Armed Services chairman: Cuts could mean draft

[Dos Equis]

 

Armed Services chairman: Cuts could mean draft
By DONNA CASSATA, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Armed Services Committee chairman is warning that further reductions to projected defense spending could make a military career so unattractive that it would force the Pentagon to revive the draft.

Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., suggested that spending cuts beyond the $350 billion that President Barack Obama and Congress agreed to in the debt accord this past summer could force the military to slash the number of service members, now some 2.3 million, including National Guard and reserves.

A special bipartisan committee is trying to come up with $1.5 trillion in spending cuts from all government spending. If it fails, or if Congress rejects its proposal, automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion would kick in, with half coming from defense.

"We also need to understand what it's going to mean to keep an all-volunteer force. Do we want to reinstitute the draft? Some of the cuts we're talking about would take over 200,000 out" McKeon said Monday in an interview with Fox News.

The military draft ended in 1973 as the U.S. switched to an all-volunteer force after the Vietnam War. In the decades since, some in Congress have suggested reviving the draft, but the Pentagon has rejected the idea and efforts have gone nowhere with Republicans or Democrats.

McKeon fears that defense cuts would force the Pentagon to reduce the size of the force, delay improvements for weapons and slice military benefits, steps that would made a military career far less attractive to recruits.

"Our troops that go outside the line over in Afghanistan every day should not be having to think about what their retirement's going to be, what their pension's going to be, are they going to be able to stay in the military," McKeon said.

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., chairman of the Armed Services personnel subcommittee, on Wednesday expressed concerns about defense cuts but said a draft was unnecessary.

"I'm concerned that the cuts are so devastating to our national security that almost any negative consequence can arise, but I actually have supported and continue to support as a budget-cutting measure elimination of the Selective Service," Wilson said in an interview.

The lawmaker, who attended the Marine Corps graduation at Parris Island last Friday, said service members are volunteering even in a time of two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"We have the new greatest generation," Wilson said. "We don't need as large a military due to the technology we have, the equipment we have outfitting our personnel. They really are storm troopers."

Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts said "there are savings to be had in the military. The all-volunteer Army seems to be working pretty well. Reinstating the draft? I don't know what that accomplishes."

In recent weeks, McKeon suggested that he might back an increase in revenue through taxes to avoid deeper cuts in defense.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jreris8KcHrtlwBJ7d3humdGftIg?docId=2417bde6d73f4ee5930ea7d6555e1e17

[Deicide]

Armed Services chairman: Cuts could mean draft
By DONNA CASSATA, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Armed Services Committee chairman is warning that further reductions to projected defense spending could make a military career so unattractive that it would force the Pentagon to revive the draft.

Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., suggested that spending cuts beyond the $350 billion that President Barack Obama and Congress agreed to in the debt accord this past summer could force the military to slash the number of service members, now some 2.3 million, including National Guard and reserves.

A special bipartisan committee is trying to come up with $1.5 trillion in spending cuts from all government spending. If it fails, or if Congress rejects its proposal, automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion would kick in, with half coming from defense.

"We also need to understand what it's going to mean to keep an all-volunteer force. Do we want to reinstitute the draft? Some of the cuts we're talking about would take over 200,000 out" McKeon said Monday in an interview with Fox News.

The military draft ended in 1973 as the U.S. switched to an all-volunteer force after the Vietnam War. In the decades since, some in Congress have suggested reviving the draft, but the Pentagon has rejected the idea and efforts have gone nowhere with Republicans or Democrats.

McKeon fears that defense cuts would force the Pentagon to reduce the size of the force, delay improvements for weapons and slice military benefits, steps that would made a military career far less attractive to recruits.

"Our troops that go outside the line over in Afghanistan every day should not be having to think about what their retirement's going to be, what their pension's going to be, are they going to be able to stay in the military," McKeon said.

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., chairman of the Armed Services personnel subcommittee, on Wednesday expressed concerns about defense cuts but said a draft was unnecessary.

"I'm concerned that the cuts are so devastating to our national security that almost any negative consequence can arise, but I actually have supported and continue to support as a budget-cutting measure elimination of the Selective Service," Wilson said in an interview.

The lawmaker, who attended the Marine Corps graduation at Parris Island last Friday, said service members are volunteering even in a time of two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"We have the new greatest generation," Wilson said. "We don't need as large a military due to the technology we have, the equipment we have outfitting our personnel. They really are storm troopers."

Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts said "there are savings to be had in the military. The all-volunteer Army seems to be working pretty well. Reinstating the draft? I don't know what that accomplishes."

In recent weeks, McKeon suggested that he might back an increase in revenue through taxes to avoid deeper cuts in defense.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jreris8KcHrtlwBJ7d3humdGftIg?docId=2417bde6d73f4ee5930ea7d6555e1e17

Well, at least the wars will end quickly then...

[headhuntersix]

Yeah...I'll have you looking for mines by foot.

[Deicide]

Yeah...I'll have you looking for mines by foot.

The draft was one of the major reasons the Vietnam war ended. No doubt if it were reinstituted the wars many people either approve of or are indifferent to would find an end quickly, that said there should be no draft.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

Armed Services chairman: Cuts could mean draft
By DONNA CASSATA, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Armed Services Committee chairman is warning that further reductions to projected defense spending could make a military career so unattractive that it would force the Pentagon to revive the draft.

Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., suggested that spending cuts beyond the $350 billion that President Barack Obama and Congress agreed to in the debt accord this past summer could force the military to slash the number of service members, now some 2.3 million, including National Guard and reserves.

A special bipartisan committee is trying to come up with $1.5 trillion in spending cuts from all government spending. If it fails, or if Congress rejects its proposal, automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion would kick in, with half coming from defense.

"We also need to understand what it's going to mean to keep an all-volunteer force. Do we want to reinstitute the draft? Some of the cuts we're talking about would take over 200,000 out" McKeon said Monday in an interview with Fox News.

The military draft ended in 1973 as the U.S. switched to an all-volunteer force after the Vietnam War. In the decades since, some in Congress have suggested reviving the draft, but the Pentagon has rejected the idea and efforts have gone nowhere with Republicans or Democrats.

McKeon fears that defense cuts would force the Pentagon to reduce the size of the force, delay improvements for weapons and slice military benefits, steps that would made a military career far less attractive to recruits.

"Our troops that go outside the line over in Afghanistan every day should not be having to think about what their retirement's going to be, what their pension's going to be, are they going to be able to stay in the military," McKeon said.

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., chairman of the Armed Services personnel subcommittee, on Wednesday expressed concerns about defense cuts but said a draft was unnecessary.

"I'm concerned that the cuts are so devastating to our national security that almost any negative consequence can arise, but I actually have supported and continue to support as a budget-cutting measure elimination of the Selective Service," Wilson said in an interview.

The lawmaker, who attended the Marine Corps graduation at Parris Island last Friday, said service members are volunteering even in a time of two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"We have the new greatest generation," Wilson said. "We don't need as large a military due to the technology we have, the equipment we have outfitting our personnel. They really are storm troopers."

Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts said "there are savings to be had in the military. The all-volunteer Army seems to be working pretty well. Reinstating the draft? I don't know what that accomplishes."

In recent weeks, McKeon suggested that he might back an increase in revenue through taxes to avoid deeper cuts in defense.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jreris8KcHrtlwBJ7d3humdGftIg?docId=2417bde6d73f4ee5930ea7d6555e1e17

Won't be anytime soon.  Recruitment is on the high due to the unemployment rate so they won't have any trouble with enlistments

[Dos Equis]

Won't be anytime soon.  Recruitment is on the high due to the unemployment rate so they won't have any trouble with enlistments

Oh I'm pretty sure the ridiculous changes that have been floating around would dramatically affect recruiting and retention (especially retention). 

[headhuntersix]

Our involvement in Vietnam ended in 1973 because the war was left unfunded by Congress.  We had still fought 8 plus years there. The anti-war movement was pretty much done a few years before then, it hadn't made alot of difference despite what those involved thought. We'd invaded Cambodia...operations in Laos....bombed Hanoi...etc etc well into the early 70's...well after the height of the anti-war movement. People will have more skin in the game but people will still draft dodge, get deferments and the same types of people who serve now...will still serve drafted or not.

[Dos Equis]

Our involvement in Vietnam ended in 1973 because the war was left unfunded by Congress.  We had still fought 8 plus years there. The anti-war movement was pretty much done a few years before then, it hadn't made alot of difference despite what those involved thought. We'd invaded Cambodia...operations in Laos....bombed Hanoi...etc etc well into the early 70's...well after the height of the anti-war movement. People will have more skin in the game but people will still draft dodge, get deferments and the same types of people who serve now...will still serve drafted or not.

I agree.