• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

POLL: (And debate) Required Military Service (or maybe Required Citizen Service)

N

neomits

Diamond Member
I've thought about this for quite a while and I really think its a good idea. In Israel you are required to serve in the military for a certain amount of time (I don't know exactly how long 2 or 4 years maybe) right out of high school. I really think this is a good idea.

Now I know it would never work in the US. Too many issues would arrise as to rights and whether women would have to or not and such.

But otherwise, do you think it is a good idea? Some of the reasons I think its an excellent idea is first of all, everyone would be a lot more mature and learn a lot about what being "grown up is". Being in the military for 2 or 3 years would teach you valuable life lessons. I think the average person would be better off.

A second reason is that your dad or my dad could be the best fighter pilot EVER and we have no way of knowing. If we were required to enter the military we could find out who IS the best and if they are then they can continue (if they so wish) in pursuing that field.

I expect to get a lot of response from this. But just so you know I'm 20 and in college but if this was a law... I would follow it wholeheartedly. In fact I think I may have gone into the military for a few years out of high school if I didn't think that I'd "get behind" in today's job economy.

Just a few thoughts...
 
I'm definitely for some sort of mandatory service for all able bodied persons once they graduate high school. 2-3 years is pretty steep though, 6 months at most sounds better. The places where I could see bitching from are the lazy people that don't want to serve, the ones who don't want to get behind economically (like you said), and businesses who probably wouldn't like seeing a large chunk of the workforce being used up by the government. Futher education and training could be had though which sort of offsets the economic issue, though.
 
I agree with rawoutput - 2-3 years is a long time - I think 3-6 months is good - get yourself in shape, get trained and if you're needed in the future you're ready to go instead of enlisting, then having to train for a couple months before you go off to war. And women should have to - they're always whining about equal rights and being treated equally - they shouldn't be excluded just because of their sex.
 
For some countries it's a good idea for others it isn't. Clearly the social/political/economic climate in the US is such that it is not at all necessary. All other things equal a volunteer military is going to have a higher morale. In times of war sometimes you need to ask people to fight when they'd otherwise not want to but since our society isn't at war right now a required military is simply a waste of time and effort.
 
I don't think so. First of all, our military is plenty strong and they have no problem getting recruits. If anything, with improving technology, the military will require far fewer soldiers than it has in the past. In 25 or 50 years, there will likely be no human soldiers anywhere near the frontlines.

Also, I will "grow up" the way I see fit. I don't need some drill sargeant sticking his head 3 inches from me yelling his head off to make me mature. IMO, military services teaches you how to toe the line. It teaches you not to think for yourself, but instead follow orders without questions. The powers that be might like a populace full of worker bees, but I don't think that would make America better.
 
Sorry skoorb,I disagree. A draft at 18 is good for the country. fear of a draft will motivate people to enlist in the branch they want ,lest they get duty they do not want. When it is peace time,a voulenteer enlistment only is suitable, however, the lead time for training,which is far more than just a 6, 9, or 12 week boot camp, demands a longer commitment that is coupled with a reasonable replacement schedule.

We are as close to war without an all out declaration as you can get. Those troops in Afghanistan aren't on a picnic. W are at risk of political and economic blackmail, as you can see Saddam is trying with Iraq oil. If our mancount is up with a fully trained, fined tuned, motivated military, the threat of blackmail is greatly deminished because the real threat of military repurcusions is a fantastic deterent. It gives a Pres. like Bush the cajones to use it when necessary.

It wasn't long ago discussions here where about our not needing a standing military to defend a war in two different theaters at he same time. In fact,prior to 9/11, that was the mantra of advisors to Bush. It was a crock of crap then and definately a crock now. We need to be able to respond to threats on a global scale,at any time and I personally would like to see a larger rapid response force trained and at the ready.

Also, I remember not long ago people saying we shouldn't be in the nation building business. Well times sure have changed, haven't they? We are nation building in Afghanistan, we are about to do the same in Israel if peace can take hold and allow PLO to have a state. And that says nothing of the open talk of removing Saddam regeme from power in Iraq.

My how things change when people fly airplanes into tall buildings. That pussy Osama didn't think we would do much. I wonder what he thinks now? I really wonder what the whole damn Arab world REALLY thinks, not the soundbites and photo ops for protestors. The man in the street in Egypt or Saudi Arabia might have a different story about Americans if they knew we can't be bluffed or bullied. Right now,that might not be the case. That bothers me,and it should concern you too.

