What is your opinion about the practice of praising volunteers today over draftees in the past?

Mine is simple. It is nonsense. Our History is full of examples of volunteers who failed and outstanding draftees. I don't support a draft unless it is revised to make it much fairer than the past and loop holes like student deferments for example closed. Cheney used that repeatedly to avoid Vietnam service. The only two loop holes I would leave intact are only son and conscientious objector status. This brings me to my example. Most draftees from the Civil War to Vietnam served as well as volunteers. The names on war memorials are all dead and they don't have draftee or volunteer beside them. It is a myth WWII and WWI were volunteers wars. Both had a large number of draftees. In combat troops don't have the luxury to go over whether the person next to them was a volunteer or drafted. They fight to survive, for their unit pride, and for their friends survival. Not for political slogans. Anyone who has experienced this knows the truth of this statement. For one example Sgt. Alvin York was a draftee in WWI. He originally seriously considered refusing to serve for conscientious objector reasons. He had to be convinced service was not unchristian. Then he proved an outstanding soldier. He won the Medal of Honor and several allied decorations for an action in the Argonne. York killed thirty Germans and forced the surrender of two hundred others while armed with a bolt action rifle and regulation pistol. The Germans had the same weaponary as well as many machine guns. They were a machine gun battlion. In WW I these were crack troops in all armies. York's squad was pinned down and he was the only one in position to resist. There are many examples of gallantry by draftees and there are many examples in our history when volunteers did not perform well in action. A label does not say how people will react when it comes down to the line. Who agrees?