>>The influx of troops required to add "boots on the ground" comes in the form of Iraqi troops.<<

We've completely dismantled their military. It will literally take years to rebuild it. This is compounded by the fact that the Iraqi economy is a disgrace and most of the people enlisting are doing strictly for a paycheck and have no intention of dying for their country. When the economy is good, you get a better grade of soldier because he's volunterring out of a sense of duty. When the economy is bad, they sign up just to have a job and patriotism and duty be damned. Whent he bullets fly, they flee. It will take years just to comb out the malingerers and the free-loaders.

>>A US draft would solve absolutely nothing apart from increasing your casualty rates and guaranteeing the defeat of US troops.<<

It's the only chance we have. It is the ONLY option not being explored. Every other has been exhausted and been found wanting and that is why Robert Gates said the other day that he is open to suggestions. That should prove right there that we currntly have no real options. So to me, we either get out and get out now or we stay and fight but we MUST have fresh, well-trained, well-armed troops and we're not going to get them from among the Iraqis.

>>How long do you think it would take to put those draftees into the frontline? The answer to that would be termed in months not weeks.<<

That's atually very fast. With Iraqis, it will take years. At least 5 years of struggle must pass before any Iraqi officer or enlisted leader would be considered savvy, experienced and trustworthy enough to be followed. We don't have that time to wait. We have to do something NOW!!

>>How effective would they be? Absolutely bloody useless, they would be a bigger danger to your "professional" troops than the insurgents those "professionals" are currently fighting.<<

Professional armies historically don't work any more effectively. Ask Egypt, Rome, Greece, Assyria, IRAQ and countless other nations of the past. They all had professional armies. They all fell. Professional armies are notorious for a can-do attitude no matter what the odds are. "We can do it" "we don't need help" "We're soldiers and we rely on ourselves" is all you'll ever get out of them regardless of what the truth is. They don't care about the truth. All they care about is being a soldier. Once there is a war, they generally don't want it to stop because it might mean being cashiered once that war ends. It's their livelihood--they have nothing to go home to. The longer a war goes on for a professional soldier, the better--it's his job. Professional armies are bunk.

>>Please note that while a largely "civilian" think tank suggests an increase in troop levels, not one single military commander on ground has asked for more troops. I would rely more on their judgement of the situation than those of any damn committee sitting in Washington.<<

You would be an idiot to do so because, as a veteran and as someone working inside the defense industry, military people do not speak their minds to the public and they do not get in the faces of the people whose policies they are assigned to carry out. They do what they're told and, by my own military experience, they are told to do it and shut up. And they do. That's why generals retire before they speak out against Rumsfeld. They just can't do it when they're in an active capacity or they would have. Generals aren't clamoring for more men because they have been ordered not to and a good soldier NEVER disobeys an order unless it is illegal.

>>US with their conscripted/draftee army were comprehensively defeated in Vietnam by a far weaker foe.<<

I never said we would win. We are going to lose. But it is the only chance we have to score some kind of victory. If we leave without drafting, it will always look like we chickened out--in fact, if we leave before we draft we DID INDEED chicken out. It would show the rest of the world that we're just a pack of stupid asses who start shit and then expect everyone else to finish it for us because we're weren't prepared to make the sacrifices necessary for a victory. Not acceptable. We must make EVERY effort--EVERY EFFORT--possible BEFORE withdrawing. That means we HAVE to draft. Will we win? Fuck no. Of course not. It's too late for that. But we have to be the example not a coward who starts a fight and then hides behind others. Every other option has been exhausted. This is the only one left before withdrawal and it MUST be implemented before we can leave.

>>The Soviets with their conscripted/draftee army were comprehensively defeated in Afghanistan by a far weaker foe.<<

It doesn't matter. We MUST draft BEFORE we can leave or we will have cut and run. It is the ONLY option not yet exploited and it must be exploited before we can leave.

>>The British with their professional Army succeeded in both Malaysia and Borneo.<<

It doesn't matter. We are losing the war and so we MUST draft or we will be cutting and running. We will be cowards in the eyes of the world.

>>Currently in Afghanistan while BBC repeatedly reports that the number of deaths in Helmand Province have rocketted since the British took over, they somehow fail to mention that the vast bulk of those killed are Taleban fighters - again they are facing professional troops, not conscripts, not draftees.<<

It doesn't matter. We are losing the war!!!!! THEREFORE we MUST draft before we leave or we will be cowards who cut and run. We MUST exhaust EVERY POSSIBLE OPTION before we can leave. Period. And if that means a draft then so be it.