we're at war, right? so?
June 14, 2004 5:57 PM   Subscribe

The Allen Plan --a very interesting alternative to the possible coming draft. Makes perfect sense to me.
posted by amberglow (41 comments total)
 
Haha funny. Wait, I meant worthless.
posted by Witty at 6:02 PM on June 14, 2004


The draft is coming. US forces are already stretched too thin. We need to face the reality of the situation.
posted by heyadam at 6:04 PM on June 14, 2004


Haha funny. Wait, I meant worthless.

Do you post anything but this empty nonsense? Just curious.
posted by kjh at 6:05 PM on June 14, 2004


That was your second comment EVER... in three years heyadam? Wow. Not nearly as worthless as amberglow's post though.

Do you post anything but this empty nonsense? Just curious.

Yes, but not for you... and certainly not in such a worthless thread like this. I mean, does it deserve much more? C'mon.
posted by Witty at 6:07 PM on June 14, 2004


Do you post anything but this empty nonsense? Just curious.

Witty's purpose is to trick you into commenting on the irony of his username. This requires an impressive dedication to posting huge quantities of drivel.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:12 PM on June 14, 2004


I'm sorry Mr. Shanks. Obviously you've come to this thread with something very important to tell us about the "upcoming draft" or something... Haliburton maybe? Something neat about sand or Iraqi culture. Whatever. But it looks like you forgot to post it. You can keep posting if you'd like. You're not limited to just the one thought on this amazing topic amberglow has chosen for all of us. I'm sorry if my silliness distracted you.
posted by Witty at 6:18 PM on June 14, 2004


Makes perfect sense to me.

Makes perfect sense to me.

another fine reminder of why i should not post. Thanks amberglow for basically nothing. Have a nice day.
posted by clavdivs at 6:20 PM on June 14, 2004


Witty - don't like a post? Then ignore it.

Stop pissing in the pool.
posted by bshort at 6:24 PM on June 14, 2004


I'm sorry if my silliness distracted you.

You're confusing silliness with utter banality.
I imagine you're confusing a lot of things with utter banality.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:28 PM on June 14, 2004


So i take it some of you don't like the Allen Plan--why not? Mobilizations have happened in every war.
posted by amberglow at 6:30 PM on June 14, 2004


I *love* the allen plan. Although I think they should go further.

I think, as a requirement of holding office, all sons and daughters of legislators should be required to serve a tour of duty in the military. Maybe even as infantry.
posted by bshort at 6:33 PM on June 14, 2004


Thanks for your contribution bshort {offers a flyer). I think we should send monkeys and retards (as in retarded people) to war. YEA!

You're confusing silliness with utter banality.

Oh, my bad. "I'm sorry if my utter banality distracted you." You forgot to post your topical comment again {and a flyer for you}.
posted by Witty at 6:37 PM on June 14, 2004


No-one should be forced to go to war. If we compromise on that one we don't have much of a civilisation to fight for.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 6:39 PM on June 14, 2004


No-one should be forced to go to war.
People always are tho--it's been a constant throughout history.
posted by amberglow at 6:42 PM on June 14, 2004


So have trousers that chafe, but our society has progressed beyond that.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 6:45 PM on June 14, 2004


Oh I see, it was just a well-intentioned comedic vehicle for a little chit chat about drafts and such. Clever AND cute. I'm sorry for not seeing that from the getgo. Peace.
posted by Witty at 6:48 PM on June 14, 2004


YOUR ALL GAY.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 6:57 PM on June 14, 2004


Y'know, if whoever wrote that piece had bothered to put the plan before the phrase "Reichsmarshall Rumsfeld," I might actually know what the Allen Plan is, because I wouldn't have stopped reading.
posted by kindall at 7:12 PM on June 14, 2004


Y'know, if whoever wrote those instructions on the fire extinguisher had bothered to use letters other than "e" I might have actually put out the fire, because I wouldn't have said "man, E's are for pussies, dude, and then OH GOD IT BURNS
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:35 PM on June 14, 2004


Oh I see, it was just a well-intentioned comedic vehicle for a little chit chat about drafts and such. Clever AND cute. I'm sorry for not seeing that from the getgo. Peace.

Shouldn't you have signed off with "war" instead of "peace"? It seems somehow more apt for one of your character.

posted by The God Complex at 7:40 PM on June 14, 2004


Yes, but not for you... and certainly not in such a worthless thread like this. I mean, does it deserve much more? C'mon.

