US federal court rules male-only draft unconstitutional - Polidicks

Frankly, while I agree with the argument against the government compelling someone to fight, I'm inclined to think that the decision to go to war should involve some measure of collective responsibility. If a conflict is not so necessary that the ordinary citizens of the country need to be called up to fight it, then it shouldn't be happening to begin with. Our country originally had no standing army specifically because the founders had just seen and experienced how standing armies encourage governments to unjustly and unnecessarily project force. Most Americans don't even know just how many active conflicts we're involved in, because unless you have boots-on-the-ground active duty personnel in your immediate family, you'd never notice that we're at war. It's messed up that we can all sit at home and decide, without any risk to ourselves, that someone on the other side of the world is going to die at the hands of someone we've paid to go kill them. If every armed conflict required a public referendum, and the personnel to fight it were drawn from the pool of 'yes' voters, we'd be fighting abroad a hell of a lot less often than we currently do. I don't want to see people being forced at gunpoint to go fight in a conflict they don't believe in, but I don't like war being so consequence-free either, and none of the countries with active conscription seem to have this problem.

don't point out nuance in this thread, the fact that the selective service is a precaution is meaningless in here.

The US has absolutely zero need for any form of draft even if WW3 were to kick off for a bunch of reasons. Namely the fact they have a professional army that's so well-funded it's practicely become a punchline, and that they're allies with a bunch of nations who also harbor significant professional armies of their own, with written accords stating they have to look out for each other. They're not some insular nation with limited resources and manpower facing a comparative behemoth threatening them with invasion 24/7. The need for draft is moot.

I think this is something most people could get behind honestly. It's a fairly simple solution that places the burden of the decision on those who actually support it.

I wouldn't want to be drafted to fight in some conflict the United State of Corporate America drummed up. In a legitimate defense of the US Mainland, or our long standing allies' mainland, I can see it. But the US Government is not responsible enough with that sort of power. Every conflict we get in is not for the US people's interest

Even then it's unreasonable. There would be no shortage of people volunteering in that situation so those who aren't volunteering have zero interest in fighting or otherwise being involved with a war. There is no valid reason for the draft to still be in effect in any way.

There probably is no reason for it. I'd volunteer to defend England against an invasion. Them fuckers get swindled by our government to fight and die in wars we start. As an American, I owe them

I can't imagine any scenario that's realistic where the US absolutely needs to draft or it'll collapse where for some reason the populace doesn't want to volunteer

You live here and benefit from the system. I'm not saying I'd like to be drafted but the social contract is totally consensual, you either accept it and be here or go somewhere without the rule. Not a single one of us (who is an American) is required to be an American here, you can always go somewhere else

Instead of drafting, just hire backwater!

maybe theoretically but economically speaking most people can't emigrating isn't exactly a cheap or easy endeavor

you're gonna have a hard time convincing me that I should accept being drafted as my social duty when the current president used his wealth and connections to avoid it himself lmao

The draft is bullshit, it was bullshit in the 60's and it still is today. Its only used to compel people against their will to fight and die against their will to fulfill a political agenda. Ain't ever gonna be used on the scale as WW1 or WW2 against because of MAD.

Some serious issues with your reasoning here. How many of us Americans chose to be American? I know I sure the hell didn't. I don't recall filling out some pre-birth paperwork about what country I wanted to be born in nor did I ever consent to this draft bullshit. On top of that to become a citizen of another country you need both money to pay for moving as well as marketable skills they consider important. If you're missing one or both of those then you're fucked. So... How exactly can you simply go elsewhere if you don't like it?

not for free lmao

So let me get this straight. The social contract is between you and the government of the country you hold citizenship in, in your case the US, in my case Norway. I'll take a wild guess and say you were born in the US and still live there. Same deal for me, I was born in Norway and live here. So when exactly did you choose to get born in the US? Because I sure as hell didn't choose to get born in Norway. Matter of fact I didn't choose to get born at all. By random chance I am born within the territory of the Norwegian state. So how can I consent to a contract which binds itself to me by the virtue of being born? Renouncing my citizenship isn't a realistic alternative to not using the public services of Norway in order to survive, moving elsewhere isn't either as that requires money. And every piece of livable territory on the earth is claimed by a state. By being born you will be claimed as under the authority of a state regardless of your chances. If being born anywhere binds you to the social contract of the territory you're born in, but being born isn't a choice, how can you consent to the social contract? And furthermore, how can you justify conscription? I'm fortunate enough that Norway's conscription is laughably easy to dodge nowadays. But if I was drafted against my will (and as I am against any form of militarism, all drafting would be against my will), my impulse to not follow any orders and go AWOL at the first opportunity would be an act that would most likely land me prison time. So tell me again, how is the social contract consensual?

