and Congress issued a law, stating that males and females, ages 18 through 40, had to serve a 2 year mandatory stint in the military? I've trained with the Israeli Defense Force in Haifa Israel and Republic of Korea Marines (Pohang South Korea) and they have a compulsory military, which is about two years of service.
2006-07-01 05:50:42 · 29 answers · asked by Kooties 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I understand that most think it would suck. My service was on a volunteer basis. I don't regret it. I've traveled to some cool countries. I've trained with Israeli, Korean, Spanish, French, Iraqi, Italian, British and the Philippines Marines! The training was off the HOOK! Trust me, ya don't know what you're missing! :)
2006-07-01 06:02:58 · update #1
Good question, but there would have to be huge changes in the US military structure.
Many people wouldn't want to be there, although I think it would be good for them and the country. But it wouldn't be good for the military. Right now we have an all volunteer force, so we don't have to babysit crybabies, cowards, or trouble makers. If they don't cut it, we seperate them. We have an all professional force, that's why we can defeat any country in the would and we can do it with about 1/4 as many troops.
A manditory service would have to be a seperate service dedicated to limited missions (basic military tasks) and with highly dedicated leadership to keep it in line. Those that then liked the military and wanted to make it a career would then have to change to one of the traditional services so they'd have better career and promotion possibilities.
2006-07-01 08:11:30 · answer #1 · answered by AngryPatriot 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Lol I was thinking the same, it's almost as if McCain is accepting that Obama will win, from what I read and saw. Although I wouldn't call it an endorsement, almost like an acceptance of defeat and like someone else said saving face for an enormous defeat. But don't count him out yet, he still has a chance. Btw I can't vote yet so I have no position in this
2016-03-27 00:12:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was posted in Camp Casey, So. Korea in 2004, so I've seen firsthand what kind of soldiers a compulsory conscription produces. The problem with any kind of draft is that you end up with a lot of people who really don't want to be there. In countries that need just about every soldier they can get, like Israel and Korea, the benefits of a draft may outweigh the cost, but in a huge, populous country like the US, you are talking about taking in millions upon millions of people, training them, arming them, supplying them, and maybe deploying them. The cost would be astronomical. Besides, most of them don't really give a damn about fighting for their country. It's way to costly, and wouldn't really make an effective army, anyway.
2006-07-01 10:39:15 · answer #3 · answered by Incorrectly Political 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I already did my 6 year commitment. In one way it would be good for many who never get out of in front of their computer screens. They could see the world as it truly is, not what some blog site in spewing at the moment. On the other hand, it would be a serious challenge to the TI's and DI's. It's much easier for the services now because it is all volunteer. Most of these lazy fat youth of today couldn't handle it.
2006-07-01 06:34:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The US used to have mandatory service but it was chancelled as they can afford a proffesional military (both demografically and economically). Isreal is incredibly small. Even if there were sufficient funds for an entierly proffessional military, there wouldn't be enough personel. So many countries don't have a choise. Yes, it sucks.
2006-07-01 05:56:22 · answer #5 · answered by evil_tiger_lily 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I volunteered and did 3 years and I think it would be great. Too many kids think the world owes the something, by the time they are 18, it is time they started paying back.
I think the 40 age limit though should be lowered. Maybe 32 or 35.
2006-07-01 05:55:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That wouldn't be too bad, I could deal with two years, as long as we had the choice of which branch. Although, I would rather not, but if it came down to it I would. But honestly, I don't see it ever happening, the public would revolt. And we would be using more military HERE calming riots and whatnot than we would gain by having a forced military enrollment.
-Duo
2006-07-01 05:56:36 · answer #7 · answered by Duo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that would be an outstanding thing!!!! They should do it, if our young don't go to college after high school.......they should have to serve at least two yrs in some section of the military.....and yea, this kinda may seem to violate our rights, but think about it...... we wouldn't have to worry about making quotas... it would be better for the economy, by motivating some to stay in college.....better jobs, and there'd be no shortage of trained military personell--we all need to know how to defend our country!!!
2006-07-02 00:02:54 · answer #8 · answered by Liss S 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Having been drafted to fight in a war I found to be totally repugnant (Nam), I am against forced military service where my life is on the line to protect the assets of those whose children can always find a safe haven during war in a phantom Air Guard unit in Alabama, where you don't even have to report for duty.
2006-07-01 06:00:20 · answer #9 · answered by iknowtruthismine 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not a horrible idea, because it gives people the opportunity to choose when they could join, it wouldn't just force you into service during a war like the draft did. Specify wether we would have to do all of the time in 1 chunk, or if we could split it into smaller pieces.
2006-07-01 06:02:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