The Instigator
draxxt
Con (against)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
jjmd280
Pro (for)
Winning
39 Points

Resolved: The US should implement a military draft

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/7/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,957 times Debate No: 5908
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (9)

 

draxxt

Con

I would like to thank whoever accepts this debate. For the record, this is my first debate in quite a while and I would officially like to say... I'm back! I would like to elaborate on a few things and then extend the first argument to my opponent.
1) Should entails things beneficial to the agent of cause.
and 2) a military draft includes both willing and unwilling candidates.

Thank you again.
jjmd280

Pro

First, I would like to say thank you to my opponent for a very worthy and unfortunately, quite timely topic. I hope to do him and the topic justice in my following arguments, and look forward to a valuable exchange of ideas. I believe I have a unique take on this issue, since I served my country with pride, honor, and due diligence as a Korean Interpreter/Interrogator in the United States Army from 1989 to 1993. I did so without being conscripted, and would do so again if asked.

I accept the resolution as stated and definitions my opponent graciously provided. I would like to add that only the US Army is the only branch which has relied on conscription in the past, popularly known in the US as "The Draft."

There are several reasons why I think, as many do, that the United States should not reinstate the draft.. But, in an effort to be concise – I shall limit my arguments to the most compelling.

1.It would be illegal. The Constitution forbids Congress to send conscripts off to fight an undeclared war, or to conduct a peacetime draft. The theory here is that while Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution empowers Congress to "provide for the common defense" and "raise and support armies," the framers simply meant to establish a professional army, composed of volunteers. Not draftees. Besides, Iraq and Afghanistan are undeclared wars.

2.A weaker argument, but still valid, is that it would violate the 13th and 14th amendments of the United States Constitution, which abolishes slavery and involuntary servitude, and establish due process - In 1918, the Supreme Court ruled that the World War I draft did not violate the United States Constitution. But Supreme Court rulings are subjects to their time periods. It is not an unfounded assumption that this issue is seen differently today.

13th -
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

14th
No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ....

3.Warfare has changed – There is no longer a need for massive human cannon fodder. Maybe in Napoleon's time, or even in Vietnam (debatable) but no longer. The military is high-tech, with battlefields controlled from 1000's of miles away. We have a more mobile force and a superiority in weapons and technology that is unrivaled.

4.It would lower morale – one of the most important attributes to an effective fighting force. The strength of a volunteer is their heart to do what they are doing – THEY WANT TO BE THERE. With a draft come people who would do their best not to be there, or are ineligible. ( Be it Conscientious Objectors, students, dodgers, or valid medical cases) The Vietnam War shows us this – besides being a most unpopular war, and the first time America "lost", over 500,000 draftees dodged the draft, and 70,000 of these went to Canada.

Force someone to do something they do not want to do, and it negatively affects those around them.

In summary, with a draft, the military would be expanded, thus increasing federal outlays for defense and further exacerbating the national debt. Most importantly, the draft would be a violation of the Constitutional rights of those drafted. A simple solution would be what many have suggested, raise the recruiting limits, offer more incentives to enlistees and those who wish to reenlist, and stay an all-volunteer PROFESSIONAL Army. An Army of the 21st century.

Thank you, and I look forward to my opponents response.

References -
http://www.landscaper.net...
http://www.snopes.com...
http://hasbrouck.org...
Flynn, G. (2000). The Draft, 1940-1973. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.
Gilliam, R. (1982). The Peacetime Draft: Voluntarism to Coercion.
US Constitution
Debate Round No. 1
draxxt

Con

Thank you to my opponent for accepting this debate. I'm afraid there may be some miscommunication so far as your stance on this goes but nevertheless...

"There are several reasons why I think, as many do, that the United States should not reinstate the draft."
Good wording, I agree.

"1.It would be illegal. The Constitution forbids Congress to send conscripts off to fight an undeclared war, or to conduct a peacetime draft. The theory here is that while Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution empowers Congress to "provide for the common defense" and "raise and support armies," the framers simply meant to establish a professional army, composed of volunteers. Not draftees. Besides, Iraq and Afghanistan are undeclared wars."

Not necessarily, this may be helping my case but you must also realise that if Congress decided to word it how they wished, it would seem almost necessary to implement a draft. That does not mean we should. Don't get me wrong, I agree with my opponent insofar as the concept.

"2.A weaker argument, but still valid, is that it would violate the 13th and 14th amendments of the United States Constitution, which abolishes slavery and involuntary servitude, and establish due process - In 1918, the Supreme Court ruled that the World War I draft did not violate the United States Constitution. But Supreme Court rulings are subjects to their time periods. It is not an unfounded assumption that this issue is seen differently today."

Bad argument, I wouldn't use it. the 13th and 14th say, essentially, that everyone is equal and that due process must be set. However, due process is subjective.

