The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 4 of 12)

: /p>

The left has discovered that the primary difference between Vietnam and the Gulf war is that the military is voluntary military service. With a voluntary military you are not dragging people who don't want to be in the military to fight in a war, and thus have eliminated a whole group of probable anti-war supporters.

p>The encouragement of the left to "draft" people is an attempt to reinstate the unpopular practice on those who are not anti-war. br> -- B.W. Peek br> Ft Lauderdale, Florida /p>

Perhaps a different focus. The Founding Fathers were too old to serve in the military when the time came. But what's wrong with the logic that the most important matters of politics concern our defense against real enemies, and that such matters are best understood by those who have been trained for war.

p>Therefore, we need to have universal military training made available, though optional. Every young man and woman should have the opportunity to sign for a year of intense physical training and weapons training in their youth. After a year the motivated could be selected for the military branches, or for ROTC at college. The rest would form a sort of back up militia, subject to call in extreme circumstances. No one would have to take the training. But only those who completed it would vote. Age cohorts above the age of, oh, say, 22 when the plan was initiated would continue to vote despite their lack of training, but eventually those who bandy about the "chickenhawk" label would realize their dream. Only those with military experience would make choices about military action -- or anything else important. It seems as though liberals are behind the idea, and I think conservatives can be persuaded. Let's roll. br> -- Michael J. Lynch br> Atlanta, Georgia /p> p> Reagan was a

topics:
Economics, Business, Environment, Movies, Law, Founding Fathers, Military, Conservatism, Oil