View Full Version : Should 2 years of military service be mandatory for every American?
ICANHITHIMMAN
04-15-12, 10:18
I am doing a paper in school and I think I may choose this topic. The thing is I don’t know where I stand on it. I have done some research on conscript army’s around the world and had a chance to interact with some (Turkish, Israeli).
I saw how bad is sucked for the guys doing there 2 years and I'm not sure if the perceived benefits in national unity are worth the cost it would entail.
What are your thoughts and Experiences?
Jon
i dont think it would ever work, even if it was passed into law.
for so many reasons.
just a few below
1.people would be coming up with any excuse to be exempt from service.
2.not to mention that the overall strengh of the force would be diminished by the people that dont want to be there and will only do the bare minimum to not get a dishonorable discharge.
3.it would go from a fighting force to a slave labor force.
4.the GOV would never be able to afford to pay all these conscripts.
Should 2 years of military service be manditory for every American?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military, or some other form of public service - yes.
I am paraphrasing here, but Clausewitz wrote 'a nation that cannot find enough willing volunteers should not go to war in the first place.'
In military circles we call this the Strategic Resource of National Will.
Personally, I would like to see the conventional Active Duty Army force cut in half, and the RC (particularly the National Guard) doubled. The RC is only about 9% of the budget but has been providing more than 40% of the force for the last 10 years of war. I would increase the size and capability of the Navy (including the USMC). The Air Force needs to refocus it's self. I should be concerned with land based strategic missiles, strategic air lift, and homeland security. A lot of these duties can be picked up by the Air National Guard. Bottom line, we are still funding a Cold War style military/industrial/congressional complex.
The real question is, why do we even have a military? Is it to protect national strategic interests? Or, do we have a military to provide jobs and promote social justice?
It's a nice idea (I've thought about it before) but for the reasons Vash gave, it wouldn't work.
Of course there is always Obama's Civilian National Security Force...:haha:
ICANHITHIMMAN
04-15-12, 11:36
I am paraphrasing here, but Clausewitz wrote 'a nation that cannot find enough willing volunteers should not go to war in the first place.'
In military circles we call this the Strategic Resource of National Will.
Personally, I would like to see the conventional Active Duty Army force cut in half, and the RC (particularly the National Guard) doubled. The RC is only about 9% of the budget but has been providing more than 40% of the force for the last 10 years of war. I would increase the size and capability of the Navy (including the USMC). The Air Force needs to refocus it's self. I should be concerned with land based strategic missiles, strategic air lift, and homeland security. A lot of these duties can be picked up by the Air National Guard. Bottom line, we are still funding a Cold War style military/industrial/congressional complex.
The real question is, why do we even have a military? Is it to protect national strategic interests? Or, do we have a military to provide jobs and promote social justice?
I had never thought of that. Is that how Israel does it cause it sound sort of close?
Well, if history was still taught, there would be some realization that republics relied heavily on the concept of the citizen-soldier. Freedom never was free, and today most people really do believe that there is such a thing as a lifelong free lunch. They're called freeloaders and they are the functional equivalent of air brakes.
Conscript armies are a thing of the past now, but the idea of national service in a military or public service role makes sense. We could do a lot worse than abbreviate high school and put young people on a bus headed to the other end of the country to experience real life. It would promote the idea of "civic virtue"--which we could sure use nowadays.
That ought to be enough to drive the average teacher bonkers.
Army Chief
04-15-12, 11:51
Two years of some kind of service? Sure. We could probably do a lot of good there, even if it were only a one-year stint. The old CCC probably isn't the worst example of how such a thing could prove beneficial, though I'm not sure we would see the same kinds of results, given the deterioration of our national work ethic.
Two years of compulsory military service? Pass. We've already seen what happens in uniform when formations are awash with people that have absolutely no desire to be there. I understand the larger rationale behind the question, but I'd rather elevate those who have the heart and mindset to serve than to dumb-down the standards and deal with the discipline problems associated with forcing kids to play the part.
AC
Reagans Rascals
04-15-12, 12:12
seems to work for Israel.. I am all for it... the sense of entitlement of today's youth is flat out disgusting...
it will be a rough few years to get going... but after 10-15 years those entering the program wont even have any idea of what it was like before hand so they will have no basis from which to start bitching about... it'll just be the way it is without ever really thinking about it.... like it is today with everyone's view on college... it's not even really thought about as a choice.. it's just the next step in the process because it's been that way for so long
after 10-15 years... graduating seniors would look forward to it as an exciting experience... not the fat bastards of today bitching and moaning because they can't live with mommy and daddy until 28, use gubment funds to get their degree's in communications and do nothing productive in society until life kicks them in the dick and forces them to grow up...
Question is would you really want to serve with that many people that didn't want to be there? I had enough problems with some if my joes out of basic. They volunteered. No way a mandatory commitment would be good for us.
Failure2Stop
04-15-12, 12:37
I would like to see compulsory service of some kind, but not in the military. Even something as simple as state/federal property maintenance/care would do something.
The military though? No thank you.
A willing and enthusastic volunteer is worth a hundred whining conscripts, and those conscripts will poison the morale and efficiency of any unit more combat oriented than the 19th Pantyliner Repair Bn.
Reagans Rascals
04-15-12, 12:43
I would like to see compulsory service of some kind, but not in the military. Even something as simple as state/federal property maintenance/care would do something.
The military though? No thank you.
A willing and enthusastic volunteer is worth a hundred whining conscripts, and those conscripts will poison the morale and efficiency of any unit more combat oriented than the 19th Pantyliner Repair Bn.
until it becomes the standard... it will be rough for the first few years because change is always hard to accept... lets say we implemented it next year... well those who are seniors now get a pass.. yet those who are juniors get the shaft.. so of course there will be bitching... however... in 6-7 cycles when there is no class of people who thought they were going to college and had to change theirs plans... things will be different... and you simply add incentives to specific performance standards..
I think there could be a much better system in place. For any type of mandatory service there would at least need to be some changes in how things are done in order to not have more negative effects then good.