Bring back the draft now, not later. You able bodied young men should grow some balls and serve your country with the vigor , will and pride that the IDF recruits do. They all serve. And the same goes for most euro and asian nations too.( I think😉)
 


<< I don't think so. First of all, our military is plenty strong and they have no problem getting recruits. If anything, with improving technology, the military will require far fewer soldiers than it has in the past. In 25 or 50 years, there will likely be no human soldiers anywhere near the frontlines.

Also, I will "grow up" the way I see fit. I don't need some drill sargeant sticking his head 3 inches from me yelling his head off to make me mature. IMO, military services teaches you how to toe the line. It teaches you not to think for yourself, but instead follow orders without questions. The powers that be might like a populace full of worker bees, but I don't think that would make America better. >>





I'm not necessarily saying for you yourself or even for the US. Kind of imagine it as if you were running a country. Would you want to enact some sort of plan like this?
 
federal service should be required to vote, no service , no say in the government

a persons sex is irrelavent
 


<<

I'm not necessarily saying for you yourself or even for the US. Kind of imagine it as if you were running a country. Would you want to enact some sort of plan like this? >>



I'm not sure I understand what you are asking, but If I were running the country, it would be very tempting for me to have a populace that never questioned anything, but I think the country would be stronger if this were not the case. This is going off topic, but the way it is now is probably ideal for the people in charge. The people that question anything politically get shoved out of the mainstream media. I'm not talking about democrats questioning republican's actions and vice versa. I'm talking about Noam Chomsky, Amnesty International, Human Rights groups, etc who get almost no press in the US, but a fair amount in other countries. Since the people are outside of the mainstream media, all their ideas get classified as the ravings of fringe lunatics.
 
Required, yes on the idea but against anything but a minimum of a 1-2 year hitch

Reasons:

1. Training time in todays military whatever the branch varies from job to job. There are jobs out there that have a school almost 6 months long and longer in some cases.

2. Todays youth are not like yesterdays, todays youth are about the money, not honor, and not country

This is only MHO, but is also from a person who has trained these youngsters for about 18 years, and just got back from the desert again 🙁
 


<< Excellent Idea
Terrible Terrible Idea >>



Sorry, those are a bit too cut-and-dry for me...too complicated a topic for those two ends of the spectrum to be my only choices.
 
Terrible idea. Some people aren't open to the thought of killing for national supremacy. The military does not honor maturity, but discipline and conformity. Forced service stands against the best part of america: freedom. An aversion to guns and drill sergeants should not render one a second-class citizen. *Burns small american flag in front of a large, rippling american flag*
 
MisterPants,

How is discipline possible without maturity?

I would not be opposed to the idea of short(6week-6month) service for all, but I would not push for it either. We simply do not need a standing army that large at any time other than for full scale war.

We also really do not need since we have a right to keep and bear arms.
 
National service is a fine idea to gain 'citizenship' enabling the vote (exactly like in starship troopers). However, this service should not be limited to 'military' service. Any productive service to country/community should qualify. Red Cross type organizations, community involvement groups...pretty much anything where you're receiving minimal compensation for working yourself to death to help others...that's what this country has lost. It's all arrogance and ego now, and nothing gets done out of the desire to help another human being.

Because I believe this so absolutely, I joined the military...even though it was during a time of war for reasons I did NOT agree with, under a leadership I did NOT believe in/trust. I felt I had no right to make comments or demand rights unless I had offered everything I had first to secure those same rights for others. After 2 years I left, and now feel that I have every right to my opinion, and every right to take full part in the processes of this nation and my community. Anyone who doesn't serve, will NEVER know this feeling, no matter how rich or 'important' they are.
 


<< National service is a fine idea to gain 'citizenship' enabling the vote (exactly like in starship troopers). However, this service should not be limited to 'military' service. Any productive service to country/community should qualify. Red Cross type organizations, community involvement groups...pretty much anything where you're receiving minimal compensation for working yourself to death to help others...that's what this country has lost. It's all arrogance and ego now, and nothing gets done out of the desire to help another human being.

Because I believe this so absolutely, I joined the military...even though it was during a time of war for reasons I did NOT agree with, under a leadership I did NOT believe in/trust. I felt I had no right to make comments or demand rights unless I had offered everything I had first to secure those same rights for others. After 2 years I left, and now feel that I have every right to my opinion, and every right to take full part in the processes of this nation and my community. Anyone who doesn't serve, will NEVER know this feeling, no matter how rich or 'important' they are. >>




Hmmm good point. I think I like the idea of it not being required but if you don't you don't recieve full privledges as a citizen. An you're right, it shouldn't necessarily be military service.

