Compulsory Service? Why? Because Dan Thinks You're Myopic

I took personal offense to something said in Dan Rodrick's article about reinstating the draft. Right from the beginning he takes the stance that young people in America don't care about the outcome of the war and have more worries about who will win the next American Idol competition. As one of the young adults he is speaking about, I strongly disagree with his accusation.

I think the majority of Americans, including young adults, find the outcome of the war very important. It’s the constant arguing in the media and in politics over what a victory actually would be, and a saturation of bad news coming out of the middle east that leads us to daily discussions about TV rather than the war. Why should we talk about something depressing and unchanging? All we see on the news about the war these days (if anything at all) is the tragic bombing of a security checkpoint, followed by new totals of the American and Iraqi death toll. We're not able to discuss any victories, or anything good at all.

Dan's second article is even more insulting than the first. And the worst part is that he uses the insults as the reasons for his idealistic belief that we should basically force all young Americans to do good deeds, change the world, and restore America as a nation of good people with good will. He first generalizes everyone who opposes his 2-year mandatory service idea into libertarians who would no more force someone to serve in the armed forces or peace corps, than they would force someone to pay taxes.

Then he goes on to say that mandatory service in one of the three branches he outlined (armed forces, domestic assignment, foreign humanitarian assignment) would fix the alleged problems with our youth, including having become "increasingly myopic, wealth-obsessed, self-centered, cynical and clueless to essential concepts of loyalty and teamwork, community and commitment."

Wow...

Wait a minute, that sounds more like the morons that lied to get us into this war, destroyed the economy, and smoked pot and led the sexual revolution in the 70s... our parents. The very people he describes with those words are the people that run the businesses and politics of our time, NOT the young adults that plan on voting for other people to change all that. And those same people had the draft in the 70s. And they changed it... for a reason. Cumposory service should never be in effect unless the fate of the world or country depends on it.

The advancement of technology has required soldiers to become more professional and niche skilled. Two year service would rotate too many people through the system, putting a strain on the country's economy and armed service branches in general. Also, conventional warfare is less dependant on high numbers of troops. And considering how unacceptable it is for 4,000 soldiers to die in a war today a draft would just increase the amount of troops dying each day. And yes, his suggestion would do a great deal of good in our own country and in others and thus help us and help reinstate the U.S.'s reputation... a reputation soiled by the post baby boom generation now in control of the country.

Young people are naturally cynicall. It's a personal defense to prevent depression from how much our parents have screwed up the world. The young people of today have so much to make up for. But Dan wants us to start cleaning up their mess sooner. Well I don't think that's very fair. Even when not faced with compulsory service, I can garuntee that people my age would rather us pull out of Iraq than continue sacrificing Americans for a lost cause (assuming there was a just cause in the first place).

I don't see the rest of the world bending over backwards for other nations, so as priviledged and lucky as I am to be an American and lead the life I live, I don't plan on supporting any bill or push for forcing people to do what should be voluntary. If another Holocaust or world war breaks out then I will be in compete support of service, as terrified to die as I might be.