Mandatory military service

You earn benefits by paying taxes and obeying the law. What benefit is there to forcing people who don't want to be in the military to join? It was disastrous in Vietnam and would be even worse now with our current political climate. As someone else on here pointed out, forced service is basically government slavery, something that belongs to Communism and Fascism. Not everyone is a soldier and they should not be forced to become one. I personally would rather shoot myself than join.

 

hey, guys! I found john kerry!!!

 

You have 'resisters' in every conflict; it's not unique to the U.S. If everything required 100% agreement before doing it, the country wouldn't exist at all, and of course ersatz, simplistic 'ideological purity' and obsessions with legalisms is at the root of many of the problems we have now.

https://www.indyreader.org/content/breaking-rank-history-soldiers-refusing-fight?nopaging=1

 

It wouldn't be "forced service." One would have the option of enlisting, otherwise service would be compulsory. People who live in this country expect their freedoms to be protected. The same people who whine about their rights and freedoms can get off of their lazy rears and give three years of their lives to help protect those freedoms. Besides, the military builds maturity, self reliance and character. Something the youth of this country are sorely in need of.

If you don't agree with that then indeed, shoot yourself in the foot for a deferment.

Regards,

Jason Bourne

 

I was drafted.

This is what i was taught.

Never talk back to government.

Always obey them.
You will eat where they tell you to, wear the clothing they mandate and wake you up and tell you to sleep at named hours.
You will spend endless hours in lines
You will clean toilets
You will stand guard duty
You will work in the unit kitchen. I am aware they may do it different now overseas. Not clear on American bases in the US.

You will do all of this at a fraction what you could earn in the public market

And who wants this foisted on us?

If the current guys get much better pay, it is only due to them being volunteers. Draftees can be paid a lot less and take it laying down.

 

Indeed, that's my personal experience as well. Those few who had 'problems' were already having problems before they were drafted, would have had the same 'problems' regardless if they hadn't been, and we have better psychological screening methods these days, supposedly anyway.

 

I was in country from late 67 to early 71. Bravo Troop, 2/7th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry (Airmobile) and 11 Aviation Pathfiners. I saw very little drug use, officers who earned respect got it and we did not abuse civilians. People who never served there base their opinions on youtubes and movies. No wonder alot of us were treated like dirt when we came home.

Regards,

Jason Bourne

 

Ran out of time to edit Post#28, but re substituting mere legalisms and ideologies for citizenship and service, this part of a discussion I posted in another topic points out the problem with that mentality, from an orthodox religious perspective, one of the more genuine objections to military service.

http://www.thejewishreview.org/articles/?id=182

Jewish Review: How does, and to what extent does, the philosophy of Samson Raphael Hirsch help us deal with the kinds of dilemmas we've been speaking about?

Rabbi Schiller: Well, because Hirsch really felt himself to be a German, a German citizen, and he sincerely wanted Jews to be genuine patriots caring about the German nation and people, (although he was wary of Jewish/gentile socializing) everything he writes on this subject offers us an alternative to our current approach. The problem, however, is very complex. It is complex in part because the kind of nation which Hirsch was urging us to be patriotic to has almost ceased to exist, insofar as almost all western societies have gone over to a contractual, liberal, capitalist view of the state. So I don't know if Hirschian patriotism is relevant in a western world in which a concept of the nation as more than a contractual agreement no longer exists. There's almost no patriotism, for example, to America the nation anymore. That died either in 1865, 1932, or when Senator McCarthy was censured or maybe when General McCarthur died. It certainly doesn't exist anymore outside of, say, West Point. It's important to make the distinction between a 'nation' and a 'state'. If you were to ask Americans what America is they would point to the Constitution, freedom, democracy. If you would ask a Russian, an Englishman, or a Frenchman, they wouldn't equate their particular form of government with their 'nation'. They believe that a nation exists outside of the government. A Russian loves 'Mother Russia,' the nation, although he may despise the government. An American can make no such distinction. There is no America outside of the American system of government. Now, even in European countries there is a movement towards this contractual conception of the realm, and therefore Hirschian patriotism becomes almost outdated in a west that has moved beyond a spiritual conception of the nation.

Jewish Review: So you're saying that the nation used to be thought of in much of the same way as Jews think of Israel?

Rabbi Schiller: Yes, in terms of a sacred bond.

Jewish Review: Hirsch managed somehow to have a 'sacred bond' both to Germany and to Clal Yisrael?

Rabbi Schiller: Yes, he felt this was not a contradiction although he did not equate them.

Jewish Review: How was he able to live both of them?

Rabbi Schiller: Because he felt that the Jewish people were a religion and not a political entity, at least prior to the Messiah. He was an anti‑zionist. He felt that viewing the Jewish people as a political entity pre‑messiah, is a violation of the three oaths (Ketubot, III a) of galut, etc.

