Beginning of article  The need for increasing the size of the
Army is a subject of enduring importance. Even preceding 9/11,
the Army was too small for its missions; now it is too small
even to assure its continued quality and capability. We are
already sustaining its viability through stop-loss and extending
the terms of service of our reservists.  Two recent bits of news
have highlighted issues that bear on the problem. First,
Congressman Charles Rangel has proposed a reinstitution of the
draft. The idea has provoked a spate of newspaper columns
rehashing old arguments, pro and con, about the draft, UMT
(universal military training), fairness and unfairness and the
comparable value and trainability of draftees and volunteers.
Most military veterans, at least the ones I know, can cite the
ultimate benefits to the nation of UMT, and most see the need
for relying on the draft if we become involved in a war
demanding a high, long-term manpower commitment. Most military
veterans, however, also recognize the ben