In terms of military service the main branch .mil is generally not a good place for mandatory service without severe changes but something like the guard is better. In general things can be done today that just makes a lot of sense like most stateside security (like base parameters, checking IDs, etc), transportation/shipping, etc being removed from the standing/professional military to the more amateurs.
All sorts of things can be done that is not related to the .mil as well such as hospital work, security, public works, etc as well.
Of course in a Utopian society (relatively speaking, true Utopian society would not have a need to know of violence, hunger, illness, or anything bad) people would have 30 days of supplies shall a disaster occur, be able to fight and drive off invaders, make confrontation crimes the highest risk occupation, etc.
RancidSumo
04-15-12, 13:00
"I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say*: Let the damned thing go down the drain!"
-Heinlein
Mandatory service of any kind is slavery and is sickens me to see people on this board supporting it.
theblackknight
04-15-12, 13:01
19th Pantyliner Repair Bn.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c7/SaluteYOurShorts.png/220px-SaluteYOurShorts.png
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-15-12, 13:20
I've read a bunch of Victor Davis Hanson's stuff about the Greeks, and the idea of citizen-soldier and shared sacrifice seems a good one. It is the logistics in the modern world that make it tough to translate. Sure if we were going literaly shoulder-to-shoulder in a phalanx, the more bodies the better. In a C5ISR or whatever you want to call our force structure, more bodies probably isn't the answer.
I understand the idea that if not military service, some other 'service' to the nation. I have a real problem with this as someone leary of a big government. Why does the govt think they can spend two years of my life better than me? This is just a 100% tax on my time for two years. Sure you can give great photo opps of helping dumb kids to read, but if these issues are really that important, how about professionally solving them rather than throwing ignorant 18-19year olds at the problem?
I have been in 'National Service" since I was 18. Paying taxes and working with a market driven economy to provide goods, services and advancing technology.
Granted, there are so many people this day that are a drag on the economy and society, but two years of 100% taxed labor isn't going to solve this. If anything it will teach them that they need the govt to tell them what they should be doing with their lives.
What we really need to do is get the college tuition and financial aid monster under control so that people don't treat college as some kind of govt subsidised 5 year (yes 5 year) kegger.
Failure2Stop
04-15-12, 14:34
until it becomes the standard... it will be rough for the first few years because change is always hard to accept... lets say we implemented it next year... well those who are seniors now get a pass.. yet those who are juniors get the shaft.. so of course there will be bitching... however... in 6-7 cycles when there is no class of people who thought they were going to college and had to change theirs plans... things will be different... and you simply add incentives to specific performance standards..
I've been dealing with the current volunteer force for 15 years now, and already 90% of my time was devoted to "fixing" the 10% problem children. Guys that were recruited, screened, trained, and selected still have a 10% "discipline failure" rate. I can't imagine that a force of unwilling or apathetic citizens will be a better option, or that it is worth paying for that massive increase in force size. Now, change that to a massive increase in free workers for your town, city, or state, and I can see how that could benefit the nation directly.
I have a mixed feeling about this.
First, as stated before, work ethic and salty "I don't wanna be here" people would really screw it up for the volunteers that want to be there.
This country is in a horrible downward spiral and maybe if some of our citizens saw what it was like to make a difference, there would be less people bringing this country down.
Second, I myself, feel that I missed out on giving something to my country. I believe that if there were mandatory service requirements, I would not have that empty feeling.
These type of questions scare the hell out of me. It's amazing how so many are willing to continue sacrificing their liberties in small bits.
Could you image the precedent that would set? The government doesn't need another excuse to force people to do things.
The concept of mandatory service is fundamental un-American and completely contrary to the principals our Country was founded on.
Cesiumsponge
04-15-12, 15:42
This country has over 300 million people. That's a lot of damned people. Work ethic, respect, and duty start at home. It carries on with your peers and coworkers. Forcing someone into conscription for anything for a couple years of their life isn't the solution and it probably won't fix anything. The cultural dynamics of a country made up largely of cultures from around the world, pooled together, is a bit different than countries that are more homogenous in culture.
There will always be idiots and lazy moochers, and I would have no problem if they were left to their ways and suffered the consequences of their own actions.
"I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say*: Let the damned thing go down the drain!"
-Heinlein
+1
1) Our current leaders have no honor. They are utterly terrible men and women of nefarious and corrupt character.
Why would anyone support handing them MORE toy soldiers to throw around and play with?
2) Section 1 of Amendment 13 states: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction"
Granted, they used the draft 3 more times after.
Call me old fashioned, but I feel that an all volunteer military insures that the government won't have enough troops to conduct imperialism and hegemony, but would have plenty of troops in the event of a declaration of war of self defense.
Plenty of kids need to get their heads out of their asses, but I don't think conscription would work.
For those of you using the Ancient Greeks and the Israelis as examples, look at the bigger picture of both societies. Both societies have (had) a strong sense of the urgency of national service. In both cases, the prospect of invasion (boots on the ground, fighting in the streets type invasion) was very real, and at most not one or two generations removed from the societal memory. The Israelis live under the prospect of terrorist gunfire and suicide bombings frequently, daily in some regions. Before that, there were external threats to the state's existence, from various countries within driving distance of Jerusalem. The Greeks dealt with invasions, and long running wars that were fought entirely with manpower. In the case of Sparta, there were no walls around the city state, as the men would be the walls, metaphorically speaking.
Because defense of the homeland is a regular issue, conscription works in these societies, because homeland defense has to be part of the national identity. In both cases, service became a part of daily life, and a rite of passage, in the Spartan case. For better or worse, we don't have that memory or that ethos among today's American youth.
I feel that an all volunteer military insures that the government won't have enough troops to conduct imperialism and hegemony, but would have plenty of troops in the event of a declaration of war of self defense.
Best thing I've read all day.
Having grown up in a country where conscription was the MO I can 100% state that it in no way shape or form helps national unity. It actually does more to spawn dissent then it does to foster unity. Comparing the USA to Israel is an oranges to computers comparison. We live in different societies with a vastly different make up and value system. Cookie cutter solutions to life's problems only work well in PowerPoint.
