Mandatory Military Service

[Preyhunter]

<< The Military are my servants and they protect my ass. That's why I pay them and it'll always be like that. >>



LOL, that's a good one. Now, take that one into an NCO club and see how it goes over. I don't imagine there would be much protecting at that point.

 

[OutHouse]

Mister T wrote:
As a general rule of thumb, I beleive if you have a college degree and upon graduation you become an active POSITIVE member of society, you should have a military exemption. Those who wish to do nothing with their lives, drop out of school, collect welfare, etc., should be required to partake in military service. It would be the only way to help them become a POSITIVE influence on society.


What does having a college degree have to do with anything? So you got a 4 year degree so what, big deal, whoo hooo!!! are you special or something? your an american citizen just like everybody else. I bet there are more people out there with-out a sheepskin who have just as if not more of a positive impact on society than most college grads. Just because you have a college degree doesent automatically make you a any more privilaged. :|

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

In the time of crisis you will be ordered by your Superior Officer to protect my ass. Plain and simple. And you follow orders just like you always have!

 

[Kosugi]

The founding fathers did see it as an infringement of personal liberties to force anyone to do anything.


This includes paying taxes, and most certainly forcing people into military service.


The 20th century saw the US in 4 major wars (WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam), and thus we are accustomed to the military being a major player in our society, however, that has not been the norm over the course of the history of the United States.

The historical norm for the US was to have a *very* small army, but with the ability to scale up when necessary. But the majority of our history our fore-fathers, and founding-fathers, were not military.

I'd also like you all to remember that if everyone were forced to spend two or more years in the military, our military would number 10 million or more. Do any of you realize how expensive that would be to maintain? How many of you realize that as a direct result of reducing the size of the military over the last ten years we have saved the US trillions, and this is in fact one of the leading contributors to the budget surplus's of today?

No, for patriotic reasons, and for fiscal reasons, we must never force our citizens into service. We treasure our freedoms and liberties, and this is one of them.

Oh, the founding fathers were also more concerned about a large standing army with too little to do than they were reassured by its presense.

 

[Preyhunter]

<< In the time of crisis you will be ordered by your Superior Officer to protect my ass. Plain and simple. And you follow orders just like you always have! >>



I won't be ordered to do anything, probably because I'm no longer in the military. YOU, on the other hand, will be cowering behind these people when your way of life and level of comfort are threatened. Don't fool yourself.

 

[GL]

Mandatory military service is one of the best socialist programmes ever. I'm glad a lot of the Conservatives/Capitalists are for it.



-GL

 

[Mister T]

Citrix,

<<What does having a college degree have to do with anything? So you got a 4 year degree so what, big deal, whoo hooo!!! are you special or something? your an american citizen just like everybody else. I bet there are more people out there with-out a sheepskin who have just as if not more of a positive impact on society than most college grads. Just because you have a college degree doesent automatically make you a any more privilaged. >>

Lets take a look at some facts:

People with 4-year degrees are

1. Likely to have higher paying jobs than high school grads or dropouts.
2. Likely to commit fewer crimes than high school grads or dropouts.
3. NOT as likely to use Social Services (like Welfare, subsidized housing, food stamps) than high school grads or dropouts.
4. Likely to have more &quot;direction&quot; in life.

Bottom line: I think being in the army teaches you discipline. Many people in this country lack discipline. If more people were disciplined and self-sufficient, then this country would be 5X as strong with 1/2 the SOCIAL spending.

 

[Phil21]

According to Mister T I should be serving in the military right now. Nevermind I have a successful small business and am pulling down more money in my full time job than my parents make. I DROPPED OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL! *gasp*

Yes, I am the exception to the rule, but overbroad statements need to be corrected. I do believe the &quot;positive contributor to society&quot; part. If I were on the street living on welfare, thats a different story. Why should others have to try to make up the slack for me?

peace,

-Phil

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

Preyhunter,

When my way of life is threatened? Please, tell me you're fvcking joking! Because, if you're not, you're more brainwashed than I originally thought.

 

[Mister T]

Phil,

I really wish there were more people like you man. One of America's strongest asset is the small business owner.
But you are definitely the exception to the rule. I see so many of my friends doing nothing and living off their parents.
If Military service was mandatory, it would be a nice kick in the @ss for them to do something.

I am not trying to set absolutes here of what is right or wrong, but I think mandatory military service would make this country much stronger and prosperous.

-----------
BTW, I am not trying to incite class warfare here. My father is a high school grad, while my mom is a high school drop out. Next year I will be making more than my mom and dad combined.

 

[BoberFett]

You're pretty high and mighty there, eh Hamburgersimp? I'd love to see a drill instructor reduce your candy ass to a pile of quivering goo, you sniveling little bitch.

 

[Mister T]

Another point I would like to make.

