If the draft had been reinstated after 9/11...

[Frodo]

Let's try this again -I hope this thread will have more substance to it than the last one I deleted:

Suppose that President Bush had urged Congress in the immediate aftermath of the terror attacks on September 11th, 2001, to reinstate the draft.  How would this factor impact the train of events that have led to the situation we are in now? 

You are welcome to come up with your own timeline on what would have happened if conscription had been reinstated. 

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

It would not go over well and when combined with the recession at the time would lead to congress/the POTUS/Washington D.C. not being going concerns.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Agreed, from the POV of 2001, its hard to see how drafting an army was going to help in the War on Terror.  The only nation that was offering support for Osama was Afghanistan and we didn't need a draft to handle Afghanistan.  It was only when Bush tried to expand the War on Al-Qaeda to include the Axis of Evil that did the possibility of needing a large army even became a possibility.  If Bush had called for a draft for that, he wouldn't have gotten it and might well have failed to get Congressional approval for the War on Saddam.

[DanielX]

It would have a mixed reaction at the time. If Bush combined the draft with a complete 'we are at war' WWII-style mobilization, possibly cutting off some fuel from foreign countries and going for gasoline rationing, lots of propaganda, etc. you might have a reaction similar to World War II - there will be lots of unhappy people, but it'll be a 'war effort'. This might be combined with more rigorous anti-terrorist operations.

I suspect most draftees won't go into active combat, instead being used for internal security (especially sealing the borders) and to replace volunteer soldiers in places like South Korea and Germany. I could strongly see the US going into more thorough anti-terror operations, like bullying Pakistan into allowing significant numbers US troops to enter the NW Frontier Province. Iraq and/or Iran might happen, might not. We'd have the numbers for it.

My reaction would be mixed. I generally have a strong distaste for drafts, but this might work better than OTL in terms of getting at terrorists (by having large draft armies doing internal patrols and stuff), and incidentally also drug smuggling and illegal immigration.

OTOH, there's a good chance Bush et al screws things up and we'd have draft riots and all sorts of Vietnam-era sh*t.

[NewFederalist]

No one in the Pentagon even wants a return to the selective service system as a means of acquiring manpower. Far too many deferments and loopholes which many of the people they want to recruit use to avoid service. Difficult as it may be to believe, the top brass figured it out long ago that the best way to get the forces they want is to offer specific recruitment incentives. The cost of training and equiping a service member today is far more than in the Vietnam era. The real issue here is should a formal declaration of war been made. That would have gone a very long way to avoiding much of the morass we now experience.

[kashifsakhan]

He probably would have been voted out in 2004 if he'd somehow managed to reinstate the draft.

With more and more soldiers being killed in Iraq, i think the democrats under Kerry, Dean or Clark would have put up the arguement that Bush is sending kids to they're death in Iraq/Afghanistan.

There would probably be another case of draft-dodging, and massive student protests, the democrats who would be completely anti-draft in the 2004 campaign would probably win with the backing of the young voters around 18-25/30 age people.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Actually, in the unlikely event of a draft, our foreign problems would have been less not more.  Had we been able to put a million men in Iraq instead of 200,000 we would have been able to prevent the chaos that has followed.  We would haev had enough men to secure the ammo dumps and keep the peace until an Iraqi civilian government could have been elected.  We would have had the strength to disarm all of the militias and prevented the need for the private security forces in that unhappy city of Baghdad.  With the military having to come to grips with a draft-forced expansion, I doubt if Iraq could have been invaded before 2003 at the earliest, so the 2002 election would have been a referendum on the draft that would have occurred before the War on Iraq. So either 2003 sees a lame-duck Bush contending with a Democratic Congress getting nothing done, or we have a successful invasion of Iraq and the GOP goes on to become the party of permanent majority for a couple of decades that Karl Rove dreams about.

[Inmate Trump]

If this had happened, Bush's high poll numbers at that time wouldn't have lasted for as long as they did.  He would've lost the 2004 election in a Democratic landslide.  The Democrats probably would have went with Dean, being the most anti-draft/anti-war candidate of the field.  President Dean, upon arrival in office, would've put a stop to the draft.  His election would've also signaled the withdrawal of the U.S. from Iraq.

[kashifsakhan]

If this had happened, Bush's high poll numbers at that time wouldn't have lasted for as long as they did.  He would've lost the 2004 election in a Democratic landslide.  The Democrats probably would have went with Dean, being the most anti-draft/anti-war candidate of the field.  President Dean, upon arrival in office, would've put a stop to the draft.  His election would've also signaled the withdrawal of the U.S. from Iraq.

For once I agree with you 100%. But i think the withdrawl of the US from Iraq would have been a longer drawn out process. I think it would ahve been the main issue of his presidency - giving Iraq back to the Iraqis as soon as possible. I'm sure that by 2007, he would have completed the withdrawl.

[Left-Wing Blogger]

There is no way a draft could have stood. Even warmonger Bush would find it quite impossible. He's already made those attacks his platform, as has Giuliani.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Bush fails to invade Iraq and loses in 2004. The end.

[Stranger in a strange land]

There is no way a draft could have stood. Even warmonger Bush would find it quite impossible. He's already made those attacks his platform, as has Giuliani.

I agree: society has changed too much to allow a draft. Of course I remember seeing a LOT of hysterical BUSH WILL BRING BACK THE DRAFT!!! announcements and e-mails in the 2003-2005 period.

[afleitch]

The Republican controlled Senate would have voted to repeal don't ask don't tell and allow gays to serve openly but only out of spite. A full scale draft would have exposed the number of healthy and able soldiers being turned away because of their sexuality. It would have been spun in such a way that it was the 'gays fault', unpatriotic, selfish etc rather than as the result of the law.

[Frodo]

The Republican controlled Senate would have voted to repeal don't ask don't tell and allow gays to serve openly but only out of spite. A full scale draft would have exposed the number of healthy and able soldiers being turned away because of their sexuality. It would have been spun in such a way that it was the 'gays fault', unpatriotic, selfish etc rather than as the result of the law.

I think the Senate was actually 'controlled' by Democrats at that time, due to then-Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords' abandonment of the Republican Party in June. 

[Verily]

The Republican controlled Senate would have voted to repeal don't ask don't tell and allow gays to serve openly but only out of spite. A full scale draft would have exposed the number of healthy and able soldiers being turned away because of their sexuality. It would have been spun in such a way that it was the 'gays fault', unpatriotic, selfish etc rather than as the result of the law.

I think the Senate was actually 'controlled' by Democrats at that time, due to then-Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords' abandonment of the Republican Party in June. 

Theoretically. The reality was that the Republicans could do pretty much whatever they wanted in the Senate because many (arguably most) Democratic Senators were unwilling to stand up to the President in the wake of 9/11.

[Хahar 🤔]

The Republican controlled Senate would have voted to repeal don't ask don't tell and allow gays to serve openly but only out of spite. A full scale draft would have exposed the number of healthy and able soldiers being turned away because of their sexuality. It would have been spun in such a way that it was the 'gays fault', unpatriotic, selfish etc rather than as the result of the law.

I think the Senate was actually 'controlled' by Democrats at that time, due to then-Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords' abandonment of the Republican Party in June. 

Control switched hands about 4 times in that Senate.