Chickenhawk Baiting

Has anyone been following the war of words between liberal and conservative writers about enlistment in the military?

On the left there's Kos, with body blows like this.

On the right, there's Jonah Goldberg, with counterpunches like this.

There may be better examples of the arguments on both sides of this issue--and I know there are other participants in this debate--but these are two recent ones I came up with.

Look, there's absolutely no doubt that we have a personnel crisis right now in our military. When two of the four branches are missing recruitment goals month after month, we're increasingly relying on highly paid mercenaries to do our fighting, and reservists in their 40's and 50's who have already served honorably for years are being recalled from jobs and families and sent directly to combat in Iraq for years at a time, it's a crisis. It is not a crisis of will, material, equipment, or logistics--it's a crisis of personnel. And to the extent that this limits or may limit our military options in Iran, North Korea or elsewhere, it has a multiplier effect on our national security.

But if you support this war and are of reasonable age and physical ability, should you drop everything, jury-rig some protective armor in your backyard, put on your cammos and head to Mosul?

First, I've long believed this nation should have some type of compulsory service. Requiring high school or college grads to spend a year in a military-support role or in reserve-type training when most would be getting paid minimum wage anyway is a good idea, and other nations with a fraction of our national security needs have no problem with this. If you support this war and think it is vital to our national security, this is one way you can serve right now; our military is a massive machine, and combat roles are a small part of it. There are jobs available for skilled personnel in every area: computer technology, equipment maintenance, logistics---and for the bloggers and pundits, in media relations as well. You don't need to be in a tent taking mortar rounds every night. You're needed right now, in this country, and your service "in the rear with the gear" could free up someone else to fill a combat role. So if fear is an issue, it shouldn't be.

Some argue it is enough that we already have a military composed of motivated, highly-skilled volunteers; no one can do the job as well as those already in uniform can do it, they say. But if your house is on fire and the kids are asleep upstairs, you go get them; you don't run to your neighbor's house and dial 911 because firemen are better trained to rescue people from burning buildings than you are. In terms of personnel needs, our military's house is on fire right now and the kids' rooms are filling with smoke.

Here's a counterpoint to consider. I think it is reasonable to argue that there are more effective ways for some people to support this war than serving in uniform. We have a massive and ever-growing budget deficit. Many people--me included--think this poses as much of a threat to our national security as anything else. We need to finance this war and our military. If we can't pay for it (and it is arguable we can't and we're not, but that's another issue) it does not matter if there is a line of volunteers from here to Mars begging to enlist. If someone has a family, pays taxes, and makes a few hundred thousand bucks a year, is he doing the nation any good by dropping everything and going to work on an Army base for $10 an hour? Or should he do his part as a civilian so we can actually pay for those tanks and jets? Indeed, our enemies realize the taxpayer is just as important as the soldier; Bin Laden has said that is why he believes civilians are legitimate targets.

Where do I come down on this? I think there are reasonable arguments on both sides of this issue. But ultimately I think the burden of proof is on those who are vocal supporters of this war and this President. If I counted myself among them, I'd certainly think long and hard about joining. During World War II, men and women rushed to enlist regardless of money, career, family, or draft. People are needed right now, and if you think Iraq is an important part of the war on terror and thus vital to our national security, anything else is just conversation. Period.

And when I see privileged, highly educated---and generally Caucasian---writers debate this from behind the safety of a keyboard, I start thinking about shameful episodes in our national history like this. Above all else, it is imperative that we don't go down that path or anywhere near it again.