It's not my opinion that the quality or meaning of our collective discourse is elevated by responses such as yours. The article amberglow linked to is puerile, thoughtless, and partisan; if your sensibilities are offended by those attributes, you might do well to avoid them in your own comments.
posted by kjh at 8:02 PM on June 14, 2004


Ok... so it IS shit then. Good. I'm glad you agree.
posted by Witty at 8:14 PM on June 14, 2004


"ReichMarshall Rumsfeld."

Right. Uh-huh.
posted by davidmsc at 8:34 PM on June 14, 2004


Jesus, Witty. You're quite the asshole tonight.
posted by ook at 8:35 PM on June 14, 2004


As tempting as it is to hop in to the pissfest, I'd like to actually say something about the post.

Obviously the guy who wrote that article was half-kidding. But when you think about it, it's really kind of a logical idea.

A draft assumes several things. The foremost for this discussion is that it requires people to go to war who do now want to go to war. Added on top of that the fact that there are probably a large contingent of people who would be willing to go to war via draft for a war that is just, and the Allen plan becomes more and more sensible. The contractors are in Iraq voluntarily. They are most certainly in favor of the war, seeing as how it's the war that is lining their collective pockets. If we're going to have a draft, and force people to fight, why not those who already have a vested interest in the region? Going further, why not people who are, in fact, acclimated to the climate and probably know more about the country than most hypothtical draftees from the states?

It really does make sense.


And witty: Your initial complaint was that the post is worthless. Then you post 6 totally offtopic comments in a 25 comment thread. Maybe someone needs a nap?
posted by lazaruslong at 8:48 PM on June 14, 2004


Metafilter is a community we all choose to belong to. Agree or disagree, we should all be civil towards each other. Witty, you are being way out of line tonight. If you don't like someone's thread, you can start a thread in Metatalk about it. Please leave your aggressive comments out of the blue. Other people might wish to legitimately discuss this article, but be turned off by your caustic insults. I'm sure that's your point, to derail the thread, but that's really not what Metafilter is about. Please refrain, I ask you respectfully on behalf of all those here who share my feelings.
posted by PigAlien at 8:49 PM on June 14, 2004


who do *not want to go to war.
posted by lazaruslong at 8:49 PM on June 14, 2004


I agree with lazaruslong. I think the draft is slavery by the State. However, if we are going to institute it, we should enslave those who
  1. already have the skills required
  2. are profiting from the war
first.

We shouldn't be enriching unaccountable mercenaries like we are. The public pays for them to get their training in the service, muster out, then go on and go back to working for the service for 2x to 10x as much. This is a bad deal for the taxpayers.

Pay the regular soldiers what they are worth (i.e., fair market value), make a policy of not paying for mercenaries, and you hopefully eliminate the problem.
posted by moonbiter at 8:53 PM on June 14, 2004


sheesh, and i thought the trolls stayed on fark...

As for the article i'd say that it's not bloody likely. I had contemplated working for bechtel in iraq last year (i'm a structural engineer just out of school and single...but luckily they wanted people with more experience). While i theoretically could have ended up out there i wouldn't have wanted to be there for long when the place went to real shit for civee's. Simply because someone puts themselves into that situation hopeing for doing good work (ie actually building a new infrastructure) that doesn't mean they want to go die for thier country (hell, i build targets, not kill people). That said there are allot of ex military security persons out there who could easily be drafted.

As for the actual draft itself, i put it's chances at 10% to nill. It started as a political statement and i think it'll stay that way. While we may be fascinated by war, the average american knows they want to stay away from it...unless it's on tv...which reminds me, band of brothers is on ooooh
posted by NGnerd at 8:57 PM on June 14, 2004


GIs marching away from re-enlistment:
Fort Carson isn't alone with sharp re-enlistment drops during the past 90 days. According to Army figures:
• At Fort Bragg, N.C., home of the 82nd Airborne Division, recruiters have met 65 percent of their goal of first-termers and 80 percent of the goal for mid-career soldiers.
• At Fort Riley, Kan., whose 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division remains deployed in Iraq, re-enlistments are off sharply. Recruiters have signed only 50 percent of its quota for first-term re-enlistees, and 57 percent for mid-career soldiers.
• Across the Army's massive III Corps, which includes Fort Hood's 4th Infantry and 1st Cavalry divisions as well as Fort Carson's combat units, only 51 percent of first-termers and 54 percent of the mid-career soldiers are signing up.

posted by amberglow at 9:09 PM on June 14, 2004


It's too late. Registration for the draft has already started.
posted by euphorb at 10:07 PM on June 14, 2004


It's too late. Registration for the draft has already started.

