Ike '56

Apples & oranges. WWII and Korea REQUIRED a draft because of the enormity of the military conflict. Thousands of soldiers on both sides died in brief battles (e.g., "our side" lost about as many in one month at Heartbreak Ridge as we have lost in the whole Iraq war), multiple nations were involved in the conflict (e.g., Chinese soldiers in N. Korea), and most observers consider our current professional military to have better education and skills than previous conscripted forces. Yes, the sacrifice was spread out more evenly due to the draft. For my part, I would rather have professional soldiers with enhanced ability than an equal number of conscripts who may be serving resentfully. If you really want to bring Ike into this conversation about Middle East policy, we could probably have some interesting discussions about the Eishenhower doctrine, the Suez crisis, and his foresight about the importance of oil in the region....

I wonder how different our politics would be if a draft had caused a large number of Americans to have to serve in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan, instead of our volunteer army. Pretty much what they were in 1968 or 1972.
World War II was a radical exception that many on both Left and Right mistake as the norm for American warfare. The country was completely united by the direct, unprovoked military attack on the US by the Japanese Empire, an attack many reasonable people viewed as a precursor to an all-out invasion of the American homeland. We were also united in opposition to Germany because Hitler had rashly declared war on us after Pearl Harbor (though during WWII Americans generally still viewed Japan, not Germany, as the main enemy). Aside from World War II, all American wars in which the US government resorted to a draft have been massively unpopular at home: -- The Civil War draft launched major riots in New York and might have led to Lincoln's defeat in 1864 had Sherman not smashed through the South.
-- After a brief period of pro-war fever in 1917-1918, Americans got a severe case of buyer's remorse over World War I, the first clear break with the principles of US foreign policy set forth in Washington's Farewell Address. The war party (Democrats, then) were driven from Congress in 1918 and routed on a historic scale in 1920. Wilson's League of Nations was a non-starter with the public, and the deposed German Kaiser became a figure of sympathy in the public imagination. -- Korea was a disaster, thanks to Harry Truman's insistence on letting tens of thousands of drafted American soldiers die there without trying to do anything more than preserve the status quo ante. Once again, the war party (Democrats) lost both houses of Congress and the White House in 1952. Truman's unpopularity at the end of his term was broader and deeper than that of any President in history other than Woodrow Wilson. -- Vietnam ... 'nuff said. Normally in wartime, Americans do not rally together to collect tin scrap and buy war bonds. And a draft only serves to sharpen the public's focus on WHY the particular war is being fought. And if national survival isn't clearly at stake, the public will oppose the war.

Simon's history primer is equal parts visionary verbiage and partisan pique; like a pair a sunglasses where one lense is polarized to help one better see, and the other dark enough to obscure an eclipse. But hey... I went through school depending on Cliff Notes, so like the mindset when they shout 'Last Call' in a Saturday night bar, it'll do just fine.

Susan, never give up! Even though the USSR folded, Cuba and North Korea still offer hope to our oppressed black folk. Now, please lead us in singing the Soviet anthem.

Proof again that perception (or prejudice) is seldom fact. And by the way, a ton of Hispanics are certainly a high percentage of our servicepersons. Where (and I am a good old fashioned centrist Liberal here) would one get the idea that this 'volunteer' army and its dead and dying is primarily black and poor? In all due respect, (I mean that) that sounds like something Rosie O'Donnell says.

Simon's history primer is equal parts visionary verbiage and partisan pique; If only HaloScan would allow me to publish the partisan pique parts in red, so they could be distinguished clearly from the visionary verbiage.... :) Seriously, though, Rawlins: Aside from the extreme case of World War II (where we were directly attacked by a major military power), when in U.S. history has a wartime draft NOT been deeply unpopular?

Proof again that perception (or prejudice) is seldom fact. Prejudice, properly meant, is never meant to be a fact, only a probability. And by the way, a ton of Hispanics are certainly a high percentage of our servicepersons. They're slightly overrepresented in the casualties.

They don't turn out Republican Presidents like they used to. That's for sure!