The USA has absolutely no need for a conscript military, civil defense force, or anything. Our military is tired and worn out not because we don't have enough volunteers, but because of idiotic political commitments and ideologies. If you're hoping to solve the wear and tear on the military and their families you're better off forcing the political deuche bags to stick to the Constitution and stop acting like the US military is the worlds police force or disaster recovery plan.
I also have mixed feelings about mandatory volunteerism. For one I spend 4 hours a day volunteering my efforts to the various levels of Government BS in the form of income tax, sales tax, property tax, regulatory fees and all sorts of other crap. Now you want to pull people out of the work force for a number of years or number of days per year. How the hell do you intend to pay for that? Unless you intend to charge these people a tax on their service, the revenue lost by these people being out of the work force will have to be made up by those if us still working. If you intend to pay these volunteers or in the least offer them benefits while they serve, the tax burden on the rest of the country will have to rise. Not viable in my opinion. Especially when those new sacrifices will bring little to no value to the table. Forcing people at gunpoint or via other coercive measures does not foster a nice sentiment. The exact opposite is true. You will not change the free loader mentality until you stop fostering and rewarding their behavior. They know that as soon as they get out they will still have their welfare, unemployment, free dental, medical and all the other crap we give away to the loosers among today. They will do the minimum to get through the program and them resume their free loading. Human nature is human nature. Idiotic behavior will only stop once it is no longer rewarded.
ICANHITHIMMAN
04-15-12, 16:20
For those of you using the Ancient Greeks and the Israelis as examples, look at the bigger picture of both societies. Both societies have (had) a strong sense of the urgency of national service. In both cases, the prospect of invasion (boots on the ground, fighting in the streets type invasion) was very real, and at most not one or two generations removed from the societal memory. The Israelis live under the prospect of terrorist gunfire and suicide bombings frequently, daily in some regions. Before that, there were external threats to the state's existence, from various countries within driving distance of Jerusalem. The Greeks dealt with invasions, and long running wars that were fought entirely with manpower. In the case of Sparta, there were no walls around the city state, as the men would be the walls, metaphorically speaking.
Because defense of the homeland is a regular issue, conscription works in these societies, because homeland defense has to be part of the national identity. In both cases, service became a part of daily life, and a rite of passage, in the Spartan case. For better or worse, we don't have that memory or that ethos among today's American youth.
Gosh that is a great point as well
PA PATRIOT
04-15-12, 16:24
Absolutely Yes!
Everyone loves the rights and freedoms associated with this once great nation but many would never lift a finger to assure those benefits of living in the United States remained when so many outside and internal threats wish to see those rights snuffed out.
Its always the "I Want" folks but how many will actually defend what we hold so dear should the need a rise?
Hell a little military service may straighten out some of these messed up kids we have these days.
NO.
It is not the responsibility of those who raised their hands voluntarily to babysit societies rejects forced into service.
Our military service should always be voluntary as Soldiers demand quality leadership and quality peers while putting their lives on the line.
**** no.
Many people have no business making fries and McDonalds and they can't even successfully manage the drive though, I wouldn't want those same tards armed with a M4 and in charge of national security.
Some folks become "better people" because of their military experience, but it can also have the opposite effect and some people become more ****ed up than they might have been otherwise.
Also I strongly believe the military should be a "calling" for those select few who are suitable candidates and NOT a punishment or a correction for **** ups and rejects.
But perhaps most importantly, I think compulsory military service is a socialist concept and we have enough socialism in this "free country" already without adding more.
Well put.
These type of questions scare the hell out of me. It's amazing how so many are willing to continue sacrificing their liberties in small bits.
Could you image the precedent that would set? The government doesn't need another excuse to force people to do things.
The concept of mandatory service is fundamental un-American and completely contrary to the principals our Country was founded on.
Yep. Also, the negative effect on morale.
Absolutely Yes!
Everyone loves the rights and freedoms associated with this once great nation but many would never lift a finger to assure those benefits of living in the United States remained when so many outside and internal threats wish to see those rights snuffed out.
Its always the "I Want" folks but how many will actually defend what we hold so dear should the need a rise?
Hell a little military service may straighten out some of these messed up kids we have these days.
War is not the answer, discipline is. Many youth could absolutely use a good dose of discipline, but it can be found and instilled in a variety of more constructive environments than the current military, which is also suffering from increasing political correctness and preferential treatment for deviants, neither of which is becoming of proper and effective discipline.
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-15-12, 18:24
Also I strongly believe the military should be a "calling" for those select few who are suitable candidates and NOT a punishment or a correction for **** ups and rejects.
That is an interesting point. Military service used to be seen as an option for everyone but lefties have spent two generations trying to make the military into something 'thinking' or progressive people shouldn't see as an option. From keeping ROTC off of Ivy League and elite campuses over this and that, showing the military as a force for evil in movies and a general disdain for the military (while encouraging big govt solutions for everything else ironically) has reduced the number of people that think of the military as an option.
One thing that VDH brings up about the Greeks is that the citizen-soldier and mass mobilization lead to shorter wars because people had to get home and harvest and attend to business. Sometimes I think that our muslim enemies, by dragging us into a shadow war, take us out of Western civilizations true strength- shock warfare and total victory thru technology and economic power. Granted, our 'progressive' citizens have outlawed much of the ability of our war machine to dish out mass casualties and devastation to enemies military and economic centers.
Anyway, my son drafted me to make my meatballs and spaghetti for dinner.
That is an interesting point. Military service used to be seen as an option for everyone but lefties have spent two generations trying to make the military into something 'thinking' or progressive people shouldn't see as an option.
One could argue they have also spent that time doing everything possible to tear down and remake the military into a more "welcoming" environment for people who have no business being in a proper military let alone a war.
I say NO.. and this coming from my last 8 months working in Army TRADOC. Everyday(sarcasm) i seem to contact my recruiter buddies and ask then where they find some of the Soldiers they bring in
"I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say*: Let the damned thing go down the drain!"
-Heinlein
Mandatory service of any kind is slavery and is sickens me to see people on this board supporting it.
