at a time of no draft, that every single male must upon his 18th birthday submit all his personal information and indeed himself to the selective service admin. or face PRISON? probably not, because it only pertains to MALES and is not considered important...i wonder if the other gender were the only ones selected if there would be more interest......

Hey in Israel there is an equal opportunity mandatory military service. Perhaps young USNA males should protest based on gender discrimination.

perhaps if females wanted REAL equailty, they would be the ones protesting.....

That the female gender is not considered for the draft nor are they (women) concerned with the omission does gender equality disservice. It is interesting to note that even the most rabid feminst in the USNA will not waste tongue discussing this patronising exclusion.

my point exactly.

for those of you who want the war to end, its simple..send 4000 dead females home in rubber bags..we would be out of there tomorrow....

As mcuh as that seems like a solution you know darned well that double ew made the situtaion in Iraq so complecated that immideate extraction is impossible.

BTW, thanks for the challenge I am going to grab a selective service registration at the post office on the way home this evening. I may be too old but am curious as to the response I may get.

they will accept all commers, however age is considered. however, only MALES are forced to register under penalty of law....