Selective Service eyes women's draft
The proposal would also require registration of critical skills

By ERIC ROSENBERG
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- The chief of the Selective Service System has proposed registering women for the military draft and requiring that young Americans regularly inform the government about whether they have training in niche specialties needed in the armed services.

The proposal, which the agency's acting Director Lewis Brodsky presented to senior Pentagon officials just before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, also seeks to extend the age of draft registration to 34 years old, up from 25.

The Selective Service System plan, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, highlights the extent to which agency officials have planned for an expanded military draft in case the administration and Congress would authorize one in the future.

"In line with today's needs, the Selective Service System's structure, programs and activities should be re-engineered toward maintaining a national inventory of American men and, for the first time, women, ages 18 through 34, with an added focus on identifying individuals with critical skills," the agency said in a Feb. 11, 2003, proposal presented to senior Pentagon officials.

Brodsky and Richard Flahavan, the agency's director of public and congressional affairs, reviewed the six-page proposal with Pentagon officials responsible for personnel issues. They included Charles Abell, principal deputy undersecretary for personnel and readiness, and William Carr, deputy undersecretary for military personnel policy.

The agency officials acknowledged that they would have "to market the concept" of a female draft to Congress, which ultimately would have to authorize such a step.

Dan Amon, a spokesman for the Selective Service System, based in Arlington, Va., said that the Pentagon has taken no action on the proposal to expand draft registration.

"These ideas were only being floated for Department of Defense consideration," Amon said. He described the proposal as "food for thought" for contingency planning.

Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jane Campbell, a spokeswoman for the Defense Department, said the Pentagon "has not agreed to, nor even suggested, a change to Selective Service's current missions."



Nonetheless, Flahavan said the agency has begun designing procedures for a targeted registration and draft of people with computer and language skills, in case military officials and Congress authorize it.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, say they oppose a revival of the military draft, last used in 1973 as the American commitment in Vietnam waned, beginning the era of the all-volunteer force.

Mandatory registration for the draft was suspended in 1975 but was resumed in 1980 by President Carter after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. About 13.5 million men, ages 18 to 25, currently are registered with the Selective Service.

"I don't know anyone in the executive branch of the government who believes that it would be appropriate or necessary to reinstitute the draft," Rumsfeld said last month.

At present, the Selective Service is authorized to register only young men and they are not required to inform the government about any professional skills. Separately, the agency has in place a special registration system to draft health care personnel in more than 60 specialties into the military if necessary in a crisis.

Some of the skill areas where the armed forces are facing "critical shortages" include linguists and computer specialists, the agency said. Americans would then be required to regularly update the agency on their skills until they reach age 35.

Individuals proficient in more than one critical skill would list the skill in which they have the greatest degree of competency.

Why not draft women? Raise the age limits? Again, why not?

If we are to have a draft I am 100% for drafting women alongside men. And I have no problem with raising the age.

I have a problem with the draft in general.

Imagine a military where the soldiers are paid well, get great benefits and their families are taken care of while the soldiers are away from home. Imagine a military where injured and disabled veterens where taken care of and honored instead of shuffled off to poorly funded veteren hospitals or given barely enough disability to survive on. Imagine a miliary that stands behind it's soldiers. Like granting help for agent orange poisening rather than denying it ever existed. Imagine a military where soldiers weren't threatened to re-enlist but were actually rewarded for re-enlisting.

Now if we had a military like that there would be little need for a draft. People would see advantages to enlisting. A way to better themselves and take care of their families. In my oppinion, anyone that enlists in the military deserves these things.

After WWII, the government created some great veterens benies (though not enough), but most of those have slowly been taken away or striped to being almost worthless (like the college tuition benefit).

When I was 18, I went into the service because back then the veterens benefits paid 100% of my college. I probubly would not have enlisted otherwise. In my generation, a large majority of people enlisted for exactly that reason.

The problem with the draft as it was practiced during the Vietnam era was one of fairness. The children of the wealthy could avoid the draft by a combination of deferments, and preferential enlistments in the National Guard that were not generally available. Political influence moved some individuals to the head of the waiting lists for enlistments in such "Champaigne Units". Women were not subject to the draft at all. At most times, married men with children were also not subject to the draft during that era. Also homosexuality was an instant disqualification.
I am not opposed to a draft in principle. If we are to have a draft, however, it should be "fair". There should be no exceptions for political connections, wealth, gender, or sexual preference. The ban on gays in the military would have to be changed. Since this would result in a military that would consist of the children of the rich and powerful, as well as the children of the working class, wars would be more carefully considered. George Bush might have been more careful in invading Iraq if his daughters were subject to a draft.
Given human nature, such a draft would be nearly impossible to implement. Parents will do everything they can to help their children. Human beings administer the selective service system, and humans are corruptible. Serious penalties would have to be instituted for those who seek to influence the process, or those who grant favors while administering the process. All in all, if we are going to have a draft, we need to have a national debate on what is fair.

What will really be great is if the neocons get a draft and still don't allow gays to serve. That will totally fuck with their goals. Instead of being discriminatory to gays it would help them. Neocans would hate that. Millions of Americans will claim to be gay to avoid serving. The right wings discriminatory ways will come back to bite them.
LOL

Don't worry...if the draft comes back, I'm sure they will get rid of Don't Ask Don't Tell. In fact, they will probably send the gay people for first.

Originally posted by Idioteque
Don't worry...if the draft comes back, I'm sure they will get rid of Don't Ask Don't Tell. In fact, they will probably send the gay people for first.

LOL - That would solve their problem of having to give them equal rights.