These type of questions scare the hell out of me. It's amazing how so many are willing to continue sacrificing their liberties in small bits.
Could you image the precedent that would set? The government doesn't need another excuse to force people to do things.
The concept of mandatory service is fundamental un-American and completely contrary to the principals our Country was founded on.
1) Our current leaders have no honor. They are utterly terrible men and women of nefarious and corrupt character.
Why would anyone support handing them MORE toy soldiers to throw around and play with?
2) Section 1 of Amendment 13 states: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction".
Anyone espousing anything other than what's been quoted needs to read some American history. Conscription is tantamount to slavery and the opposite of what our great country was founded on. My children are not owned by the state and I for one would not allow this form of servitude with someone who shares my blood.
Don't forget that what people are supporting here is the 8th plank of the Communist Manifesto dictating an "equal liability of all to labor" in tasks ordained by the state. The fundamental premise of conscription is that people exist to serve and protect the State, and can be used as seen fit by those who control it. Use any country you want as an example, but my favorite would be the Nazis, they were quite fond of what people are espousing.
Raise the rate of pay and benefits for our military along with the qualifications and standards, that would benefit our fighting men and women much more.
And now back to studying for my new state licensing...
SeriousStudent
04-15-12, 19:10
I agree with many of the posters who have active-duty military experience. I think that some sort of national service may be a good thing, but am not in favor of two years compulsory military service.
I would approach the issue from the same vantage that many chose their rifles:
"What do you want it to do, and how much money do you have to spend?"
If the military exists as an instrument to persuade others to do what our nation wishes, then we need the most effective tool for that task. Not the cheapest, and not the biggest, but the most efficient.
It’s not “Gee, this would be a spiffy way to effect a valuable social change.” The purpose of the US military is to be the nation’s ultimate blunt instrument. To make noise and break things. If you think it’s there as a “reflection of society that will improve things for all members of our nation”, then I would disagree. If you doubt, then all you have to do is hit the orange search button we are all so fond of, and type in “don’t ask don’t tell”.
Go ahead, I’ll wait.
Quite the strong reaction you read, didn’t you? Police normally refer to things like that as “clues”.
I'm also in complete agreement with Failure2Stop. As a rifle squad leader, I spent a LOT of my time with one precious little darling. He was in the Corps on a "serve your country or serve your time" enlistment. It took multiple sessions of extensive, um, well, let’s call it “coaching” to convince him that the road to happiness was to do what Corporal Serious told him to do. But there was a lot of wear and tear getting to that point. I would have much rather been working my herd on land-nav, calls for fire, VD prevention whilst on leave, or damn near anything else.
I have X dollars and Y people to get Z result. Let’s face it, the dollars are not going to get any bigger, they will get smaller. The desired results are going to be the same – very unpredictable at best. So we need the people to be the absolute best. Not some sullen 10th grade reject that will need a Corcoran up his backside every nine minutes.
OP: Good luck to you on your paper. I think it should be an interesting read, with your service and experience. Let us know what you decide.
No.
Should one be required to "earn" franchise? Yes.
The old-school approach is best:
Small peacetime military.
Population loaded with millions of talented riflemen.
If our trade interests or our security interests are attacked, scores of riflemen sign up, bloody some noses, and get honorably discharged.
Back to a small peacetime military.
The riflemen have kids. They teach their kids to shoot, and teach them about how precious a jewel liberty is.
Inevitably, another cock comes along and attacks our interests, and the cycle repeats. Scores of riflemen sign up . . . Etc.
Absolutely Yes!
Everyone loves the rights and freedoms associated with this once great nation but many would never lift a finger to assure those benefits of living in the United States remained when so many outside and internal threats wish to see those rights snuffed out.
Its always the "I Want" folks but how many will actually defend what we hold so dear should the need a rise?
Hell a little military service may straighten out some of these messed up kids we have these days.
I hope you never have to go to war with a squad full of shit birds and **** ups who you will need to depend on for your very survival. I can't imagine a worse thing we could do to the men we send to war.
I'd rather have a squad full of "out of the closet" homos, ghetto dwellers with 6th grade educations who joined because it was their best option, females who just happen to be in a combat area and the like who WANTED to be in the military than a bunch of **** ups and jail candidates who were sent in "for fixing."
I agree with many of the posters who have active-duty military experience. I think that some sort of national service may be a good thing, but am not in favor of two years compulsory military service.
I could see some kind of "basic training" for the citizen militia or something along those lines. But even then I don't know if I'd want to crash course every gang banger in the skills of basic combat.
SeriousStudent
04-15-12, 20:14
I could see some kind of "basic training" for the citizen militia or something along those lines. But even then I don't know if I'd want to crash course every gang banger in the skills of basic combat.
I honestly would not even go that far. By national service I am thinking of working for the Public Health Service on an Indian reservations, conservation projects in parks, helping retired folks in a senior center, or teaching literacy in schools.
If they want to be in the military, then they should feel free to join.
There are many ways one can serve their country.
ICANHITHIMMAN
04-15-12, 21:00
I'm very pleased with all the coments so far. It is going to help me out a lot guys. Its great to have all these perspectives.
I wanted to ask cause it keeps comming up about dirt bags in your units and how they took extra time etc... I did my first 4 years in the Navy and we had our share of DB all around. Sometimes if the offence was great enough they would be sent to a shock camp in Norfolk for a month to straiten them up. One guy even got sent to camp Lajune for re training. I never witnessed this in the 6 years I spent in the Army after that. Any of you Marine vets or AF fly boys seen this?
Jon
Should 2 years of military service be manditory for every American?
No.
Should 2 years of service be required before an American is allowed to vote?
Yes.
Then maybe people will give a shit when they cast a ballot. Robert Heinlein was way ahead of his time.
CarlosDJackal
04-15-12, 22:02
HELL NO!! I am currently a Reservist and have also served on Active Duty and the Army National Guard for a combined 17-years (28-years if you count my Inactive service).
We have enough problems with kids who volunteer and then change their minds because they cannot commit to anything. I don't want to have to deal with kids who are forced to be there in the first place.
