Kurtz Posted March 4, 2000 Share Posted March 4, 2000 A war gives you a chance to use up the stores of obsolete ammo that otherwise would have to be scrapped, probably in an expensive way. IIRC, during the Gulf War NATO´s stores in Europe were in effect emptied and not replaced afterwards (at least not Cold War-levels) since the threat from the Soviet Union had diminished. Ahh, the Soviet Union....the Warsaw Pact...those were the days... On the other hand, if you have to replace the ammo you consumed, it would be somewhat more expensive. And don´t forget the opportunity to try out the latest weapon systems on real targets. The Horror! The Horror! How about the Vietnam war, wasn´t there drafts back then? Or did the draft exist anyway, without connection to the conflict? BTW: what does O&M mean? Operations & Manouevre? [This message has been edited by Kurtz (edited 03-04-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted March 5, 2000 Share Posted March 5, 2000 Kurtz, the draft was abolished after Vietnam as a direct result of that conflict. I forget the exact year, but it was mid 1970s IIRC. Basically, the US government abused the priveledge of calling up civilians for military duty and now MUST present a case to the public (through elected reps) before being able to do so. IMHO this is the way it should be. Right now we have a very skilled military force composed of volunteers. If that isn't enough to handle our military needs, fine, but there had better be a damned good reason to increase our military's size through drafting. Simply wanting more warm bodies to chuck into a jungle to never be heard from again is NOT a good reason. Just for more info, every single male (er... and is it now female??) is required to fill out a form at 18. It is called Selective Service and basically puts your name into the system used to call up civilians in the case of a draft. Not filling out for Selective Service is a serious crime, though I don't think it is probably enforced too strongly. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurtz Posted March 5, 2000 Share Posted March 5, 2000 Thanks for the enlightment, Steve, we Europeans know about as much about the American bureaucratic and political system as the average American. That is, not very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted March 5, 2000 Share Posted March 5, 2000 The US draft was officially discontinued at the end of 1976 (about 4 months before I enlisted). Personally, I would support a universal draft of reduced time- I know the Bundeswehr used to have a 15 month service period. While this conflicts with my libertarian inclinations, modern war doesn't always allow time to set up a universal draft and train a bunch of civvies up to snuff. Having a pool of manpower with some basic military clue would expedite mobilization in the event of a real emergency; and from what I saw, society might benefit from a modicum of discipline, universally dished out, at a tender age. I really don't want to debate this here, but there was a good reason for it. No one now seems to believe that we'll ever face another national military emergency, but things have a way of changing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hunt52 Posted March 5, 2000 Share Posted March 5, 2000 As to the Selective Service not being enforced: A guy from my high school threw it away and the police came to his door with another about a week after it was due. - Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted March 5, 2000 Share Posted March 5, 2000 MkIV, to some extent I agree with you. However, now that the BIG threat (i.e. the SU and Warsaw Pact) is gone, there doesn't seem to be a need for a massive fighting force. In fact, we had an all volunteer force during the height of the arms race, and military experts seem to agree that it would have been enough to crush any attack. Point is that if we have a conflict BIGGER than that, we are all doomed regardless of who wins or loses... It also seems that the Bundeswehr is having a lot of problems with recruit quality. Seems there is a lot of dodging and/or conscientious objectors. Too many in fact. It would seem that they need to move to a volunteer force, but then again my understanding of the problems facing the Bundeswehr are superficial. But one fairly recent ex-Bundesheer soldier I know said that if war came he felt he couldn't relly upon his fellow soldiers. Right or wrong, this is not a good opinion to have. Bill, good to hear. Nobody should be allowed to be different in the regard to Selective Service. That is something to be sorted out later if a draft were to ever come into force. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike T Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 An aside on conscription - Both Great Britain and Canada had all volunteer armies for most of WWI until manpower losses forced the adoption of conscription in 1916-17. Canada also had an all volunteer force at the beginning of WW2 and adopted conscription in 1940 but only for home service - until 1944 the actual frontline troops were all volunteer General Service troops and from November '44 til the end conscripts began to trickle forward releasing rear-echelon troops to the frontlines and in the end only 313 casualties were suffered by conscripts (69 fatal). Another interesting aside is Canada's involvement in the Pacific - Approximately June 1945 a cabinet decision was made that only volunteers for the Pacific theater would serve against Japan. This created an interesting problem. HMCS Uganda was serving