Declining Military Enrollment: A Modest Proposal © 2006, John Stoddard Klar

It is unthinkable for America to withdraw from Iraq, so it is obvious that the United States has no choice but to increase troop levels. Yet a draft is unpalatable, especially when young women would today be as vulnerable as men for compulsory enlistment.

It is thus with high hopes that this humble writer proposes a simple solution to America's troop shortage: instead of drafting our young people, institute a new military draft of people aged 65 and older. While at first blush this may seem like it might present some tactical drawbacks, let us more fully review the multiple benefits which would arise from such a program.

America's older generations are without doubt responsible for our current situation, having squandered their lives in consumptive comfort while the federal government and corporate America pirated the future. Why should eighteen-year-old boys and girls be sent to this slaughter, when we have so many non-productive retirees sitting around collecting benefits, sucking off the government teat? Those young people are our future (English-speaking) labor force, and we simply can't afford to support the growing retired class in this country. The United States has now killed and maimed many more women and children in Iraq than it has men or soldiers -- since America calls five-year-olds "terrorists," it should be easy to call those in their twilight years "soldiers."

What is lacking in quality in the twilight soldier can be made up for in quantity - no doubt the elderly, especially those over ninety, are not as capable soldiers as our younger generations (especially the old ladies). But increased numbers will compensate for the short-windedness, brittle bones and clogged arteries which affect these troops. And it's not like these folks will seek college or child-bearing deferrals. True, some military equipment such as tanks or planes may be lost to cardiac arrest or stroke in the field, but this can be more than offset by the sheer numbers of available patriotic troops. And unlike the young, many of these people will bring experience from world wars and other conflicts to their service, and at their age they will hardly suffer from the fear of death that afflicts their descendents.

Meanwhile, the financial benefits of this program will be enormous. The young make for very expensive wounded, with amputees, the brain damaged, and PTSD sufferers requiring many decades of federal benefits which further swell our deficits. Not only do the elderly have much lower life expectancy and thus will require shorter disability benefit periods, but those who are killed from roadside bombs, bad falls, pneumonia, friendly fire, etc., will sharply reduce the number of persons eligible to receive Social Security.

Some people would doubtless object that octogenarians do not make good infantry soldiers, but this is simply unfair to our patriotic elders. Boot camp must for these troops teach fighting techniques unique to this caliber of mercenary - instead of bayonets and martial arts, such troops must be trained to attach themselves to the legs of their attackers, bogging them down long enough for artillery fire to make quick work of the enemy, or for other incontinent combatants to overrun them, like a scene from "Night of the Living Dead." Imagine the terror this would strike into those silly Hadjis!

The traditional lobbying leverage of the AARP is of no concern, for in the new America, any cane-rattling against this program would be an obvious demonstration of a lack of allegiance to our Commander-In-Chief: under recent laws, such people are terrorists to be housed in the massive penitentiaries being built by Halliburton for American citizens who are thusly confused in their loyalties.

There is such a surplus of "mature" citizens that our wondrous military technology might be used to employ them directly as munitions. Imagine the terror in all those young Arab hearts if we began carpet-bombing them with human projectiles! Looking up to the sky, all they would see would be wave upon wave of screaming, wrinkled ancients crapping their Depends and spitting curses as they plummeted down on the heads of their enemies, using their boot camp training to steer their bodies toward targets. If the bombing campaign mirrored those waged thus far in the Iraq War, most of these people would just land with a thud in the desert. But many would be able to seek out and strike the many civilian targets available. In fact, a well-trained retiree (who retained some eyesight) could easily strike two or three children with their body mass. And there would be no depleted uranium to threaten younger coalition troops"¦.

Also, suicide bombing by American personnel is necessary to win the psychological war. Our senior citizens often suffer such pain and disability that many would welcome going out with such flair, even without the incentive of dozens of waiting virgins. It would be relatively inexpensive to surgically implant C-4 or other explosives in the bowels of truly committed old farts, rendering them difficult to detect by the enemy. This would make the Iraqis fear even unarmed soldiers. Suicide bombing also relieves the expenses of transport and burial which attend conventional mortalities. Corpulent combatants (is that a new category?) like Dick Cheney or Karl Rove could accommodate large charges and deliver a very effective assault against insurgents. Rush Limbaugh would make an excellent Geriatric Grenade, and he's deaf anyway"¦(he's probably faking it).

Other ideal soldiers include George H.W. and Barbara Bush, who should hardly be permitted to languish in opulent retirement on the taxpayer tab as reward for hatching that demon seed son of theirs. Bush Sr. has flying experience, and Barbara, a known scrapper, could pack a lot of TNT in her paunch! Henry Kissinger (a "smart bomb?") is another aristocrat whose deployment would save us money, and we know that he would "stay the course," right? Nancy Reagan is too skinny to effectively house explosives, but she would make an excellent white phosphorous armament. Ted Kennedy (the "megabomber") could simply bluster hundreds to death before his enormous guttural payload was discharged by remote control (some people just can't be trusted as Kamikazes).

This plan also solves the troop shortage in Iran. Why should the President be restrained in his divinely-inspired military ambitions by the cowardice of America's youth? Just try this plan, and watch how many patriotic elderly flood the recruitment offices, even without exorbitant signing bonuses! Here are the resources to finish the job begun in 1953 when the CIA overthrew Iran's fledgling democracy, and to secure Iran's oil resources for our future. Let's stop pretending we're trying to "liberate" these people we've oppressed for more than fifty years, and just take what we want - our old people know how to do this, and don't suffer the moral squeamishness of our idealistic youth.

Employing our otherwise indolent elderly in this fashion would cause many granny mortalities. But billions of dollars of wealth would be freed up from those wasteful, mummified consumers and transferred to the next generations. With costs cut and capital reallocated to those who will quickly squander it, a stimulus to the economy would be accomplished which might offset the looming economic collapse from an unserviceable federal deficit, an imploding real estate market, and spiraling inflation.

If we run short of able-bodied old folks, the nation's obese people will make good receptacles for munitions (instead of liposuction, the government could inject them with nitro!), and they offer larger impacts in cluster bomb formations. Their sacrifice would free up food supplies for the more temperate. Pedophiles, whose numbers are increasing exponentially at home, could be unleashed in Iraq as an alternative to prison, and simply set loose on the Iraqi children (The Foley Brigade?) - they are already armed, they would strike terror into our vile enemies, and at least the Iraqi kids would have a chance at survival"¦.

Frankly, the other proposals presented for Iraq, like partitioning or withdrawal, are pie-in-the-sky fantasies. The use of our "elderforces" is efficient, cost-saving, and equitable. What are we to do in Iraq otherwise? And what are we to do with all of these old people and our nation's soaring healthcare costs? If this plan seems untenable, just ask our nation's elderly what they think of such a golden (years) opportunity: surely the response would be enthusiastic!

I profess as my motive for this writing, my sincere desire to arrest America's military and economic decline. In fact, both of my parents, and my two 96-year-old grandmothers, would be likely conscripts under this program. But it would be unpatriotic for me to ignore such a brilliant solution because of personal remorse, or to deny my parents or grandmothers the glorious opportunity to "defend" their nation.

This plan will probably be discarded, as all really good plans are by government incompetence. Instead of tapping these valuable reserves, we'll keep wasting our innocent youth....

John Stoddard Klar www.christianwords.us

John Stoddard Klar is the author of Christian Words, Un-Christian Actions: George W. Bush and the Desecration of Christianity in Modern America
Available at www.pleasantwordbooks.com