IMHO, if they should require 2-years of full or part time service in some capacity, this should not just be in the military. They can do so as a Volunteer Firefighter, EMT, or Ambulance driver. Or they can work as an Auxiliary Police Officer, a member of a Search and Rescue Unit, an Auxiliary Park Ranger or even in the Peace Corps of USAID.
I would rather have an understrength unit that is manned with motivated and competent volunteers; than an over strength unit that is manned by conscripts who were forced to be there. JM2CW.
As a former service member, I say no. A volunteer service is preferable to a conscription service for many reasons. Our voluntary service fulfills the mission as needed. Until such time that it doesn't, I say keep it that way.
"I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say*: Let the damned thing go down the drain!"
-Heinlein
Mandatory service of any kind is slavery and is sickens me to see people on this board supporting it.
I second this post.
Not to mention completely in contradiction of the idea of this country.
I'm with the mandatory service just not the military crowd. Aside from avenues already mentioned, the roads always need repairs...fill some of those "shovel ready" jobs.
SeriousStudent
04-15-12, 23:10
I'm very pleased with all the coments so far. It is going to help me out a lot guys. Its great to have all these perspectives.
I wanted to ask cause it keeps comming up about dirt bags in your units and how they took extra time etc... I did my first 4 years in the Navy and we had our share of DB all around. Sometimes if the offence was great enough they would be sent to a shock camp in Norfolk for a month to straiten them up. One guy even got sent to camp Lajune for re training. I never witnessed this in the 6 years I spent in the Army after that. Any of you Marine vets or AF fly boys seen this?
Jon
The precocious little tyke I mentioned ended up with the Big Chicken Dinner. He failed a piss test, and based on other NJP, our battalion commander decided he should be a civilian.
"You are a civilian at heart, and a civilian you shall be. Oh, but there will be a slight delay of 90 days at the Pendleton brig beforehand. Next."
I had a really good squad most of the time. Peer pressure and positive rewards were very effective. We worked together as a team, and the vast majority of the Marines worked together very well. We had very few "individuals".
I was in a long time ago, and sometimes more direct counseling was used. It was rare, and was judiciously applied. We were not sadistic thugs, but there were times when a clean Page 11 and a bloody shirt were deemed the best way to do things. It was a different Corps. Not better or worse, just different.
So we never really had to send anyone off for shock training. I think the enviroment was already enough of a shock. It was either straighten your act out, get your ass beat, or go to the brig then be discharged.
If someone was that big a dirtbag, I would not want them around live ordinance. It's way too easy for someone to be killed. So it was get right or get gone.
I would say not only no but HELL NO. And that goes for mandatory service of any kind.
I fee that it goes against the ideals we were founded upon. Every man and woman is free. Every man and woman born here is a citizen and can vote. At no point did our founding fathers say that our rights were conditional on service or any kind.
I am not arguing that a couple years of service would not benefit everyone and the country as a whole. However that doesn't make it right.
There was a time I felt differently but as I have come to study our history I see how wrong I was.
I'd rather have a squad full of "out of the closet" homos, ghetto dwellers with 6th grade educations who joined because it was their best option, females who just happen to be in a combat area and the like who WANTED to be in the military than a bunch of **** ups and jail candidates who were sent in "for fixing."
Agreed - seriously.
Actually, I sort of like working on the Island of Misfit Toys.
Should 2 years of military service be manditory for every American?
No.
Should 2 years of service be required before an American is allowed to vote?
Yes.
Then maybe people will give a shit when they cast a ballot. Robert Heinlein was way ahead of his time.
Much as I enjoy Heinlein and am attracted to ideas like this, ultimately I reject them. Some people simply have no place in the military and would be a liability if you put them there, but are otherwise basically good people.
Also if you made the military a "political vehicle" you'd simply **** up the military rather than get the preferred result of improving society. All the power brokers who are currently ****ing up the government would simply take over the military and do to that what they have done to the government. Same way they **** up all the other paths to success like universities and administrating social programs.
Every time somebody says "I'd fix the country by [insert overly simplistic answer here]" they always assume things would remain as the currently are before the implementation of simplistic ideas. 99% do not even contemplate, nor can they imagine how the simplistic idea would change the way things currently are, and in most cases not for the better.
There is only one way to really improve the country and that is to raise societal standards. To do this we'd have to do two things:
1. Raise children according to those higher standards and see that they are held.
2. Hold ourselves to those same standards.
Currently we don't even have enough of a majority of the population who even understands what those standards should be so they couldn't adhere to them even if they were inclined to do so (they aren't), and as a result they don't have what is necessary to pass those standards on to their children.
And as a result we are continuously at the mercy of the lowest common denominators who make life suck for everyone else because they are in the majority.
I blame Dr. Spock, a jackass with simplistic answers who was going to fix everything with his stupid ass book.
I strongly disagree, for many of the reasons already mentioned here.
HOWEVER, my personal view is that if we were not Team America World Police, I probably would be open to change my mind on the compulsory service bit. I say this because I really do like the idea of the citizen-soldier. I like the way the Swiss do their military because it reflects on that concept. Their military is really more like a big militia and in a grassroots way, this has historically helped to maintain stability in CH. For example, I think the fact that they keep their StG.90s at home (and have always kept their service rifles at home) exemplifies that it all starts with the citizen instead of power coming from centralized "top to down arrangement." If I understand correctly, they organize by village, then canton (like their state/province) and as a centralized force at the end. I do know that all the K-31 rifles have a different stamp denoting their respective cantons. I have not heard of any other force that denotes specific regions on their weapons.
I could be wrong, but so far this is my rough understand of how the CH armed forces work.
Bottom line, I disagree with compulsory service in the modern American military. Our volunteer force is fine. I would be more open to the idea if our force really were just a big militia, the way the Swiss do it. But I could never see that happening in our country--that is, I could never see the federal gov't handing off that kind of power to the citizen. Besides, there are too many jackasses who just should not own weapons in this country (exact same reason why service should not be compulsory); y'all know what I'm talking about.
*BTW, I'm pretty sure the citizen-soldier thing only works in CH because they have a small and relatively homogenous population which probably means that they have decent national cohesion.