"3.Warfare has changed – There is no longer a need for massive human cannon fodder. Maybe in Napoleon's time, or even in Vietnam (debatable) but no longer. The military is high-tech, with battlefields controlled from 1000's of miles away. We have a more mobile force and a superiority in weapons and technology that is unrivaled."

I agree.

"4.It would lower morale – one of the most important attributes to an effective fighting force. The strength of a volunteer is their heart to do what they are doing – THEY WANT TO BE THERE. With a draft come people who would do their best not to be there, or are ineligible. ( Be it Conscientious Objectors, students, dodgers, or valid medical cases) The Vietnam War shows us this – besides being a most unpopular war, and the first time America "lost", over 500,000 draftees dodged the draft, and 70,000 of these went to Canada."

Again, I agree.

I would also like to point out that the US military is notorious for a specialized army, not a large standing army. Cannon fodder is about the gist of what a draft would be. Also, troop morale plays a large role. One may argue that Stop-Loss is a negative and is, in essence, a draft but a soldier signs a contract saying that they may be subject to stop-loss. Draftees are also paid less. Many people join the army for financial security. In addition, Draftees would need to be trained by a specialized official. That would take twelve of their eighteen month tour time. Most draftees, thereafter, would drop out. That's 4 billion dollars (According to the New York Times) Wasted on training.

Let us review my contentions.

1) I am in almost complete agreement with my opponent.
2) We are known for our specialization (i.e. a navigator of the Mississippi River wouldn't be called to navigate the Euphrates.)
3) Draftees are paid less
4) It would be a gross waste of money on training troops who will most likely drop out after their first tour.

I thank my opponenet for conceding to the resolution and urge a firm CON ballot.
jjmd280

Pro

OOPS.

In lieu of the developments on this interesting debate - such as the fact that I ARGUED MY OPPONENTS CASE FOR HIM (like an idiot), I must tip my hat to him, and shuffle into the darkness, with my proverbial tail betwixt me legs.

How fricken embarrasin' is this?

You won, my friend. I look forward to debating you again, and next time, I just might READ THE RESOLUTION CORRECTLY. (*slaps self upside head unmercifully.)
Debate Round No. 2
draxxt

Con

The sad thing is is that you and I could have reversed roles or at least debated from then on on our appropriate sides. I would have allowed it. If you still would like to, I'll allow it, though one and a half round is hardly a debate. Thank you for attempting the debate.

Vote Con.

Thanks
-EG
jjmd280

Pro

Vote Con.
Post the resolution again, someone might. I don't have the energy to now. Thanks anyway.
Debate Round No. 3
draxxt

Con

I reiterate the reiteration my opponent has stated. Thank you but that's life. You win some, you misread some. My opponent is obviously a well-spoken... written?... debator and I enjoyed hearing his take on my argument.

Vote Con please.

Thanks,
-EG
jjmd280

Pro

Vote Con please.

I'd attribute my screw up to age, but seeing that I plan on doing that for the rest of my life, I shan't rush it. A deserved win for my opponent.
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wjmelements 5 years ago
wjmelements
Defaulted CON.
Posted by draxxt 6 years ago
draxxt
I'm inclined to post it again period. I will soon.
Posted by jjmd280 6 years ago
jjmd280
Sorry for messing up your debate - are you inclined to post it again for someone else?
Posted by jjmd280 6 years ago
jjmd280
OMG - I screwed the pooch on that one!!!! What a dumbass!! I was thinking CON! SHITSHITSHIT!!!
Posted by draxxt 6 years ago
draxxt
That's why I gave it four rounds instead of three.
Posted by jjmd280 6 years ago
jjmd280
Ok - just seems wasteful.
Posted by draxxt 6 years ago
draxxt
It's cordial to allow the Affirmative the first speech.
Posted by jjmd280 6 years ago
jjmd280
I am happy to debate, but why does everyone waste their first round? If you are setting the resolution, shouldn't you also be good enough to provide the opening arguments? This is the third debate I have taken that is this way. Odd way to debate, IMO.
Posted by jjmd280 6 years ago
jjmd280
OK - I will. Good luck.
Posted by draxxt 6 years ago
draxxt
Yes, fear me. Or not, but please for the love of God, SOMEONE TAKE THIS DEBATE!!!
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 months ago
lannan13
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by KendallAntigone 4 years ago
KendallAntigone
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by atheistman 5 years ago
atheistman
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Vakama888 5 years ago
Vakama888
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by wjmelements 5 years ago
wjmelements
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by HighLikePlanes 5 years ago
HighLikePlanes
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by solo 5 years ago
solo
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by draxxt 6 years ago
draxxt
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by jjmd280 6 years ago
jjmd280
draxxtjjmd280Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70