Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
smzimbabwe

Mandatory Military Service

34 posts in this topic

This was a topic my middle daughter had in school, she's just looking for opinions to put in her paper. My oldest is currently studying engineering in college, the daughter working on the paper graduates in a couple months and is looking at serving in the military as a nurse, my youngest son is still looking at his options, he won't be out of school for years. I come from a long line of military men, I didn't join because my grandfather would tell horror stories about his military service in order to motivate me, but they didn't work, and I wish I had joined, but I got a scholarship and turned down the military because of those stories.

 

Anyway, her paper is about whether or not the United States should require a mandatory service of about a year for all students out of high school. I said I would ask and get some other people's opinions on it for her paper. Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say No.

 

That's probably only because I'm 17 right now, and the thought of being forced into boot camp as early as October really scares me.

 

I was talking to a family friend this summer and we got to talking about how and why he went into the military. I asked him why he left and his response was "I thought to myself, there's got to be something better than being shot at." I agree with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm about to graduate high school myself. This isn't a good idea imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try not to get too political here, but it's inevitable that my personal opinions bleed in here.

 

I don't think mandatory military service is necessary at all. You have plenty of patriots, people looking for college, and people wanting to shoot guns enter the military on their own. A lot like the draft, mandatory service brings people into don't want to be in the military in, and makes people who didn't want to die, die. It's a cruel and unnecessary thing to do. When a country like the United States has drones, missiles, and human-less technology, why endanger people when you don't have to?

 

War as a whole is unnecessary, and forced service only perpetuates the militaristic ideals we should be leaving behind. I'm gonna be out of high school in a few years and I hope to whatever god is out there that our president doesn't start WW3.

 

And as said above, there are much better things to do than getting shot at, and shoot at people.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expand "service to country" to include Peace Corps, Americorps or similar, and sure, sounds great.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a TON of factors here that make me say hell no on this topic. Biggest is probably our motivations. If we were a country like Switzerland that prided itself on being "neutral" and doing all we could to stay out of conflicts, then yeah, maybe. But we're the nation that's best known for getting ourselves into unnecessary oil wars in third world middle eastern countries in the name of corporate profits. I'd help burn the White House down if it meant I could avoid getting shot at in Bahrain so that Halliburton and Lockheed Martin could pocket a few extra bucks. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Part of what makes our military so great is that it's a volunteer army. The people who serve currently want to be there. Forcing people to serve ruins that because then you have a bunch of people who don't want to be there, and are less likely to take the training seriously or even watch out for their buddies back like what you currently have. Sure their are guys who serve knowing they are just going to do 4 years and leave or what ever but they chose to do that. Sure their are guys who regret joining (I know a few) but no one forced them to sign their contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah.

 

There's plenty of Americans who would gladly serve without being forced into any aspect of temporary servitude.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To reiterate what dont care said, the military here has always been volunteer.  Except for a few stragglers and court rulings (I knew someone who had a judge tell him "either enlist, or go to jail") anyone who signed up did so under their own choice.  I myself decided it was a better option at the time than going into college immature and not knowing what I wanted to do with my life.  While mandatory service could help remove a lot of immature and selfish sentiment that some of the younger people I've had the pleasure of interacting with tend to have.  As some of you are younger and have expressed hesitation about the potential of finishing school and suddenly being sent off to the military for a few years, it would cause a lot of blowback.  Forcing someone to serve for their country just removes any aspect of the desire to defend one's nation.  It's why the volunteer aspect creates a stronger soldier. They are already willing to put themselves on the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Pharos04 said:

To reiterate what dont care said, the military here has always been volunteer.  Except for a few stragglers and court rulings (I knew someone who had a judge tell him "either enlist, or go to jail") anyone who signed up did so under their own choice.

Except for the period between 1940-1973 when that whole draft thing happened.

 

And don't forget, if you're a male and turn the age of 18, you're required to sign-up for the selective service in the case that they ever want to implement a draft again.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BayouJim said:

Except for the period between 1940-1973 when that whole draft thing happened.

if you want to get specific, the Draft still exists under the name Selective Service System

Quote

Virtually all male U.S. citizens and male immigrant non-citizens between the ages of 18 and 25 are required by law to have registered within 30 days of their 18th birthdays.

It was eliminated back in 1975 but due to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, it was effectively reinstated by Carter.  But there's also the unknown issue with it...