RogerinTPA
04-16-12, 05:33
Absolutely not.
We, as a country, would be better off if we stop coddling our children with the "everyone's a winner" reward failure, and way over played self esteem BS. That shit should cease at the elementary school level. We have way more than our fair share of ****ed up, non productive adults because of that ****ed up social experiment. The average 17-25 year old can't even hold a job flipping burgers because they can't deal with someone in a position of authority telling them they ****ed up. At the middle and HS level, competitiveness, skill development, high achievement (grades & performance) should be taught, and reinforced by the parents at every opportunity. With special emphasis on "loser in life = poor house/welfare/homeless."
Army Chief
04-16-12, 06:27
The other factor that we're not really accounting for here is that a startlingly-high percentage our nation's young people are physically, morally or educationally disqualified from military service. Under current accession standards (which will only grow more stringent as the force is drawn down to a lower end strength), only about "15 percent of the roughly 31 million youth ages 17-24" are really available to recruit, according to Dr. Curtis Gilroy, director of accession policy for the Department of Defense (2009).
What do you do with the other 85%? Considering that the military used to be the one place that a down-and-out kid could always go to straighten out his life and get some productive job/life experience, I'm left to wonder what it says about our society that so many can't even make it over the bar for enlistment in any specialty at all.
AC
I am paraphrasing here, but Clausewitz wrote 'a nation that cannot find enough willing volunteers should not go to war in the first place.'
paraphrasing or not, that is a fantastic quote on a lot of levels.
What do you do with the other 85%? Considering that the military used to be the one place that a down-and-out kid could always go to straighten out his life and get some productive job/life experience, I'm left to wonder what it says about our society that so many can't even make it over the bar for enlistment in any specialty at all.
When a majority of our young adults are "physically, morally or educationally disqualified" we, as a nation, are in serious trouble.
If they don't qualify to be available to recruit, what does that say about their civilian job prospects? And if their job prospects are poor, what then? What activities will they then turn to make a living? I believe it says our society is in serious decline.
I was an early responder to this thread, and I said "Military, or some other form of public service - yes." After reading all of the responses I wish to clarify why I said what I did.
I said military on the assumption that the same people who now volunteer would continue to do so, not that I thought we should force others to serve in the military. So I was really referring to those who don't qualify and volunteer for the military when I said "or some other form of public service".
I believe in the positive benefits of having skin in the game and I see a large majority of our young adults with no skin in the game. And it bothers me. That is why I said "or some other form of public service". But I hear what a lot of you are saying in your responses.
So my question is, if not required public service, how do these "physically, morally or educationally disqualified" get skin in the game, or do they just continue to become an ever growing percentage of leaches on the rest of us that do have skin in the game?
Growing up, I was mostly in uniform of one kind or another - cub scouts, boy scouts, explorer scouts and Army green, and not all by choice, either. And, among other things, I learned discipline, honor and duty along the way. I believe it has served me well. In my long civilian life I have routinely volunteered my time, energy and money for one thing or another.
But today I see this growing group with no skin in the game always wanting more and more from those that do. So is our society simply totally f***ed?
I don't see that allowing our out of control government more power to force citizens to serve them as a good idea at all.
When a majority of our young adults are "physically, morally or educationally disqualified" we, as a nation are in serious trouble.
Ah, yes. Yes we are...
)
What do you do with the other 85%? Considering that the military used to be the one place that a down-and-out kid could always go to straighten out his life and get some productive job/life experience, I'm left to wonder what it says about our society that so many can't even make it over the bar for enlistment in any specialty at all.
AC
Although my initial thoughts go the the Spartan Solution (think tall mountain with a steep cliff), I know that our country could never stomach such a "proactive" solution for our voluntary dependence problem. However, we must get comfortable with limiting the availability of social welfare programs, and the fact that some people will slip though the social safety net as the holes are widened. That's right - a small number of capable souls will die due to their unwillingness to help themselves when they can't get free shelter/food from GovCo and free medicine from the local ED. However, the numbers would be less than our current death rates from self-created diseases (COPD, obesity, overdoses, type 2 diabetes, most trauma) that are largely related to maladaptive behaviors. This is the only way to avoid a catastrophic collapse of the country's social order.
Now, don't think of me as heartless. I appreciate that there are a few people who are legitimately disabled. Those with Down's syndrome, cerebral palsy, early cancers, etc. can be easily cared for by private charities if the rest of us pull our weight.
Smuckatelli
04-16-12, 12:42
There is only one way to really improve the country and that is to raise societal standards. To do this we'd have to do two things:
1. Raise children according to those higher standards and see that they are held.
2. Hold ourselves to those same standards.
This is the key for us.
Instituting a mandatory 2 year service in the military or some other government organization will do nothing to fix what 12 years of education screwed up.
First thing is get rid of 'No Child Left Behind' this has created a culture where the kids are taught to the test. No critical thinking involved, no accountablity from the kids.
They still get credit even when the homework is late. They get extra credit if they answer a few non test questions. They also get extra credit if the parents sign test papers.
If a school's score drops in any given year, it is the schools fault, not the children. The school system is producing kids that have no idea what responsibility is....as far as they are taught...everyone is a winner.
Should 2 years of military service be manditory for every American?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military, or some other form of public service - yes.
As cheesedicked as many of the alternate forms of service would inevitably be, it would count as job training, and a low cost labor force could have its uses.
If nothing else, forcing the to behave like somewhat autonomous wards of a larger entity would be an improvement for most of the oxygen thieves of my vintage.
No.
Now to slightly change the tone. I completely agree there are far too many ignorant, irresponsible, and worthless people around. However, let's not forget that there are actually good persons left.
Our neighbors have two young boys that are intelligent, athletic, and respectful. They are not the only ones I am aware of; sadly, though, they are in the minority. I refuse to let my daughter, and future children, be in the majority.
When I start to think of how shitty most people are, I try to remind myself there are still good ones to be found. Probably a high % on this board.
Army Chief
04-16-12, 18:54
When I start to think of how shitty most people are, I try to remind myself there are still good ones to be found. Probably a high % on this board.
