The idea has been tossed around a bit, and many other foriegn countries require that each high schooler upon graduation complete a mandatory 2 year military enlistment. What do you think?
2006-11-28 09:49:44 · 15 answers · asked by channie4808 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I believe it should be mandatory to serve a minimum of 2 years in Federal Service, meaning that after high school you may choose among military service, local beautification, helping homeless or handicapped, physical infrastructure construction, etc. Not everyone is military material and the military does not need that many recruits. Benefits and pay will be given for those two years in Federal Service. Although it would detract from our concept of freedom for two years, it would teach social responsibility and make Americans earn their citizenship rather having it because they just so happened to be lucky enough to be born here.
2006-11-28 10:13:47 · answer #1 · answered by nerdyjohn 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
No, not everyone is cut out to be in the military. I have 4 sons and the 2nd son is a Marine and it would seem that he is born for it. His older brother is considering going to officer's school after college and he might do okay. I don't think the other two should go in the military though. And if you think about it from a mother's point of view - it were mandatory, I could potentially lose them all.
It also just wouldn't be practical as we need some young people to do other jobs.
2006-11-28 18:49:49 · answer #2 · answered by runningviolin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I consider Cant, gregster, Ghost, Ivan, Smartypants, JD and Jake... the protection rigidity would be troubled by requiring human beings to be there. I do, although agree that 2 years of mandatory gov't provider if there have been distinctive techniques to comprise the protection rigidity, Peace Corps, US company for worldwide progression or maybe an NGO. will certainly help our large u . s . a .. i've got confidence between the main important problems with the family individuals "Hate the u . s . a ." crowd is that human beings no longer return and forth exterior of this countries borders, save Mexico, Canada or the Caribbean, which leaves them without assessment to the existence they have here. human beings look to think of that the worldwide exterior our borders is comparable to it particularly is here at homestead. you're able to no longer be added from the actuality. Ask any veteran. The old adage approximately "no longer understanding what you have, until eventually its long previous." weighs in here. consistent with hazard then specific voters of u . s . would whine much less, relish what they have and nationwide delight would flow decrease back to the vanguard of our society. ok, pizza's here so off my "Soapbox". thank you for listening to me pontificate.
2016-10-04 11:52:58 · answer #3 · answered by murchison 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a career military Nam era vet who retired after Desert Storm, I think it's a terrible idea. As do almost all the people I know who are on active service. I worked with people in the Navy who joined solely to avoid Army service by being drafted, and they were sullen, un-motivated, and uncaring about either the unit or the mission. Would you want to trust your life, the lives of your children, or the survival of your country, to people who have shown they care nothing about any of them? I wouldn't. My own daughter is 7th generation U.S. military, I'd hate to lose her because some draftee ran for cover.
2006-11-28 16:21:05 · answer #4 · answered by rich k 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, for more reasons than I possibly have the time to mention. Mandatory military and public service is the cornerstone of many prosperous industrialized nations. South Korea, Germany, Israel, Russia, etc....
2006-11-28 16:15:45 · answer #5 · answered by SL 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, but there should be more of a push for people to join the military or job corps for a 2-3 years as a means to fund college.
2006-11-28 09:59:06 · answer #6 · answered by ML 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It would cost a fortune to accept so many unworthy candidates.
But, our youth is in need of a kick in the pants. If I had faith in who was pulling the strings in Washington I would say yes.
But I do not know what we are fighting for or how we are supposed to "win".
So, My answer is fix the way we rule our military and then yes. Tell our kids to put down the meth, pull up their pants turn off the music and let's go.
2006-11-28 10:11:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
HELL NO!!!! There's NO WAY that I would go down to Iraq, or Vietnam. The only time it would ever be justified to draft anyone is if the war were absolutely necessary, and justified (which we will never agree on--hence there should be no draft).
Government has NO RIGHT to sacrifice innocent lives for oil profits, or for stupid "domino theories" that are blatantly FALSE.
The idea of a draft in and of itself is okay theoretically, if there were a way to guarantee that it would only be used responsibly. (Although I don't like the idea of mandatory service until a crisis emerges.)Unfortunately, human nature and history do not support this view.
2006-11-28 10:10:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yes. Every one living in the USA has an obligation to serve their nation. No free rides.
2006-11-28 12:22:21 · answer #9 · answered by blindogben 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
with the state of the world today...it may not be a bad idea.
2006-11-28 10:12:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