Persusaive Esasay - Military Draft

The reinstatement of a military draft is a controversial issue that has surfaced in American society. Although a draft would challenge the liberties granted to us in the Constitution and be detrimental to our society, some people believe that a draft would be insignificant to all the benefits we receive as American citizens, and that the draft can be utilized as an effective tool.

People that argue that the draft needs to be reestablished have a strong base for their commanding arguments. Some believe that serving in the military is a civil duty, and to live in this country one must defend it. That patriotism is illustrated in this quote by George Washington, "It must be laid down as a primary position and the basis of our (democratic) system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free Government owes not only a proportion of his property, but even his personal service to the defence of it" (Gill). Although not completely relevant to events of today it still emphasizes the fact that we as Americans need to serve our country if we expect the government to serve us. As we, the United States, are at war, people believe that a draft is needed because our "Army is stretched so thin" (Means). An influx of new troops could possibly invigorate the war effort and allow us to pull our young men and women out of Iraq. To go hand in hand with the war in Iraq some seem to think that a draft would open our eyes. A quote in the Boston Globe reads, "Reinstate the military draft and see how quickly the United States ends its war in Iraq" (Vennochi). This again ties to a general concern of the well being of our men and women in arms.

These claims are both logical and understandable. The defense of our country and the protection of those who have taken that responsibility upon themselves is a concern for both sides of this controversy. The welfare and security of the US is a number one priority for both sides, and each has different views on how to achieve that.

A military draft is morally wrong and it also conflicts with the basic principle that has developed the government of our nation, freedom. Would we have fought so zealously for liberty only to be placed under the tyrannical chains of our own government? The draft sends young men, the same young men that we're trying to protect, to the front lines without their consent. If one is forced to do something that they haven't committed to in their own heart and mind then they don't execute their jobs effectively. Would it help to have half-hearted soldiers manning the front line? Would it get us out of the war quicker? This has been witnessed in history in our very own American Revolution as British denizens weren't whole-heartedly for the war and we rose out of the darkness of tyranny triumphant. Another remonstration is the copious amount of people who would be angered at the draft. Would it be wise to create a solution for a problem that would in turn create discrepancies of its own? If we were to create a new draft our war troubles, might, I repeat might, quell our troubles, but in turn it would create new problems for our country. Would you rather deal with a war, or the discontent of millions of your nation's people? Personally, I would rather deal with the former rather than the latter as we have been at war before, and know quite well how to handle ourselves. As for the fact that our Army is stretched too thin, a look back at past events, such as 9-11, demonstrates proof that when needed our nation's people rise to the front lines. After 9-11 we experienced an incursion of volunteers ready to stand and fight for their lady liberty. An article discusses one such person who joined the war against terrorism after 9-11, Pat Tillman. It goes on to say that instead of being an idol for athletes across the nation this NFL player would rather serve his country in the military; Tillman is the quintessential example of American patriotism. This is illustrated in the quote, "Tillman embodies the very essence of the argument opposing the draft. Individuals will enlist to support their country and their way of life when it is warranted" (Chavez). This quote testifies to the fact that the American people will rise to the occasion when the red, white, and blue happens to be in peril.

A stronger claim, as it appeals to the well being of our country, is that selective service would deport some of our best men and women scholars, and contributors to society. Evidence of this is in the quote, "Under Rangel's bill all men and women between the ages of 18 and 26 would be required to serve in the military. The