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly. Hollywood and political fashion have colored the conflict beyond any sense of reality.

 

That's actually not my position at all. In my fantasy republic, military service would be required in order to vote, aka Starship Troopers. However that proposal is only slightly less realistic than yours. In the real world, what I think is possible is reforming selective service. Since woman are now eligible for combat positions, they should register, however I would make selective service registration voluntary. In order to be eligible for student loans, men have had to register for selective service but not women. That should change. Women should have to register to be eligible as well. Also, they should have to meet height/weight standards by weighing in every year. If they are too fat, suspend student loans, since they're not eligible for being called up at that point.

That eliminates any objection to a future draft since registration is voluntary, and it makes meeting military standards a condition of student loans.

 

I read your post. One shouldn't need to be an objector at all. I bet you used to play army with sticks for guns. Maybe we should force kids to run out and play with sticks too because if it was good enough for you, then everybody should be forced to do it.

 

With compulsory service there would likely be no need for the concept of selective service. Regular military and ready reserves would be more than adequate.

Regards,

Jason Bourne

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry to disappoint you, but I never played "army with sticks for guns."

Regards,

Jason Bourne

 

Not sure why you created this when there's already a recent thread with this same subject. Mandatory service is a HORRIBLE idea when you have a 100% fully volunteer Army, Reserves, and Guard. Since we already have that, we don't need to take the idiotic risk of drafting some left wing snow flake who is too scared to point a weapon. I don't want someone who doesn't want to be here covering my 6 when a bunch of Hajis point their AK at us.

If you want that then you truly hate my military.

 

I hate "your military?" I served two combat tours in Vietnam so don't presume to lecture me about the Army or any other branch of service. Bravo Troop, 2/7th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry (Airmobile) and 11th Aviation Pathfinders. But you keep right on rolling with your lame opinions.

Regards,

Jason Bourne

 

I'm glad you accepted defeat with your ridiculous point that you think we should currently have SS.

What a hilariously bad opinion.

At least we agree now

 

We don't agree. I favor mandatory national service.

Regards,

Jason Bourne

 

Yes, I know. I said that already. If someone who values our current military wants mandatory service, then they don't favor our standing military. We don't want some punks who don't want to be here. I'm not sure why you do.

 

I am approaching the target demographic age in your post. I have immense respect for our service men and women, and thank you personally for your service to our nation. I maintain a diagnosis of autism; therefore, am ineligible to serve in the military or law enforcement fields. Being especially gifted in mathematics, I would enjoy the opportunity to put this skill set to use in a combat support role; however, am not sure how viable a resource I would be in a combat service roll.

 

In the United States of America an all-volunteer Armed Forces is in the best interest of our nation.

We should continue to evaluate the service entrance requirements and raise the requirements as necessary to ensure we are getting the best and brightest our country has to offer. We should also improve the salaries and benefits to broaden the interest in the available applicant pool.

As another poster pointed out, there is a high percentage of applicants who simply cannot meet the minimum requirements.

As a nation we should continually raise those requirements and seek the absolute best candidates available. Furthermore, our brave men and women in the Armed Forces should receive better salary and benefits, including benefits following their active duty service.

Conscripts are inherently unreliable in the matter of esprit de corps required of our fighting men and women.

It is an honor to serve your nation through the Armed Forces of the United States. There is no other service that can compare.

 

I like it. Those that can't hack it in combat units are free to work the mess hall or any other wide variety of support positions. People would have to compete just to be in the regular infantry. Love it

 

...your argument for this not being forced service is that you can enlist before they make you join? Really? Clearly the military doesn't build critical thinking skills.

The youth in this country are fine. Our freedoms are protected by the Constitution and the courts that uphold it. Being forced to become a lawyer fits your argument better. The military hasn't defended us from anything since WWII, it's pure offense and meddling in the affairs of other countries. A Vietnam veteran should understand that better than anyone.

 

For those people we would have alternatives and I'm disabled and couldn't have served under this either but could do something like work in an office for the term, with housing and such covered, since it would need to be the same as serving in the military.

 

And you are someone who believes so little in freedom that you believe the government should enslave its citizens and force them to kill.

- - - Updated - - -

And the attempted draftees continue to stand. Or they sit en masse.

Then what?

 

Bourne's plan does demonstrate one thing perfectly:

When Conservatives claim America can't afford to provide government-paid college, they must be lying.

 

if you dont know, then you dont know.

 

Is the military going to physically beat them? Put them in jail? Shoot them?

What is the limit of the persecution you want the government to foist on people for having the gall to not be good goose-steppers?