The real draft registration site.

"What happens in a draft" might be a more interesting topic of conversation.
To make the lottery as fair as possible, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) developed a unique random calendar and number selection program for Selective Service. Using this random selection method for birthdays, each day of the year is selected by computer in a random manner, and that date is placed in a capsule. The capsules are then loaded in a large drum on a random basis. By the same method, numbers from 1 to 365 (366 for men born in a leap year) are also selected in a random fashion, placed in capsules, and the capsules are placed into a second drum. The process, repeated a second time, results in two sets of drums. Official observers certify that the capsule-filling and drum-loading were conducted according to established procedures. This certification is secured to each drum; they are sealed and placed in secure storage. Should a lottery be conducted, one of the first actions would be an inspection of these stored drums and the selection of a set to be used in the lottery.
posted by kjh at 10:16 PM on June 14, 2004


metatalk.
posted by The God Complex at 10:31 PM on June 14, 2004


The contractors are in Iraq voluntarily. ... It really does make sense.

Okay, I read it. No, it does not make sense. Because those contractors are not sitting around with their thumbs up their asses (except maybe, you know, in their time off, for entertainment). If you draft the contractors to do military work, who will do the work the contractors are doing now? I suppose you could just hire some more contractors, but who will want to be a contractor when they know they could be drafted? Or is there an Allen Plan for that too?
posted by kindall at 11:27 PM on June 14, 2004


who will do the work the contractors are doing now?

The Iraqis could and should have been doing the reconstruction work all along--it's their country, and there are (or at least, were) plenty of skilled people there.
posted by amberglow at 5:46 AM on June 15, 2004


The Allen plan, to the extent it's meant seriously in the first place, is absurd, because the vast majority of contractors are overaged for conscription, or are veterans, and, hence, exempt from conscription. A lot of the contractor employees who are of age and not veterans aren't American citizens or residents, and, once again, exempt from conscription.

Anyway, there will be no draft under present circumstances. No one in the military wants one, and, as things now stand, there's no shortfall in initial enlistments.

The modest shortfall which exists is in re-enlistments, and a draft can't solve that. Stop-loss and extended overseas tours of duty are the (unpleasant) solutions to the re-enlistment problem, and they're already in effect.

It would take a paradigm-shifting escalation in our military commitments for there to be the sort of initial enlistment shortfall which would make more coercive means sensible. That kind of escalation would probably lead to an increase in volunteers. If insufficient, softer coercion would certainly be a better first step -- for example, cutting welfare and student aid programs which compete with military salaries and the GI Bill as federally-subsidized alternatives to private sector employment.
posted by MattD at 7:10 AM on June 15, 2004


Isn't the concept of being "overage" kinda outdated nowadays? I mean, I thought part of benefit of a volunteer army is that we needed less cannon fodder and more people with actual experience and wisdom.

All I hope is that the Bush twins are No. 1 and No.2 on the activization list.
posted by DenOfSizer at 10:44 AM on June 15, 2004


The Iraqis could and should have been doing the reconstruction work all along--it's their country

I expect that all the Iraqis who are qualified to do that work are already doing it. It's not as if the contractors are the only people working on reconstruction in Iraq.

Besides, leaving the Iraqis to fix something we broke doesn't seem very noble.
posted by kindall at 10:44 AM on June 15, 2004


50-60% of the adult pop. of Iraq is unemployed, so no, i don't expect that all the Iraqis qualified are already doing it. There have been many posts about them being shut out (even though they were experienced and cheaper) of the contracting process in favor of the people there now.
posted by amberglow at 4:00 PM on June 15, 2004


As tempting as it is to hop in to the pissfest, I'd like to actually say something about the post.

I would too...but then MattD beat me to what I was going to say. That MattD, he's like that.
posted by dejah420 at 5:57 PM on June 15, 2004


The kid playing the guitar on the sss website looks like Matt.

I smell a conspiracy.
posted by sgt.serenity at 1:28 AM on June 17, 2004


« Older cassini visits saturn   |   Michael Moore's Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments