A local radio host brought up the topic that we don't even need the Selective Service. What do you say?

My concerns, as well, sir. That is what shocked me the most - that only 16% would be willing to join if the need arose. Of that 16%, how many would actually be able to serve based on any sort of criminal history, or physical ability?

During Vietnam things like criminal records and physical defects tended to be overlooked. They were drafting about 60,000 a month for awhile and they weren't real picky. 100 pounds overweight? Enough PT and the right diet and we could fix that. Some people had to go through BCT more than once but when we finished with them they were fine. I even saw cases where people were given a waiver for certain requirements because they came in with a permanent profile. Criminal record? Who cares? Judges often gave people a choice between the army or jail so we got quite a few recruits that way. Score too low on all of the tests? No problem except that you couldn't reenlist but you belonged to the army for two years. Everybody could do something. I was told that the same thing was true during WWII and Korea and I am sure that it would happen again if the shit really hit the fan. A large percentage of those people didn't really want to be there but most actually made decent soldiers.

SGT Jerrold Pesz - I wonder how many judges would be willing to do that today? Many of the judges on the bench today aren't necessarily aligned on the political spectrum that judges then were. I'd be willing to bet a good number of them grew up in the generation protesting sending people to war.
I know, a silly concern, but it is there, none-the-less.

TSgt Joshua Duplin - I know that reqs will be lowered/waived for certain things, sir. I just worry, would we actually be able to pull enough people to serve. How many COs/dodgers would we have given the current attitude certain people have towards the oncoming government, the military, hell, the country itself, even? (Its sad I had to mention that last one).