Some countries that have mandatory military service allow for the option of buying oneself out.
So you would basically pay the government a sum of money to exempt yourself from serving your mandatory time.

I support this. Even though people see Mandatory military service as a Socialist policy, I see it differently. I see it as value creation. Arbitrage if you will. Take a person with no direction, no job, no skills and throw him in the army. Then teach his to repair tanks and helicopters - Bam, now he is a mechanic. On the other hand, why take some dude on Wall Street making 100K a year and make his serve in the military. This would be value destruction - A negative NPV project if you will. This guy is more valuable to society doing what he does.

I guess it would be tough to decide who should HAVE to serve and who should be exempt. I struck a nerve when I proposed a college grad... Perhaps it would be better if proposed paying the government a lump sum of 30K to exempt yourself. Is that better?

 

[Kosugi]

A follow up from my previous post,



I view myself as pretty well read on the motives of the Founding Fathers, and the intent of the Constitution.

Over time, it seems that a large part of our own society has forgotten what that was, and why.

For instance, when new laws are passed, they aren't passed on the basis of perceived morality, or public acceptance: they are run by Constitutional lawyers who scrutinize every last detail to make sure they are in keeping with the Constitution and the intent of the Founding Fathers. If they are not, then there are only two options, 1) scrap it, or 2) push for an amendment to the Constitution (fat chance there anymore).

I just want to point out to you that the vision of America held by the Founders is still respected and pursued today. We do modify that vision as society as a whole progresses, but that is the exception.

The Founding Fathers feared George Washington (probably a little known fact), for the power he could yield. They feared dictatorships. They feared large standing armies at times of peace. However, they did support the idea of losely associated local militias in place of large formed armies (the right to bear arms interpretration).

So, I would speculate that were the Founding Fathers alive today, they would view the size and scope of the American military with great suspicion.

I think, from my reading, that their attitude would be &quot;It is very patriotic to serve your nation's military in time of war, however, it would be unpatriotic to serve in time of peace (military being an expensive, potentially destablizing, and unnecessary for the country during peactime).&quot;

I know that doesn't sit well with alot people. To tell you the truth, my father was military, and I guess it wouldn't sit well with him either (he passed away along time ago, so I cant ask him). But the United States guiding principles are put forth from the Constitution, and where ambiguity is found, from interpretation of the intent of the Founding Fathers.

Finally, love them or hate them... or do both, the ACLU are the watchdogs of the Constitution, and the personal liberties garaunteed within. I know it is easy to get upset with them for their interpretations, and representations, of some of the more contentious issues in American society, but I personally sleep better at night knowing that such an agency exists to protect the rights of the individual. Even, as in some cases, I feel they are misguided.

So, after all this mentioning of the Founding Fathers... How many of you can name all (or some) of our principle Founding Fathers? I'll post a list of the top 20 or so later... I'm at work and can't source them here.

Well Mister T, thanks for the thought provoking topic, I know my &quot;liberal&quot; reply is going to be ill-received by many, but it is an informed one.

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

Uh oh. Name calling gets you timed out! Maybe we should all back away from the computer and go out for some fresh air. BTW, WTH is sniveling?

 

[Netopia]

<< There's no law that says I have to feel pride and honor for this fvcked up country >>



No, there's not. But since you feel so strongly about how bad it is, I'm sure you've renounced your citizenship and have decided to move elsewhere? NO? Then you are only standing ground purchased through the blood of people who were willing to serve their country. If you don't like the country, you are more than welcome... encouraged even... to either make some sort of effort for positive change or LEAVE.

As far as I'm concerned, those who are unwilling to lay their life on the line for the interests of their nation should have no right to make decisions (read VOTE) in the country. Action speaks louder than words.... if it didn't, we'd be still be singing God Save The Queen!

Joe

 

[atom]

Hell no. I refuse to be forced into combat, even training, especially with the crazy global police attitude our country has.

I'm all for supporting our country and I do agree we take so much for granted, but demanding we train for combat situations is a bit much. Even the thought of being forced to learn some sort of trade that helps our country is a bit much to me, though I'd be far, far less opposed to it than actual combat training.

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

&quot;those who are unwilling to lay their life on the line for the interests of their nation should have no right to make decisions &quot;.

So, if I kill innocent people of other countries, then I have all these rights? Damn, this is getting all too confusing!

 

[Kosugi]

*sigh*


I guess I'm too long winded.


Forcing people to serve in the military is Unconstitutional except in times of war. Forcing people to serve in the military during peacetime is &quot;unpatriotic&quot;, at least contextually. A soldier is a resource that achieves maximum ROI (return on investment) during times of war. During peacetime, they are actually burdens on society, since it is practically a welfare system. Their resources would be better spent farming or building something.

That was the initial feelings of our Founding Fathers. Sorry I didn't state it directly.

