Defending Rangel on the Draft

I was talking with a co-worker today about American military policy and the draft. He likes the idea of ending the war and scaling down the size of the military, which would be expected from someone working for Save Darfur. He then proceeded to deride my NY Congressman Charles Rangel for introducing a proposal to bring back the draft. "Under no circumstances," he said, should anyone be forced to participate in war."

My response: yes and no. As with most issues, the situation fails to fit neatly into a black-or-white worldview. Certainly war is hell, and someone unwillingly dragged into battle can be seen as the victim of a grave injustice. Not to mention a less efficient warrior than a volunteer soldier, and thus harmful to the goals of a nation. However, we must be aware of a different view of the warmongering impulse in contemporary American society. A worldview that champions a policy of aggressive empire rather than acknowledging military action as an undesirable failure of diplomatic finesse and a last resort. These factions currently control the foreign policy apparatus of the US government, and wish to reap the benefits of war without sharing in the sacrifice.

Getting around the usual media distortion, bickering in the left and cheerleading in the right blogospheres, it is clear Rangel is focusing on this second point when he advocates bringing back the draft. He, like myself, is tired of "chickenhawks" who cheerlead and manage the war from afar but do not help pay the costs through higher taxes and family members in combat. The online contingent of chickenhawk apologists has been slapped with what I consider to be the most harshly hilarious of any political moniker I have heard: The 101st Division of Fighting Keyboardists. Re-institution of a draft, and the accompanying potential for responsibility on the part of said chickenhawks, would evaporate support for the Iraq War faster than you could say "JESUS SUPPORTS TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!"

I may be biased as a (kind of) constituent, but I'm pretty sure Rangel doesn't actually intend for there to be a draft. He envisions a very uncomfortable scenario for GOP warmongers when this bill is considered, followed by some beautiful campaign fodder for '08. Besides, a reality-based discussion is long overdue regarding how neocons plan to execute the future wars of conquest their grand plans have in store.

Just picture this scenario. Rangel joins with some hawkish Republican (Duncan Hunter?) in introducing a bipartisan measure that will reinstate a universal draft. No lottery; EVERYONE must perform at least two years of national service, be it with the military or performing community service. While not openly advocating for the implementation of the draft, House Dem leadership backs the move, proclaiming it a good tool with which to discuss the prospects of future threats and the national security needs of the United States.

In this discussion, we could finally talk plainly about the empty words of Republicans. How they claim to support the troops, but do no such thing. They stretch out enrollment and force multiple tours of duty on young men and women, capitalizing their patriotism while wearing it thin. Top generals are now openly advocating in support of the Democratic position on the Iraq Fiasco. Maybe Democratic leaders can whip their caucus on this point. It is time to take a stand, and either support and a draft or leave Iraq.

That is an easy choice for Democrats if the vote hits the floor. At least it better be. Unanimous NAY to the bill in question, possibly excepting Rangel himself. The choice for Republicans, however, is much more excruciating. Support a measure that if adopted would guarantee the hemorrhaging of a whole generation of young adults from the party, or open themselves up to attack as not truly caring about our national security by overstretching the military. Either way, '08 Democratic challengers have generated a brutal attack ad, with little electoral harm done to their incumbents.

Of course, this would be the smart thing to do and requires that Democrats act together. Naturally, Speaker Pelosi and other party leaders blasted Rangel and shot down the idea from the git-go. It is frustrating to see Republicans pull off the jujitsu strategy again and again, the most prescient example being the Tort Reform movement. Please note, Ms. Pelosi: jujitsu can work wonders, if you just give it a chance.