voices bound and unbound

The Quagmire of Our Voices

by Cody Barstow
GUEST EDITORIALIST

Part 2

Mojo City, January 29, 2005 - It appears that much of the original note on these pages was taken as a proposal to re-introduce the draft. That is an unfortunately mistaken interpretatrion of the editorial.

My comments were that while we have a volunteer force in place ... we, the American public, are robbed of our right to challenge the decision to place them in harm's way.

To challenge the troops' mission, is to challenge their sacrifice.

I believe that if we have a draft, where the uncertainty of whom will be taken to war and possibly killed or maimed is how we live on an everyday level ... only then will our entire community feel threatened and evaluate the reasons for war, and act for or against that war.

Freedom is built on free speech.

Only when every child is threatened by the harm of a military draft, do we become afraid for our own children.

And that only when we are all equally involved, do we see the need to make the hard decisions about going to war.

A volunteer force doesn not threaten our children, if they do not volunteer. A draft does. And we will speak out then.

A main point - our repect for our volunteer military now makes us unable to morally raise our voice with clear conscience for or against the war in Iraq.

But if we had a draft that included every child as someone who may be killed by an IED ... then we become concerned enough to take to the streets and raise our voices.

And if we go to war, we need to be damned sure it has a justification that lasts beyond mere concern that someone might have scary weapons.

The Quagmire
Part 1

Mojo City, January 28, 2005 - The current (1/31/05) issue of Time has a picture of a number of Army grunts making their way through an Iraqi street. Below is the headline,
"After the Iraq election: How soon can we get out?"

Gone is all sense of wonder of whether we will ever accomplish any goal we had set. Gone is any sense of wonder if we can even win this one. All that is left is the indirect, but implied deep desire to get out.

With this, we need now more than ever, to consider returning to the draft.

While we have a volunteer army, the people of this country and the families of those killed and wounded will always be restrained in expressing (even feeling) their feelings against the war because the troops have committed themselves to it, and we keep hearing those very upbeat hoo-rah!s from the men and women recovering from their injuries, and those still in-country.

This is their job, and they took it up willingly. I admire their continued spirit. And I keep my voice of outrage quiet out of respect for their dedication.

But that is the problem with an all-volunteer army and marine and navy and air force. Each one of the force members have taken it up as their job and moral act as Americans and they cannot turn their backs on the wars they are sent into. Many of them have an equally shared and defined umbrella of expectations for themselves in how they feel about the country and the missions they are sent on. They believe. To question It All is morally a no-go. A no-starter.

A volunteer force is the perfect way for a government to avoid dissent in the country. Respect for the fallen and living precludes dissent.

Were we to resume the draft, the military would represent the country better, with people of differing senses of what it is to be an American, differing senses of devotion ... people and their families seeking a common and shared purpose in mission and action. And finding it if the purpose were rightful, or not if the purpose were wrong.

With a draft, we would better see the fuller sense of America reflected in our fighting forces, and as a result, parents would finally be freed to scream out at the stupidity of a war fought clumsily and without intelligence. Because their children did not volunteer and that spirit does not need to be protected or revered.

A dead soldier's sister could hold funeral flowers in one hand and from across the grave, raise the finger to the Senator in attendance who voted to send her brother to war. Soldiers could talk to each other after missions, and even sensing and knowing the differences in beliefs between them, still soldier on and protect each other as they moved mission to mission. Doing the job. We did that in Vietnam. Watched out for each other while hating the war and doing the job.

While we were in Vietnam with the draft taking any and all of us (Senator's sons and the rich generally excepted) our mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters were freed to scream at the men in uniform who showed up at the door, or to be filled with rage when they dressed up and made the Long Drive to visit their wounded under the bloody sheet at the veteran's hospital.

Today, we sigh with resignation when 31 die in a chopper crash, and others are killed across the country that same day. Sadness, insanely tempered by the fact that they volunteered. Volunteerism is not justification for their deaths. But their volunteerism has stolen our right to be angry publicly, to raise a voice and a fist, to take to the streets and to try to stop the insanity of what this war has become. Because we must be respectful of the volunteers by being respectful of the mission they were on.

But with public words about a war, heard from the families of those who did not volunteer, we might finally hear the real voice of America. And make a real choice about staying, or leaving. And that is the only reason for a draft.

A draft would restore our right to sound our dissent. Or our approval. And finally, to speak openly with a freed voice as Americans.