Should all males be required to serve a term of active or reserve in the military?

Question

I understand some of the reasons why not.. But how can you say that you don't believe in it, or that it's only if you want to... It's for your freedom. It's for what this country stands for. The only reason I would say no is because I wouldnt want some of you pussy, bitches in a fighting hole with me. I serve this country with pride and for every one of it's citizens... If your a little ***** than I don't want you in my corps.

IN RESPONSE TO SASSYSOURS, FIRST OFF, I am not brainwashed... it is not brainwashed to believe in fighting for your country. and in the aspect of some people only do it for funding for school, well welcome to the real world.. it's the military dumb ***. Military was made to fight wars...

Answer 1

no. there are enough people already serving who don't belong, a draft would dilute the strength of the military

Answer 2

I think it should be mandatory to serve in one of several programs after highschool.

People should be given the choice of 18 months or so in the military or 24 months+ in a humanities focused charity such as the Pease Corps, Habitat for Humanity, Red Cross, etc..

I think it would be a great opportunity for kids to mature a little and experience a few different things prior to committing to college or a career.

However, there is a logistical issue with this.

According to the Census Bureau, in 2005, there was an estimated 19.6 million children (males and females) between 15 and 19. Assuming an equal amount of young adults in each age group, that would mean roughly 3.9 million kids a year would have to join the military or something else a year.

An entry level E-1 makes $1178.10 in pay per month (and gets an increase in 4 months).

This would require that this program would cost the military about $4.6 billion a month in pay alone, plus housing, food, uniforms, equipment, training, etc...

The cost would increase with inflation raises, pay raises, and promotions. If it was mandatory to serve 18 months, the cost would at least double during the 6 months were the original group is nearing the tour and the new group is starting.

Due to the cost factors alone, I don't think this will ever happen

Answer 3

Wow, someone's brainwashed. Chill out dude. Some people only join the military so they can get the funding for school. Some find they like the military, others drop out or get kicked out. I don't think it should be mandatory for guys to serve. It should be their choice. Especially if macho guys such as yourself don't think other guys can hack it beside you. Get over yourself.

Edit!
I feel so special that you singled my answer out. HAHA! Just means I'm right. And of course that's what the military was made for....why do you think I didn't join? I'd rather let you macho guys take care of it. Have fun.

Answer 4

Just so you know, H. R. 4752, is already way ahead of you, and your first answerer.

It is also known as Universal National Service Act of 2006.

It has not been passed, only introduced. It was introduced February 14Th, 2006.

Here is an interesting bit from it.

"(a) Obligation for Service - It is the obligation of every citizen of the United States, and every other person residing in the United States, who is between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of national service as prescribed in this Act unless exempted under the provisions of this Act."

Then of course this

SEC. 10. REGISTRATION OF FEMALES UNDER THE MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT.

(a) Registration Required- Section 3(a) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. 453(a)) is amended--

(1) by striking `male' both places it appears;

(2) by inserting `or herself' after `himself'; and

(3) by striking `he' and inserting `the person'.

(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 16(a) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 466(a)) is amended by striking `men' and inserting `persons'."

Now you know.

You can find the full bill at the link in the source.

Welcome to the end of America.

Answer 5

Absolutely not. If we're gonna push Americans into involuntary servitude, we might as well toss the US Constitution. Liberty isn't a temporary condition. It's all or nothing.

As far as serving, I would never enlist for a foreign war - especially a war of aggression like Iraq. But i'd be the first in line if the US was under a military threat. I believe in a strong military, but for defensive purposes, not offensive. As a conservative, I believe that our government can do a better job for Americans by minimizing foreign entanglements, not by initiating them and capitalizing on them for regional dominance.

Answer 6

Sure served at anytime from 15 too 50 years of age serve no less than 36 months active! I served 52 months active and 20 months inactive! Enlisted at the age of 17 with my fathers signature! VEV!

Answer 7

first of all, women are just as capable shooting a gun as men, so if men are to be required to serve a term in the military, women will have to be to.

as for the actual question, no. it works for israel because israel is small. the US has 300 million citizens. the logistics would be impossible to control, especially given that our government often times struggles to control/fund things it already has. add to that the fact that you would have thousands, possibly millions, of people who didnt want to be there, and you would have the recipe for total chaos.

Answer 8

Not just males. Females too. But we need to trust our representatives in government to make it work. That's not happening right now. The best course of action however, is to cease our role as "policeman" of the globe. Either that or take over the world. I'd prefer the former. Course, if you got rid of religion, things might not have gotten so out of hand.

Answer 9

Maybe not just the military, but the peace corp or some other form of civil service should be required. Not just jury duty, that's lame

Answer 10

Every person in this country should be required to serve a two year "national service" obligation. It should begin when you turn eighteen, unless you're in school...in which you would be allowed to finish. Military service would be one option.

Answer 11

I think requiring a summer of military training wouldn't be a bad idea. (Teaches team work, how to properly use a fire arm, basic survival and warfare tactics) Would be good in case of a major world conflict.

But imagine what the military budget would have to be if EVERYONE had to server a term of active duty?