Quote

In 1980, men who knew they were required to register and did not do so could face up to five years in jail or a fine up to $50,000 if convicted. The potential fine was later increased to $250,000. 

however, "No law since 1980 has required anyone to possess, carry, or show a draft card, and routine checks requiring identification virtually never include a request for a draft card."

 

So it's one of those "It's there but whatever" laws

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DG_Now said:

Expand "service to country" to include Peace Corps, Americorps or similar, and sure, sounds great.

 

"Conscription if necessary, but not necessarily conscription."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can provide service to your country and your country's reputation without learning about bombs and guns and things.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BayouJim said:

Except for the period between 1940-1973 when that whole draft thing happened.

 

And don't forget, if you're a male and turn the age of 18, you're required to sign-up for the selective service in the case that they ever want to implement a draft again.

Recently there was a court ruling making females signing up for selective service mandatory too.

 

but anyways drafts are a necessary evil only when the armed forces simply don't have the man power to compete. I don't see us needing to. But even then we probably never will need a draft again unless we actually go to war with Russia or some other Peer vs. Peer war where we fight someone of similar capabilities of us.   

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a service member . . . (Please don't start rolling your eyes yet), I don't like the idea of bringing in people for military service that are, "Only here so I don't get fined, "They made me do this" type crowd. We have enough knuckleheads that entered with the idea that they'd get paid a lot of money to run around with a gun, visit a bunch of other cool countries, or whatever other lies the recruiters feed them. You have to want to commit to the idea that for small stretches of time life will not be cozy. Especially if you are combat arms, (infantry, cavalry, engineers).Also, for some jobs in the army training can take up to 2 years and cost over $25,000 per person, so that will definitely limit what people can do if it's only for a year. You also have to understand that certain liberties that you have now will not be yours while you serve. For example, I can run for school board president at my kid's school, but I cannot be on the city council since I could potentially deploy at any moment, depending on assignment. I can't campaign for someone while in uniform, even though that rule has been broken a lot lately. What I will say, is that if there were a requirement of co-operative education while attending college, such as an internship in a job tied in to your college program, or a type of WPA or Job Training Partnership (a program from the 80's that I was in during elementary school)program for those in vocational training, you could see people have a better understanding of how what they do impacts the community around them. I want to say Clinton started the AmeriCorps program but it may no longer be in existence. It was based on a similar principal as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

As a service member . . . (Please don't start rolling your eyes yet), I don't like the idea of bringing in people for military service that are, "Only here so I don't get fined, "They made me do this" type crowd. We have enough knuckleheads that entered with the idea that they'd get paid a lot of money to run around with a gun, visit a bunch of other cool countries, or whatever other lies the recruiters feed them. You have to want to commit to the idea that for small stretches of time life will not be cozy. Especially if you are combat arms, (infantry, cavalry, engineers).Also, for some jobs in the army training can take up to 2 years and cost over $25,000 per person, so that will definitely limit what people can do if it's only for a year. You also have to understand that certain liberties that you have now will not be yours while you serve. For example, I can run for school board president at my kid's school, but I cannot be on the city council since I could potentially deploy at any moment, depending on assignment. I can't campaign for someone while in uniform, even though that rule has been broken a lot lately. What I will say, is that if there were a requirement of co-operative education while attending college, such as an internship in a job tied in to your college program, or a type of WPA or Job Training Partnership (a program from the 80's that I was in during elementary school)program for those in vocational training, you could see people have a better understanding of how what they do impacts the community around them. I want to say Clinton started the AmeriCorps program but it may no longer be in existence. It was based on a similar principal as well.

My training myself took 2 years to complete and I was told it cost the tax payer about 150,000 in total

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came in in 1998, the security clearance itself is $25,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like college is not for everyone, military service is not for everyone.  My brother-in-law joined the Marines in the '70s and six months after boot camp, he received a "Medical" discharge: He couldn't mentally handle the military.  

 

Forcing those who do not want to serve like sending them to jail.  

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends. If draftees were limited to administrative, supply, cooking, etc., type jobs it could work. Where you would un into trouble is using draftees as combat soldiers. Everything I've heard on the matter says that draftees generally are not good for combat situations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

As a service member . . . (Please don't start rolling your eyes yet), 

 

Anyone who "rolls their eyes" over you (or anyone else) being a member of the service can :censored: right off. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0