Instead of a draft, how about mandatory service?

[hellokeith]

I'm not favoring any involuntary service.. just making an alternate suggestion because I believe a draft would be a disaster on all sides.

So here's how my two-year mandatory service works:

1. Enter service upon completion of high school or 19th birthday (whichever comes earlier)
* Only exemptions are if you are in prison (not probation) or in a hospital (not out-patient), and you will immediately go into mandatory service upon release.
2. National lottery determines allocation to Army, Navy, Air Force, or Coast Guard. You may only apply for Marines after mandatory service is completed.
** Only exemption is for High School ROTC graduates, who may select service or (if qualified and appointed) go to West Point/Anapolis/etc.

Thoughts? Opinions?

 

[Harvey]

Manditory service is just one name for a draft. There have always been exceptions, exemptions and alternate service options to fulfill the obligation when the law was active.

 

[Moonbeam]

No

 

[Balt]

My biggest problem with it would be that I don't think the military has the infrastructure or the funds to handle or effectively train that many people. I also don't believe our country has a need for that many people unless we go to war with a country like North Korea or China.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Balt
My biggest problem with it would be that I don't think the military has the infrastructure or the funds to handle or effectively train that many people. I also don't believe our country has a need for that many people unless we go to war with a country like North Korea or China.

If they have the numbers they will.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Balt
My biggest problem with it would be that I don't think the military has the infrastructure or the funds to handle or effectively train that many people. I also don't believe our country has a need for that many people unless we go to war with a country like North Korea or China.

If they have the numbers they will.

agreed!!

 

[hellokeith]

Originally posted by: Balt
My biggest problem with it would be that I don't think the military has the infrastructure or the funds to handle or effectively train that many people. I also don't believe our country has a need for that many people unless we go to war with a country like North Korea or China.

Do we know how many 18, 19, 20 year old's there are in the US? Out of 300 million, I would guess it to be 1-2% of the population, which puts us at 3-6 million. I don't know what total troop levels are across all the armed services, but 4.5 million (averaged) doesn't sound too outrageous. Some could go into national/state guard, determined by the lottery.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Balt
My biggest problem with it would be that I don't think the military has the infrastructure or the funds to handle or effectively train that many people. I also don't believe our country has a need for that many people unless we go to war with a country like North Korea or China.

South Korea alone can handle North Korea, if they had too. There's a lot more than just numerical strength.

 

[gentobu]

That would be stupid. When I was in basic training there were people who decided they did not want to be in the army anymore and made things miserable for the rest of us. It would be 100x worse if you forced people to join.

 

[fskimospy]

No matter what our troop numbers, we're not going to war with China any time soon. Why would we? Countries do not lightly pick wars with one of their largest trading partners.

Currently we have about 2.5 million people in uniform. Considering the #1 item on the defense budget is manpower expenditures, having a 4-6 million person army would require a massive increase in the military budget. Don't we waste enough money on it already?

As far as North Korea goes, it can barely feed and supply its army within its own borders. The threat North Korea poses is not one of conquest, but more of how much damage they can do to South Korea on their way down. (the whole artillery around Seoul thing). More troops there wouldn't significantly alter this.

I just don't see the purpose in either this mandatory service, or in the draft as people describe it. It's too late to add more troops to Iraq, and we don't need more for anything else. The only good purpose of a draft would be to hopefully curtail any further foreign adventures by placing everyone at approximately equal risk of having to go there.

 

[Brovane]

Are you Going to be drafted


This article does a great job of explaining why a military draft is impratical and will reduce the effectiveness of our current military. You cannot force patriotism on somebody.

I say No. Forcing people into National Mandatory Service is bad idea and quiet frankly reminds me of some ideas from Communism. Also from reading this I take it that Females will also be forced into Mandatory Military service also. This proposal will ruin the effectivness of the US military and grow the US Defense Budget by 200+ Billion Dollars a year to just pay, feed and house these soldiers. Please take time to read the above article (Are you Going to be Drafted) I linked before you respond.

Thanks- Greg B

 

[bamacre]

I am not signing up to defend our country only to be sent to attack another. Fvck that.

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: hellokeith

Originally posted by: Balt
My biggest problem with it would be that I don't think the military has the infrastructure or the funds to handle or effectively train that many people. I also don't believe our country has a need for that many people unless we go to war with a country like North Korea or China.

Do we know how many 18, 19, 20 year old's there are in the US? Out of 300 million, I would guess it to be 1-2% of the population, which puts us at 3-6 million. I don't know what total troop levels are across all the armed services, but 4.5 million (averaged) doesn't sound too outrageous. Some could go into national/state guard, determined by the lottery.

That 3 to 4.5 million, that would be an annual figure. So that is 6 to 9 million on a biannual basis. That is still a crapload of people.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: bamacre
I am not signing up to defend our country only to be sent to attack another. Fvck that.

Sounds like you've not been properly brainwashed. See, we're good. Everyone we don't like is bad. So it's a good thing that we're attacking them, because they're all evil. Everything is black and white, no shades of gray.