I know it doesn't sit well, especially with those who served only during peacetime, but think about it... the US government spends an atrocious amount of money on soldiers, and what do they return to society for that money? (army corps of engineers is an exception)

At times of peace, a massive military is little more than a federal funded welfare program. Think about it.

 

[IJump]

I served on active duty and in the reserves. I don't think service should be mandatory but some sort of training could be. Basic military skills translate weel into regular life. Things like marksmanship and gun safety, first aid, survival skills, etc. could benefit everyone even if not in the military. Then in the event of a genuine military crisis, the draftees could be better prepared. The training would have to be well thought out, short enough not too be too imposing, but long enough to instill some sort of discipline.

Mandatroy service, No.

Mandatory training, Maybe.

 

[wyvrn]

No. We have enough volunteers right now to take care of it. Though I think we should all appreciate the efforts of our countrymen and women who do serve. Push come to shove, I would serve if neccessary, but I am not gonna volunteer in times of peace. That's just me.

 

[vi edit]

Kosugi, I don't think you can draw a comparison that easily. The times are far different now than they were 225 years ago. Back then, it took you 3 months to organize an army and ship them from Europe to the East coast here in the US. It then took weeks for an Army to march a matter of a couple hundred miles. At that time, the US didn't have a huge threat of any sort, and even if they did, they had plenty of time to prepare for it.

Times are different now. You can mobilize an army and attack a foreign country in a matter of days and sometimes even hours. We also have more areas we have to cover, albeit, we bring that on ourselves.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that you simply can't compare the thoughts and fears of the founding fathers at that time to what we currently have to worry about.

As far as my stance on the matter, I think that a mandatory 6 month stint between high school and college would do this country well. In that time put them through boot camp, some sort of technical training, and fill them in on what exactly the military does for the country. It should really help making the decision about going on to college or not a little easier.

 

[LIBERTYorDEATH]

Our Military does not have a mission anymore. The only mission of the military of a REPUBLIC is self defense. Now, we serve as the worlds cop in nato actions and as nation builders on our own dime. I would no more subject someone to that on a mandatory basis than I would kill my best dog. I spent 4 years in the USAF and look what it did for me..It taught me that a regimented dictatorial lifestyle, coupled with low pay and doing a job better suited for the jerks in the peace corp, leads to Libertarian thinking I hated who I was serving and how I was serving them. A volunteer Military is by far the only way to go, because only someone who wants to be there will do even a half-decent job. I volunteered of course, but the longer I was in , the less effort I put in because I was greatly disillusioned. If I had been drafted, hell, i might have given aid and comfort to the enemy..by sitting on my butt all day ... because it is not any care of mine nor is it a concern of the republic of the united states , who does what to whom in the balkans.

 

[Mister T]

LIBERTYorDEATH,

Question for you: You said that the only function our military should serve is for self-defense. Given your view,
is there any other circumstance where the the United States must be compelled to act? Such as a dictator in Yugoslavia systematically killing a population? And does your notion of self-defense lend itself to only territorial issues or does it go further and address ecomonic issues, i.e., the Gulf war, kuwait and oil.

I beleive that the US military should be 1st and foremost for the welfare of the US citizen, but what about in the instances I mentioned.

1. A dictator eradicating a population through genocide?
2. A dictator threatening our(and the worlds) supply of oil?

What do you say to that? Just curious.

 

[Angrymarshmello]

I don't think it should be mandatory. I would and will join if we ever get in a war because I'm proud to live in the U.S. but I sure as hell wouldn't join because the government wants to force me to

 

[LIBERTYorDEATH]

There are those who say that both of those circumstances dictate the need for intervention, but I wholeheartedly disagree. I am against violating soverignty on the basis that we do not like what other governments are doing to their people. It is up to those people to topple the oppressive regime. We can and should aid them with subversive intelligence, weaponry, and the will to live free or die. We did this in afghanistan, to great victorious effect. Actual us troop involvement in 2 previous situations, korea and vietnam, was a cluster F*ck. SO I think my principles work better. As for the gulf war, I believe that was also a tremendous waste of men(and 7 women)and material(tax money down the crapper) and does continue to be so to this day. The middle east is the worlds heart burn, all because the region is filled with tinpot potentates holding the world hostage with crude oil. But if we were to drill every last nook and cranny where there are large oil deposits in our own territory and in the deep water off the continental shelf in the gulf of mexico, we could tell the entire middle east to take a hike. It comes down to whats more important, appeasing environmental leftists in the US, or ridding ourselves of the scurge of the middle eastern arab world by drilling every drop of domestic oil we can and putting opec in deep cowdip at the same time.

Our overabundance of government regulation and red tape from the environmental lunatics in government, and lack of any clear energy strategy is why we had to fight the gulf war, and why we are still over there today doing live fire excercises in the kuwaiti dessert that killed 5 us servicemen.

A government that must extract patriotism by force, is not a government worth fighting for.