Anyone standing in favor of a draft does not believe in individual rights, or human rights at all, for that matter. A draft, which is brought about because of lack of support for a particular military engagement, requires people who would not normally volunteer for the military to be conscripted. If the person had wanted to be in the military without the draft, and he decided it to be the best option available, that person would already be in the military.
The draft is, by definition, involuntary servitude. Once drafted, should the victim meet all physical requirements, the only way out would be a conscientious objector status – which he must ask permission to receive. This is not a very good argument in favor of the draft being anything other than involuntary, since the ultimate authority on whether a draftee must commit to the fighting machine is not the draftee himself.
Now, suppose we were to start calling a draft by another name for involuntary servitude: slavery. Would all of those writing in favor of the draft be willing to concede that, in order to stop the nation building going on today, we need everyone to pitch in and advocate slavery? With its nationalist appeal and media coverage, the draft is really just slavery all dressed up for the prom. It is nothing more. Involuntary servitude is not consistent with libertarian ideals. It is also not consistent with inviolable human rights to build an army of conscripts. Manufacturing slaves to spread ideals seems like a compromising position.
It would seem that, to advocate a draft, would be to violate any principles one has claiming inviolable human rights.