Letter: Another way to look at the military draft

Iraq, always the elephant in the corner of the room at the White House and in the Pentagon, is also consuming all the oxygen. The road to "victory" arguments are clear, or are they? Stay long-term and grow a bigger army, ours, theirs, maybe both, or leave soon and let Allah sort it all out.

Expanding our "all-volunteer" military is a real conundrum. Who wants to volunteer in return for evermore bonus money just to be killed or maimed for life? Lest we forget, for every brave soldier killed in Iraq at least 10 are seriously wounded. Unlike Vietnam, this war has a much better record for keeping the wounded alive.

What is at the heart of the stay-the-course side of the issue is the application of our all-volunteer military. Is it really all we need or is there more?

When former President Nixon proposed an all-volunteer military, I was for it and I still am. However, the current deployment makes no sense. I view having the best and brightest volunteers at the ready as a plus. But after the first six months of real action, where are the draftees? Why are we so willing to put our best and brightest soldiers on the front lines for four years and more while others here at home carry guns on our streets and are a menace to society?

After six months, let's get those who think it's cool to drop out of school, hang out on street corners and in gangs into something more to their liking. Draft them, give them some discipline, and show them how to use a weapon correctly. After all, we don't need the best and brightest to shoulder a weapon, but we do need smart, highly trained people to give them direction.

Richard Rychtarik, Las Vegas

archive