Agreed. The question from my vantage point is not whether or not we've got any solid citizens left, but rather, how the ratio between the productive and the parastic seems to be trending. I heard on the news the other night that 50% of Americans now live in a household where one (or more) members of that household is currently receiving some form of government assistance. It would be useless to react to that at face value, as the veracity of the number could doubtless be challenged, it wasn't made clear what constituted "assistance" (i.e. Social Security, perhaps?), and I'm not even sure how those doing the research may have defined a "household."
What I do know is that there is no longer any shame in failing to compete one's schooling, having children for whom one cannot -- or will not -- provide, and collecting entitlements and/or payments from the government for which one has performed no work or service. Without making any judgments about these or our other pet problems (obesity, addiction, moral indifference), I'm left to wonder if perhaps some of the old social stigmas didn't serve a purpose to norm some folks that might otherwise have been lost along the way. Perhaps not, but the "I'm ok, you're ok" approach doesn't seem to be paying much in the way of dividends, either.
Whatever the case, 50% seems like an absolutely huge, and non-sustainable number. 30% would be a shock. 10% is still too much. Yes, we've still got plenty of "salt of the earth" types, but how long can one group really be expected to carry the other; especially when we're increasingly expanding and redefining our list of what we're willing to accept as normal? One need not be a sociologist (nor have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express) to see that it is only a matter of time before this becomes a very real bone of contention in society. As with most cultural issues, it will doubtless be blamed on racial division and class warfare, allowing liberal ideologues to shovel even more coal into their boilers. The truth, of course, is that our national history teaches us that great Americans are great Americans, regardless of color, class or creed. Too bad there is no power (read: money) in championing on behalf of those who are already doing their part.
I'm fairly confident that every generation before us has complained just as loudly about what they were seeing in the youth of the country. The performance of their politicians. The devolution of personal responsibility. I won't pretend that they were wrong and we must be right, but at some point, the current entitlements quandary does become a simple question of mathematics. On today of all days, I'm left to wonder where the $10k tax check we just wrote really goes ... and who will actually manage to get money back this year, despite having paid no taxes whatsoever in 2011. On second thought, perhaps ignorance truly is bliss.
Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less. (Robert E. Lee)
AC
Agreed. The question from my vantage point is not whether or not we've got any solid citizens left, but rather, how the ratio between the productive and the parastic seems to be trending. I heard on the news the other night that 50% of Americans now live in a household where one (or more) members of that household is currently receiving some form of government assistance. It would be useless to react to that at face value, as the veracity of the number could doubtless be challenged, it wasn't made clear what constituted "assistance" (i.e. Social Security, perhaps?), and I'm not even sure how those doing the research may have defined a "household."
What I do know is that there is no longer any shame in failing to compete one's schooling, having children for whom one cannot -- or will not -- provide, and collecting entitlements and/or payments from the government for which one has performed no work or service. Without making any judgments about these or our other pet problems (obesity, addiction, moral indifference), I'm left to wonder if perhaps some of the old social stigmas didn't serve a purpose to norm some folks that might otherwise have been lost along the way. Perhaps not, but the "I'm ok, you're ok" approach doesn't seem to be paying much in the way of dividends, either.
Whatever the case, 50% seems like an absolutely huge, and non-sustainable number. 30% would be a shock. 10% is still too much. Yes, we've still got plenty of "salt of the earth" types, but how long can one group really be expected to carry the other; especially when we're increasingly expanding and redefining our list of what we're willing to accept as normal? One need not be a sociologist (nor have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express) to see that it is only a matter of time before this becomes a very real bone of contention in society. As with most cultural issues, it will doubtless be blamed on racial division and class warfare, allowing liberal ideologues to shovel even more coal into their boilers. The truth, of course, is that our national history teaches us that great Americans are great Americans, regardless of color, class or creed. Too bad there is no power (read: money) in championing on behalf of those who are already doing their part.
I'm fairly confident that every generation before us has complained just as loudly about what they were seeing in the youth of the country. The performance of their politicians. The devolution of personal responsibility. I won't pretend that they were wrong and we must be right, but at some point, the current entitlements quandary does become a simple question of mathematics. On today of all days, I'm left to wonder where the $10k tax check we just wrote really goes ... and who will actually manage to get money back this year, despite having paid no taxes whatsoever in 2011. On second thought, perhaps ignorance truly is bliss.
Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less. (Robert E. Lee)
AC
AC, your post reminds me of this old French political cartoon from the 18th century.
It's still relevant today (all one needs to do is to rename/re-arrange the characters).
http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://edu.glogster.com/media/5/34/58/91/34589128.jpg&sa=X&ei=krWMT-lJhKyJAsC3oZQI&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNHdmq-I0AY8atExSa-szetmC9nRPw
Cartoon image isn't showing here. Anyone else able to see it?
SeriousStudent
04-16-12, 21:06
No.
Now to slightly change the tone. I completely agree there are far too many ignorant, irresponsible, and worthless people around. However, let's not forget that there are actually good persons left.
Our neighbors have two young boys that are intelligent, athletic, and respectful. They are not the only ones I am aware of; sadly, though, they are in the minority. I refuse to let my daughter, and future children, be in the majority.
When I start to think of how shitty most people are, I try to remind myself there are still good ones to be found. Probably a high % on this board.
Indeed. I have met some outstanding young people recently. One is a high school dropout that I'm mentoring at work. He's coming in on nights arnd weekends, and working as an unpaid intern. But he's soaking up knowledge like a sponge. I'm trying to get degree requirments waived so I can hire him. I'll have to pull in a lot of favors, but he's going to be worth it.
My daughter is dating another DEP poolee. He's a sharp young fellow, and I'm quite pleased with his drive and focus. He's enlisting in the Infantry, then wants to get his degree with the GI Bill, and return as a line officer. I have no doubts about his future success.
They are out there. And with a wee bit of encouragment, they thrive. As old fossils, we should greatly enjoy offering that encouragement.
Speaking to OP, put my vote in with the camp that is against mandatory conscription for the many reasons already stated. I think the comments by Von Clausewitz and Heinlein sum up my feelings on the matter.
