The postwar US Military Draft was in force from 1948 to 1973, which means some Baby Boomers who were 18 years old in 1973 could have been called up. These people would have been born in 1955 or earlier, and would now be 63 or older. Were any of you caught in the "Peacetime Draft", or did you Enlist, or just stayed Happy Civilians? In 1960, I was 24 years old, single, and already had a technical college education. The draft was in full swing, so in order to serve my Country with a minimum commitment to active duty time, I decided to Volunteer for the Draft. An Army Enlistee is committed to serve a tour of 3 years of active duty, while a Draftee is required to serve only 2 years. I was inducted on the next callup and served just short of 2 years of active duty, having been assigned duty as a Communications Center Technician at the 8th Army Headquarters in Seoul, South Korea. (This was 8 years after the end of the Korean War...we were there as part of the Occupation Forces.) DISMISSED! Sgt. Pollner
Remember registering for the Selective Service. Knew I was going to enlist anyway after I finished High School, so didn't pay too much attention to the Draft. The shock,( being naive ), was when I found out the Navy and the Air Force both had a waiting list to enlist. I was sitting in the hallway of the Post Office waiting to talk to either the Marine or Army recruiter, when the Air Force guy came back from lunch. Invited me to sit in the nice 'Air Conditioned Office' to wait for them. One thing lead to another and I figured I could wait a couple of months for a slot to open. He never told me an 'un-truth'; never promised anything. Everything was based on your test scores. ( and of course, what was needed. ) So I guess what was needed at the time was a Munitions Systems Specialist. Off to Guam after Tech school. Signed up and the rest, they say, is HISTORY...
@Hal Pollner , I am one who would favor instituting a UNIVERSAL draft where every young person, male and female would spend 2 years serving the country in some way. It wouldn't be limited to the military, but would include it. Many parts of the military are too technical to spend time training people for only two years' service, but "apprenticeships" could be served as armorers, or supply personnel, or any other "slot" in one of the services. It would also include the Park Service, Forest Service, Agriculture Department, or even the Post Office. It would be difficult to restrict Political Indoctrination, however, so that is my one misgiving. It could be used to reduce the civilian employment in the military, but give those interested a taste of the military life and let them see how each service operates. They could then decide to continue in government service or return to the private sector with new skills and discipline, as well as new-found maturity and perhaps patriotism.
I agree with the idea of a universal service requirement for young people that would allow service in any area from military to childcare, eldercare, etc... I would also like to see that service tied to some sort of continuing education program for college or trade school in exchange for that service. I think that a universal period of service would provide a reset button for a lot of young people and help give them a fresh start in life on a more equal footing then they might otherwise have.
The education benefit could be tied to the service, similar to what is done know with military service.
I am afraid that we'd end up paying young people to work for Planned Parenthood, The Nature Conservancy, or an organization affiliated with the United Nations or something else that would be antithetical to what was hoped for.
That was part of what I was mentioning when I said "Political Indoctrination". If they work for the Nature Conservancy (I don't think that is quite as bad as Planned Parenthood), they should also be allowed to work for the NRA or Ducks Unlimited. What I really intended with the post was true government-affiliated organizations, Park Service, VISTA/AmeriCorps, Peace Corps, Forest Service , etc., not non-profits. The military simply wouldn't have a use for that many untrained personnel during peacetime. I think it is unfair to single out some and not others for service, and, as we saw in Vietnam, the draft changes lives--some for the better but many for the worse--and it allows those who don't go to gain the jobs that would be denied to those who were in the military. Local governments could be included, I suppose. If that were so, school bus monitors, maintenance crews, and teacher's aides could be filled with these folks.
FDR instituted something like that during the Depression as one of the more successful ways to give young people a purpose in life rather than becoming Hobos, as many resorted to during the mid-1930's. It was called the CCC, or Civilian Conservation Corps, and was a New Deal measure. The CCC boys even appeared in newsreels, showing how they were helping the Land through reforestation, repairing of levees, controlling erosion, etc. and earning something for themselves as well. They lived in Camps, much like soldiers in the field. Hal
I'm inclined to think that everyone should get military training. The if, heaven forbid, we should get into another war, we would have a military backup. I know that the fighting would most likely not be on the ground but who knows?
Around the same time as the CCC, there was another government program that employed writers, who were assigned to compile histories of cities and towns throughout America. It was called the Federal Writers Project, and some of the people who participated in it later became noted authors.
There was also the NYA (National Youth Administration), for those who were too young, or didn't qualify, for the CCC. My father joined that program. I remember he told me he learned welding and studied mathematics, among other things. Cool!
There was also the Federal Theater Project, which gave employment to Writers, Actors, Directors, etc. FDR's New Deal also included giant projects like TVA, FERA, and the biggest of all, the NRA or National Recovery Act. Many private and government conservatives thought the New Deal was a pinko scheme, endorsed by the Reds. Hal
I don't know about communism but I can see that a fiscal conservative might object to the government spending. After all, they were taking money from some to pay it to others.