There will be no World War 3, it's not a matter of when. Nobody can handle the losses in the global financial sector, and the current designs of military aircraft and armored vehicles are designed for limited engagements, and cannot be manufactured fast enough to be replaced in the event of total war. The whole thing is just too impractical, the weapons we have can't be easily replaced, the world economy is too interconnected to handle disruptions, and everybody and their grandmother has nuclear weapons, so nobody wants to start a huge war in the first place.

I do not give a shit. The US has used the draft to fight a war we had no reason being a part of, where people were used as fodder in a location we had no reason to be in. We haven't had people get drafted in the 90's and 00's because there were enough volunteers. Should we "need" the draft again, there will not be volunteers.

I'm not really justifying the drafting during the Vietnam War, however since then nobody has been pressed into service since reformations. However I don't know why I have to say this again. The Selective Service isn't here to make you join the military, it is a contingency in the worst case scenario that the US military actually would need someone like yourself. Maybe I'm biased since I'm military myself, but you do you.

Because there have been enough volunteers like yourself.

Unpopular opinion apparently, but... Preservation of the state and its people is more important than your own self-interests. This is a price you pay to society by being a part of it. Everyone is subjected to the same rules. That being said, another Vietnam draft is unlikely to happen. Coupled with the growing disinterest in foreign intervention, and the size of our reserves, we have plenty of volunteer power to let idiots have their Middle East campaigns and no real benefit to start any new Desert Storms.

I don't care about preservation of the state. I'll see the state collapse before I pick up a gun for some bureaucrat. I'd rather watch all of our homes get nuked from the safety of literally any other state, than fight for a single moment for the United States. And I'm gonna continue living here until the day that happens because that's not only my freedom, but my right.

Even Mark Twain, a thinker and writer who was pretty much the archetype of an advocate for individual liberty, acknowledged that there may be certain extreme cases when the existence of one's country itself is in peril that individuals are duty-bound to fight to protect it. Of course, Vietnam was definitely not one of those times for the USA, and World War I was questionable.

I don't think we live in a world like that. Collective defense is a requirement for the individual liberty you're appealing to since our rights depend on the existence of a state

Are we all subjected to the same rules though? If you look at the proportion of poor/racial minorities that got drafted in comparison to white/upperclass people in the past then you need to reconsider whether that is true or not. Why would you expect somebody to fight for "freedom" in a state has borderline legal slavery in the form of its current prison industrial complex? Also how do you define benefit? We don't have to move forward as a civilization to create a profitable war. Corporations will reap the profits from war and send the bill to the taxpayers.

The way you phrase it, "the state and its people" make it sound like the state owns the people, which makes the rest of your argument all the more ironic. Should I have to pay a price to society when I had no choice in being part of it? People don't inherently belong to a state. They subordinate themseles to the state because that's the pragmatic thing to do when a) the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence within the territory they control and b) the state also has a virtual monopoly on public services that you might need to survive. Being born within a state more often than not gives you no choice but to go along with its rules, but that doesn't mean it's just, moral or ethical.

Cold weather isn't what saved the Russians in WWII, nor will a bunch of fuckheads up in the rural Midwest be our saving grace. If a nation really saw itself as far more powerful than the USA, we've reason to believe that there's a solid chance that our democracy, however flawed it may be, could be replaced with a government under the control of someone far more evil than Trump. War's of Imperialism don't occur anymore, and there's a reason. If someone confident enough to believe that they could overcome and avoid the mistakes made by the empires of old, then we should assume they're capable of serious destruction.

I feel like the draft makes sense on paper. In extreme situations where the choice is fight or lose everything. I just don't know if I trust the government to not use it for something less than that like Vietnam. I also don't know how many "fight or lose everything" scenarios are possible for the US in this day and age. I'd imagine a war that scale might be nuclear. In that case we're all fucked one way or another as it is.

You honestly think it's possible for anyone to take the lower 48? Really? 'cause any force that tried a hostile invasion of US soil wouldn't just be fighting the US military. They'd be fighting every last US Citizen as well. I know I'd load my Mosin if there was a hostile army on US soil, don't need to sign up for the Army to defend my home from hostile nations when I can see their forces out of my fucking window. And that's precisely why it'd never happen. It's total suicide to try to take US soil by force. The logistics nightmare alone makes it not worth it, but couple that with the absolute bloodbath it'd be and...frankly it's probably easier to take Moscow in January than it is to take DC at all. You're better off trying to do it from behind the scenes, which incidentally enough, seems to be exactly what ol' Vladdy Boi is doing. Why throw conscripts and tanks at a problem you can solve by facebook shitposting a TV star into office?

As little as five years ago I remember seeing people argue that a democracy like the US could never slip into tyranny. Haven't heard that argument in a while. Things can change real quickly. Be careful in assuming that the current state of world affairs will last forever.