What an unbelievably bad idea. Mandatory drafting is involuntary servitude, slavery. How about taking a non interventionist policy?
What do people who are not a part of the military care about non-intervention? There is a reason we viliify the draft-dodger who becomes a politician and sends others sons off to war.
Here is a Wikipedia quote
"The persistent old belief that peasants and small farmers gathered to form a national army or fyrd is a strange delusion dreamt up by antiquarians in the late eighteenth or early nineteenth centuries to justify universal military conscription"
I support Rothbard's view on the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3TY5OhUJhw
I find both the notions that conscription=slavery and that taxation=theft can only be held by someone who does not believe in any sort of duty or obligation to one's community, country, nation, or God, and that self-interest must necessarily be one's sole (or at least primary) motivating factor.
I don't know where you got this idea. Most of the largest empires in history - Romans, Sassanids, Ottomans, British, you name it - had a professional warrior class. It wasn't all voluntary, but ideas like draft only applied to non-citizens.
My point is that military service is a responsibility, not a chore foisted upon us. If it were, we would be subjects. But we are not subjects, we are citizens.
Maybe when the country is being invaded. For offensive wars however I don’t know how you can argue this.
And certain offensive wars are for the common defense, usually against neighboring countries over scarce resources, or against other imperial powers.
Well yea, that is what the parent comment explicitly advocates.
The problem is that US voters are insulated from the horrifying effects of war and thus are not inclined to avoid it.
Thus, the parent advocates achieving non-interventionist policy by giving Americans voters consequences through the draft.
So kind of roundabout, but such is often the only viable way in politics.