 

[shadow9d9]

Umm, I don't think so..

 

[GTaudiophile]

I would be 100% for it! Would force the spoiled youths of America to grow up and take some responsibility.

2 years mandatory military service (but could never be sent to war): YES!

 

[hellokeith]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Remember:
spidey07- Kentucky
According to a 1976 law that was revised in 1990, public schools in Kentucky are allowed to teach creationism in addition to evolution. The law states that any teacher who wishes to may teach "the theory of creation as presented in the Bible."
Pabster- Iowa
Hellokeith- Texas

Wow. I made it into someone's sig. I feel honored. (or perhaps stalked :Q)

 

[touchmyichi]

I'm a 20 year old and there is no way in hell I would go overseas to war. I don't care, anyone can insult me or say whatever they want, but I would do anything in my power to avoid going to war. The reason is simple: I don't want to die and I don't want to harm other people. Anyone who feels otherwise is crazy.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I would be 100% for it! Would force the spoiled youths of America to grow up and take some responsibility.

2 years mandatory military service (but could never be sent to war): YES!

Haha, the old "damn kids!" argument. If you think kids today are bad, here's a quote for you:

Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers.
Socrates
Athens (469 BC - 399 BC)

Everyone always thinks the kids these days are the worst ever.


Effectiveness of our military aside, I really do think there is something to the argument that were we to have a draft, it would be far harder to drum up public support for stupid unnecessary wars. That's a definite plus!

edited to add the real quote.

 

[touchmyichi]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I would be 100% for it! Would force the spoiled youths of America to grow up and take some responsibility.

2 years mandatory military service (but could never be sent to war): YES!

What about the others of us who have a drive in life, want to get an education to learn more about the world, and want to use that knowledge to do something special? I'm sick of this generational stereotyping that people have been doing to us. A lot of my generation is VERY hard working, I think a lot of people underestimate just how hard it is to make colleges and to do well in the world these days. Student competition is more competitive than it ever was before and I have every fact in the world of admissions to support me on that. Furthermore, we are intelligent enough to know that war is horrible and that its something we want to have no part in. We aren't going to be fed lies by the propaganda the military throws at us in TV about how joining the army is going to somehow make us amazing people.

 

[PrinceofWands]

You must allow for non-military related service; peace corps, job corps, parks service, etc. Lottery is a foolish allocation of resources. You put the best qualified where they go (or where they want to go). The same goes for Marines. Finally, you really should have a choice. If you don't want to give service that should be fine, but you should lose something in return. I've generally been a larger fan of 'service guarantees citizenship'. Not the voting thing, but by way of government benefits. You don't want to serve, don't. But no welfare, no state medical, no social security (well I'd rather that was gone anyway), no grants, no subsidized loans, etc. Either give something back to your country or get NOTHING from your country except a place to live.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
You must allow for non-military related service; peace corps, job corps, parks service, etc. Lottery is a foolish allocation of resources. You put the best qualified where they go (or where they want to go). The same goes for Marines. Finally, you really should have a choice. If you don't want to give service that should be fine, but you should lose something in return. I've generally been a larger fan of 'service guarantees citizenship'. Not the voting thing, but by way of government benefits. You don't want to serve, don't. But no welfare, no state medical, no social security (well I'd rather that was gone anyway), no grants, no subsidized loans, etc. Either give something back to your country or get NOTHING from your country except a place to live.

And here I thought that was why we paid taxes?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
You must allow for non-military related service; peace corps, job corps, parks service, etc. Lottery is a foolish allocation of resources. You put the best qualified where they go (or where they want to go). The same goes for Marines. Finally, you really should have a choice. If you don't want to give service that should be fine, but you should lose something in return. I've generally been a larger fan of 'service guarantees citizenship'. Not the voting thing, but by way of government benefits. You don't want to serve, don't. But no welfare, no state medical, no social security (well I'd rather that was gone anyway), no grants, no subsidized loans, etc. Either give something back to your country or get NOTHING from your country except a place to live.

And here I thought that was why we paid taxes?

Not supposed to be. Taxes are supposed to support the basic operation of a minimalist government structure. Consider taxes (when going to a correct government) rent for living in a country, and a sunk cost. But that's crossing into a different argument.

My point was somewhat a symbolic one, but has practical applications. Service to ones country is an act of belonging. It forms a relationship. Relationships are two way. By supporting our country we expect support in return. If we choose not to support, then we can expect no support in return. I only list social services in my previous post, but I meant it for all government support. Basic right of citizenship is to vote, have a right to live and work within the borders, be covered by the applicable legal codes, receive basic services (water, police, fire, military), etc. Those things are covered by taxation. Anything extra (working for the government, receiving government monies, tax exemptions maybe, etc) is about benefits of a relationship. That's where the loss should be.

 

[boredhokie]

Mandatory trade school if you don't make it into college = sure. Military = no way. This administration and society treats soldiers (and everything else) as disposable. GTS can go ahead and join to show how non-spoiled he is - have fun in the desert fighting for something or other.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
No