The Cold War Cometh (Again)... Is The Draft Far Behind?

Is it just me, or does their seem to be a confluence of world events that portend a return to the Bad Old Days of the Cold War?

I ask because on the heels of the continuing conflict in the middle east, it was announced today that Russia has resumed long-range strategic bomber flights close to NATO-member country airspace. Flights have also resumed in the airspace off the North American west coast, including areas within easy striking range of Alaska and  California. Whether those bombers are carrying the nuclear-tipped cruise missiles they are designed to carry is unknown at this moment. Still scary nonetheless. Adding to this volatile mix, the Russians and China are engaged in their first-ever joint war games in central Asia. I don't know about you, but it is becoming very obvious that Russia and China are determined to assert themselves militarily, if only to show the US that there are other big kids on the block that cannot be ignored.

Then there's the widely acknowledged fact that the United States Army is either "broken" or (slightly more optimistically) "near broken" but functional after nearly 6 1/2 years of continuous conflict in Afghanistan and 4 years in Iraq. Right now, of the 37 active force Brigades in the Army, 12 -- or about 180,000 soldiers give or take -- are involved in combat operations. Ten just rotated off duty, for a short period of R&R and maintenance on equipment. Casualties have been high as well, with approximately 3700 fatalities since the beginning of the conflicts, and nearly 110,000 non-fatal injuries in Iraq alone.

These repeated deployments have led to severe strain on troop readiness, troop mental stability and familial relations, as soldiers, marines, sailors and airman rotate into and out of the war-zones, some being away from home for deployments of 7 to 15 months at a time. Many Army units have seen three or more tours in Iraq, and it's becoming obvious that the United States Military, if not physically beaten-down, is certainly at a crossroads in terms of future war-fighting capability.

Taken singularly, these items are certainly alarming. But in today's world context, near-term peace is looking very much in doubt, and the long term seems to be trending to more build-up for future conflict. Aside from radical/fundamentalist terror, we now have to grapple with an apparent return to a Cold War mentality, and we don't have the manpower to play the game we started.

Enter the Draft.

In 1973, then-president Richard Nixon abolished conscription and since then, the US has fielded all-volunteer forces. But apparently, the volunteers are not enough for future needs in Iraq, let alone the other conflicts that could commence (such as the anticipated clash with Iran), nor the stated policy of the defense of Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, or our NATO allies, should either of those parties become involved in armed conflict. While Iran is surely a target for action, Taiwan would be the most likely of our allies to fall under attack, as the Chinese desperately want to "reunite" with the breakaway province, despite the perils.

The new War Czar LTG Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio that

"I think it makes sense to certainly consider it, and I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table,"

in answer to a question regarding whether it made sense to go back to a draft.

In his comments to Congress during his confirmation hearings, soon-to-be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen said that it was impossible to sustain the troop surge in Iraq "with the same force structure" that exists today. That's Washington-speak for "We need more people..." But, the Army is missing its recruiting goals, as are the other services to one degree or another, so there appears to be no other option but to seriously contemplate a draft.

The Cowboy President, having wasted manpower, treasury and goodwill now needs to consider -- or leave for his successor -- the option of conscription in order to continue this folly in Iraq and deal with rising threats from countries looking warily at our actions.

Russia, has listened with disgust as our government has condemned their behavior with respect smaller states of the former Soviet Union. China has heard us rail against their civil rights abuses, and we all know that Iran is dead in the sight of Washington's military planners. All the while, we've engaged in regime change and the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. The unilateral action we took against Iraq certainly made our friends, enemies, and the indifferent take a new look at the United States. Certainly, the Iranians took note. The Russian Republic was watching. As was China. And the North Koreans. They all heard the words "regime change" coming from GWB's mouth, and I'm sure in their minds, they were next to be destabilized -- and attacked either literally or figuratively.

So now we stand at the precipice, one bullet away from another Middle Eastern conflict and perhaps one mistaken overflight away from a resumption of conflict with the Former Soviet Union. But we don't have the manpower to cover all our bets.

Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) has often called for a draft to mobilize the anti-war movement. Enrage the voters with the possibility of sending their sons off to war, and Washington will feel the heat, bringing an end the conflict. That's the theory behind his advocacy. I'm afraid that things might be getting to far out of control for such wishful thinking now. Sadly, given the current state of world affairs, Rangel may in fact get his draft, but I'm afraid that it might not end a war; it seems to be preparing us for the ones rising on the horizon.