Why the military and American youth is so afraid of it?
Can someone explain this in simple words in detail plz 
Most Americans don't like war.
Presently the US military is all-volunteer. Meaning those who want to join it, apply for it. And thus, they do it out of their own free will and choice.
A 'draft' would mean that every US citizen who falls into a prescribed criteria (e.g. all men between the ages of 18-35) will be required by law to serve in the military for a specified time duration. They are still paid for their services, but not everyone wants to put their education, career and family life on hold to serve in the battlefields in some far off place across the globe. Therefore, 'draft' is a very unappetizing concept for most (if not all) youth in America.
For the record, neither candidate for President, nor Pentagon favors the draft. Pentagon opposes it because it provides (sometimes) unfit, and in many case, demoralizing servicemembers. Both candidates for President oppose it because it is a political hot potato. Although, if Bush carries on with his present unilateral use of force around the world, it will stretch the regular military resources pretty thin.
Incidently, the rumor about the 'draft' was fueled by MTV in their 'Rock the Vote' campaign, and they presumably give the impression that youth should vote for Kerry, otherwise Bush will bring back the 'draft'. Funnily enough, to the best of my knowledge, the idea to bring back the draft was started by two members of US House of Representative, and they are both Democrats. I forgot their names.
Correct Faisal, the draft proposal by the 2 Congressmen was done in protest to the Iraq war. The wanted Americans to ask themselves if they would support the Iraq war if they knew their children could be drafted to fight in it.
Well, I found this news item. It has names and everything there.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20041006-012158-2811r.htm
Thanks Faisal bhai. So it means the US millitary regulars are very less in numbers that US can't afford two wars at the same time.
I wonder what will we call draft in Urdu. JABRI BHARTI :D
What's happening now is a stop-loss program going on. You have volunteer soldiers in Iraq who are not allowed to leave the military even after they've fulfilled their obligations, essentially its a 'back door draft'.
Drafts are a bad way of increasing military capacity, particularly compared to "back door drafting".
Bringing in large numbers of civilians, giving them what is essentially minimal military training (compared to professional soldiers) and then throwing them into combat leads, essentially, to an ill-disciplined rabble.
"Back door drafting" merely means that trained professionals are being forced to stay in their profession a little longer.
Not all positions are being stop lossed, just highly skilled positions that take a long time to train or retrain. Many requests for transfers are being delayed so that the units will maintain cohesion. There is still a downsizing in the navy and airforce, so there is a lot of retraining going on to convert willing sailors and airmen to army job slots. The army stil needs two more active divisions (reduced by Clinton), and after Iraq is over there will be a lot of combat experienced kids who will form a good nco corps for two more divisions. The people who volunteer for the army know and understand the stop loss provisions. They are not secret, everybody knows that extensions are possible. It is part of the commitment you make when you volunteer.
The interesting thing about this is that it is more likely that a Kerry administration would need to re-institute a draft than would the Bush administration.
Under Kerry we would see a drop in re-enlistment, a decline in initial enlistment and an increase in early retirement.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
Under Kerry we would see a drop in re-enlistment, a decline in initial enlistment and an increase in early retirement.
[/QUOTE]
myvoice, care to share the other findings of your crystal ball. It seems to be on a roll (pun intended).
I do not think draft would be a viable option. Rumsfeld has clearly indicated many times that in this modern age with an advanced air force, there is no need to have a large combat force. It is less productive and more expensive to draft ordinary people and train them. In Vietnam days, technology was not that advanced and therefore, a significant number of troops were needed on the ground. These days, Americans win 80 percent of the war using their supreme air force. Therefore, all hooo haaa about the draft is simply a political issue raised by democrats, which make no sense.
modern warfare may have changed but rules on the ground haven't.. The overambitious agenda of the administrations requires a larger presence on the ground after the enemy has been decimated by a superior airforce.. there needs to be an army presence to 'keep the peace'.. that's where more troops are needed and will always be needed cuz as much as it's a surprise for the war-planners, we don't have many 'cheering liberated folks' left over at the end of these invasions.
^^
PA is right. A draft is no longer needed on order to invade a country and defeat its armed forces - modern technology acts as a force multiplier and allows a small numbers of troops to defeat many times their own number on the enemy side.
However, the Iraq war so far has proven that in order to occupy a country, rather than merely defeat it, technology cannot be an effective substiture for the Man On The Ground.
There won't be a draft related to Iraq, unless the resistance continues to drag on at current or greater levels for many more years.
However, if Bush decided to invade another country after the elections, a draft will certainly be needed to maintain an occupation.
My two cents:
You need boots on the ground to seal borders. This specially being the case in Iraq and Afghanistan. US will have no choice but to re-institute draft if another theatre of operations is warranted, example: North Korea, Syria or Iran. Currently US army is spread too thin, Stop Loss, Back Door Drafts and extending the tour of duties is very strainful on the troops and troop moral.:kaboom: 
:rocketup: :soldier: 
PS: You cant fight Guerrilla Insurgency with Air Power alone. The new wars are not going to be fought as conventional wars (US air power is a force to be reckoned with), so the best alternative for the enemy is to engage in Guerrilla tactics.
I am all for draft as I believe it is truly the only possible way to balance the president's power to go to war vs. the American people's will to fight in one. It is the only way to make sure that we will go to war when it is absolutely necessary, not when it is convenient for the people in power. It is the only way to make sure that the American poor do not become the cannon fodder!
r u implying that the rich won't find ways to avoid it?? they did the last time we had one.
Rich also try to evade taxes but this doesn't mean we should not have 'em.
i was only countering your assertion that : "...It is the only way to make sure that the American poor do not become the cannon fodder!"
there surely are other ways.. increased layoffs and jobless is one where the army remains the only available option..