Also I'm getting the general idea that 2-3 years would be too long. I know that it would never work for the US becuase we would have WAY to big a military.
 


<< Also I'm getting the general idea that 2-3 years would be too long. I know that it would never work for the US becuase we would have WAY to big a military. >>



2-3 years is NOTHING. The average person will live 60-80 years, so we're talking about 2-5% of your life, spent making life better for the rest of humanity...that's not much of a trade-off for the freedoms we enjoy. Be greedy and self-serving the other 78 years, but give just a little 😎. Also, even low end jobs often require 4-6 months of training. Then there's leave and other issues that make anything less than a year a waste of time. And what about advanced schools? Nuclear, medical, dental, etc? Those take many years to complete, before you can even begin to work off the money invested in training. No, 2 yrs or so is not much to give for everything you'll receive back.
 
I have a question for those people that want every man and woman to serve for 2-3 years. I assume, that the existing army will not be dismissed. So thats 1.5 million. Another 6 million will be added if there is mandatory service.

I want to know what we need all these people for, and how we can afford to have such a big army, when there will be less tax money due to the decreased number of workers.
 
Yeah, why would we need 100 million military servicepersons? If anything, the need for actual personnal is probably stable or declining in the future due to technological advancements.
 


<< I have a question for those people that want every man and woman to serve for 2-3 years. I assume, that the existing army will not be dismissed. So thats 1.5 million. Another 6 million will be added if there is mandatory service.

I want to know what we need all these people for, and how we can afford to have such a big army, when there will be less tax money due to the decreased number of workers. >>



This is really the topic for another thread, but do you realize that China has a standing army of about 300 million men? Despite our technology, our strategic advantages... try going up against a potential adversary like that with "just" 7 million people.
 
Well, for starters, removing that number of people from the workforce will OPEN the market for those looking for more or better work. Secondly, it would create an industry need for supplying materials and such to all those people. Third, as I stated it shouldn't all be military service, with roughly equal numbers in civilian service billets. Lastly, the training and experiences acquired would overall enhance the eventual entry into the workplace.
 
How can any Armed Force that commits horrible atrocities like the IDF has over that last week or two be a shining example? Bulldozing houses, killing innocent civilians to get the murdering bastards they are trying to roust, leaving scores of bodies rotting in the streets. I don't think an Armed Force no better than the scum it's supposed to protect it citizens from is the type of Armed Force that the US should aspire to have.
 


<< federal service should be required to vote, no service , no say in the government

a persons sex is irrelavent >>



You read Starship Troopers too😉
 


<< I have a question for those people that want every man and woman to serve for 2-3 years. I assume, that the existing army will not be dismissed. So thats 1.5 million. Another 6 million will be added if there is mandatory service.

I want to know what we need all these people for, and how we can afford to have such a big army, when there will be less tax money due to the decreased number of workers. >>



I'm not asking if it'd be right for AMERICA to do this. Obviously it'll never happen. I'm saying is the idea behind it a good one. Like for example. Let just say we're are talking about Israel where it is mandatory. Is this a good thing that they are doing (mandatory military, nothing else) or a bad thing. Is the IDEA good. It could never happen in the US for the reasons listed already and many more
 
Required, in my opinion is not a good idea. I'll admit in theory, it does sound good. Realistically, there are enough volunteer idiots in the service, hate to imagine how it would be if it were required. I'm an NCO in the Air Force, and I'll admit, getting the discipline I needed, and some kind of direction in life helped me out quite a bit. However, I have seen quite a few airmen that have just entered the service do stupid things. Granted they're young, and yes, I do remember what it was like to be young, I don't think the military machine would function well with Joe Blow, 18 years old and hates the military, but has to do a 2 or 3 year stint anyway. He will not be productive, as a matter of fact, he'll just be a burden on his fellow workers, as they'll have to take his slack. Hell, I've seen quite a few that volunteered to be in the military act that way. When I first enlisted, I thought that yes, everybody should put their time in, serve their country. Now, eight years later, I know that that is an extremely ridiculous notion in today's military. We are the strongest, most educated, and most professional military in history, and to stay that way, we can't let every swinging d*ck in. Just my 2 cents.


Edit: Spelling
 
No doubt almost everyone could benifit from a stint in the military. Of course that is if you go in with the right frame of mine. Being drafted more often than not forces young people into a situation that they'ds rather not have to face and would cause them to have a horrible attitude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top