I'm going to look at this from my own past and say YES we need some type of civil service right out of high school. This is my reasoning. I went to college right out of high school. After 3 years of partying and surfing I finally managed to flunk out. Being from a military family I decided to go into the Army. 4 years later I get out and go back to college. 2 1/2 yrs after re-enrolling I graduated with a BA and a MBA and on the Deans List. Right out of high school I was nowhere mature enough to handle college and the lack of boundaries.
I firmly believe that if more kids were to perform some type of civil service right out of high school they would be in a better position to become productive members of society. I don't think the military ought to be the only choice. Giving them choices could make the requirement to serve more palatable.
Crow Hunter
04-16-12, 21:27
No. I don't think it should be mandatory.
What I think should be mandatory though is for the government/media/education system to stop teaching that Anglo Saxon culture and the moral values and work ethic that it enshrines as somehow "evil" and that all the other cultures of the world, no matter how morally and culturally backwards and reprehensible are somehow superior to it.
The ONLY reason that the US exists is because of the peculiar culture/history of the Anglo Saxon people and the ideals of individuality and personal rights that were present from the signing of the Magna Carta forward. No other culture in the history of the world has so cherished individual freedom/rights.
With the continued dilution of the "Culture of the Individual", the "Culture of the Strong Man" or Despotism becomes more dominant. This is the form of culture and government that has existed over the vast majority of the history of mankind and continues to exist in almost all of the other nations in the world today, both developed and undeveloped. People raised in these cultures are content to be "Ruled" by a "Strong Man". They don't know any better. Read Germany, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, China, Japan, etc. Whether that "Strong Man" be an actual person, like Putin or Hitler or a group, such as the CCP.
As long as we continue to dilute that which makes The United States of America different from everything that has ever come before, we too will pass into history and join the rest of the world as pawns of the "Elite" and "Warlords" as have countless generations before us.
Multiculturalism WILL be the Death of America.
Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less. (Robert E. Lee)
AC
Damn. Wish we had met b4 I moved out of the area.
R.E. Lee was truly a great man. Please, no one read anything into my quoting of him. Just take an hour to read about him.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
04-17-12, 00:40
The hipocrisy is thick in here for some of you, really thick.
"The government cant make me buy health insurance!"
"The government cant tax me unreasonably!"
"The government cant limit my freedoms!"
"The government cant tell me how to raise my children!"
And yet, I see the following statement from the people who say the statements above:
"There should be mandatory federal or military service!"
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over. What happened to personal responsibility? What happened to American's being proud of having the most elite all volunteer military force? What happened to personal freedoms?
If kids are ****ed up today, then do your due dilligence and correct them. Volunteer to work with kids, become a teacher, be a responsible parent, work hard to be a good role model, get inolved in your church's youth program. Assuming that the government can fix this problem with more regulation and programs is asinine and lazy, and completely ass backwards from the beliefs that we were founded on.
Freedom should be all or nothing, not just whatever fits into your world view.
"Lets enslave and conscript the youth of tomorrow!"
Does anybody in here even realize how the military works? Do you realize that most of the people in the military dont want to be there, and they volunteered! Do you realize that even now the lowest of the low still slip through the cracks? And yet you want to stick every fresh 18 year old into our ranks? Jesus H Christ. The military cant force you to be a good person, they cant force you follow rules, they cant even force you to be disciplined. Dont believe me, take a trip with my brother in law who is the Brig NCOIC of the Norfolk Joint Service Brig. Still dont believe me, watch the results of ANY urinalysis done by the military. By forcing bad people who dont want to be in the military into service, you are unleashing some serious nastiness and dissent among the ranks. Dissent and low morale spreads like ****ing wildfire....Those of us who joined the military and became better people because of it did so because we wanted to be there, we wanted to join, we were receptive to training, we allowed ourselves to be broken down and rebuilt.
I completely agree with you LSHD; it's one of those 'good intentions' ideas I think. When you think of how Israel does their thing and the national patriotism and pride that seems to go with it, well, I guess it looks good on paper.
RogerinTPA
04-17-12, 03:10
Our society is well on the path to becoming like the movie "Idiocracy" if something isn't done soon.
Suwannee Tim
04-17-12, 03:29
Our biggest problem today is that the United States government commands way, way too much resources. The vast wealth and power available to the politicians, bureaucrats, judges, NGOs, lawyers, et cetera have allowed them to expand the scope of government far beyond the limits of the Constitution then far beyond the limits of reason and then far beyond the limits of sanity and they want to expand it more. Two years of compulsory service would add to the power and resources available to these folks. No matter how well designed the program might be in the beginning it would soon be captured and perverted to increase the power and scope of the leviathan state even further.
Army Chief
04-17-12, 07:21
I find a certain wisdom in LSHD's words, as this nation was never conceived as a totalitarian state, and compulsory service (of whatever sort) certainly does serve to limit the freedom of the individual. In the spirit of opportunity and free enterprise, perhaps it would make more sense to encourage such service by means of tying it to powerful incentives, college assistance programs, vested grants, and other methods of offering a clear "leg up" for those who would choose to sign on. Make it attractive enough, and the idea could well sell itself.
The only problem, of course, is that the guidelines and provisions of any such effort would have to be very clear cut, lest the whole thing just amount to another government employment program from which we derive little, and for which we pay too much. Still, especially as it might relate to giving kids a realistic shot at higher education and far better job prospects, this might serve to provide some powerful peer incentive for young people to get into such a program -- or risk being left behind. The military already does this to a great extent, but as we've already observed, not every kid is really cut out for that kind of service. What if there were other ways to serve that really made a difference AND provided a worthwhile benefit to the nation?
More carrot. Less stick. That sounds quintessentially American to me.
AC
Smuckatelli
04-17-12, 11:35
Do you realize that most of the people in the military dont want to be there, and they volunteered!
I think it is more like most want to be there; was that a typo on your part?
We need baby steps, first get rid of the 'No Child Left Behind' federal intrusion and teach accountabilty to the kids. The parents are going to be hit & miss.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.