with the British Pacific Fleet off Okinawa at the time having transferred from the RN to the RCN in October 1944. When a vote was taken among the crew it was found that there were not enough volunteers for duty in the Pacific to keep the ship crewed and thus the Uganda voted itself out of the war, being forced to return to Canada to replace the non-volunteers HAHAHAHA!!! Another aside - the last VC won in the war was won by a Canadian pilot serving in the Fleet Air Arm on HMS Formidable when he was killed in an attack on a Japanese destroyer (which he sank) on August 9th, 1945 - the same day the second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. ------------------ 'Bitter Mike' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babra Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: ...now that the BIG threat...is gone, there doesn't seem to be a need for a massive fighting force...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Famous last words ------------------ Floreat Jerboa ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: Personally, I would support a universal draft of reduced time- I know the Bundeswehr used to have a 15 month service period. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I was in the last badge of Germans drafted for 15 months. The reason Germany still has a daft, err, draft system is political. During the Weimar republic 1918-33, the 100,000 men standing professional army became a state within the state and a big reason for the rise of Hitler. It was impossible for politicians to control it. Now it is believed that the introduction of 'citizens in uniform' helps to keep the army as a part of civil society, that is why Germany has a hard time abolishing the draft, although it is more of a hindrance to overseas ops now. I received 3 months of basic training (admittedly in an Air Force Training Bataillion 1./LAR3) and neither I nor any of my colleagues were fit for any sort of real infantry fighting after that. We had one major outdoors drill which was cut off because of bad weather! I talked to friends who underwent the three year draft of East Germany and I believe that they would have had us for breakfast at any time during the cold war. The best thing I can say about it is that I went through the post high school phase of drinking and being stupid before I came to university But whether that is worth society's expense at running a conscript army is questionable. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 Perception is everything... one reason the DDR & company didn't have you for breakfast is that the Warsaw pact believed it would face a trained, mobilized West that was to some extent prepared. Sometimes its a good idea to look stronger than you really are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 Andreas were you in the infantry? I have worked a bit with some German units (paras and Gebirsjaegers), and they seemed fairly competent, particularly the NCOs and Officers. But it's been a few years now... Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 Andreas were you in the infantry? I have worked a bit with some German units (paras and Gebirsjaegers), and they seemed fairly competent, particularly the NCOs and Officers. But it's been a few years now... Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 Los, I think the paras and mountain troops are exceptions in the modern German Army just as they are, to some extent, in every army. At least the most motivated guys are put in those units and appear to get put through the ringer training wise. Personally, I think the short 15 month service is self defeating. If the German government knows that the vast majority aren't going to stay in the service, and mass conflict is highly unlikely, why bother spending all sorts of money training them correctly? Poor investment from a government expendature point of view. This is one reason the US armed forces tries quite hard to retain its soldiers/sailors/airmen for more than one tour. In fact a couple of weeks ago I saw a program about the US Army's 2nd chance program for troubled new recruits. It is designed to try and keep potential washouts in uniform instead of watching them walk out the door. The major reason for this program? As outlined above, retention of an idividual that the government has made an investment in. Apparently the program is off to a good start and is keeping a fairly high precentage within the military in some capacity or another. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted March 6, 2000 Share Posted March 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Personally, I think the short 15 month service is self defeating. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think Steve is spot on here. AFAIK, it is only ten months now, and with time off and all that effectively only 8 months. Los and MkIV, I was in the Air Force but everybody (in theory) gets the same infantry training, delivered by failed officers who have to serve their remaining tour of four years after failing Bundeswehr University - as you can imagine, they are highly motivated and the cream of the crop . A friend of mine was with the mountaineers and another with the paras (I was saved from that fate by my fitness rating of 2) and they are a breed apart from the rest. The enlisted ranks now send out to Kosovo are volunteers on special 18 or 24 month draft schemes. No draftee has to go unless they sign up for it, but it is sweetened by very high overseas pay. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts