No, I do not want the draft back. I would not want to have to deal with draftees. The US military already has enough people.
I do however think military service should be a prerequisite to be a president or to be eligible for congress!
2006-12-03 18:49:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by higg1966 5
·
1⤊
3⤋
Good question. The draft is not a functional need at this point. The United States enjoys the best trained volunteers in the world for the very reason that it is an all volunteer force. Recruiting goals are met or nearly met every quarter. What would be better served is an increase.in the military size toward the Tables of Organization seen in the early 90s, before the Clinton Administration decimated the ranks. If you build it, people will come. We just have to let loose the purse strings to do it.
I do, however, support required government service for adults 18-21. A three year commitment either in the military or civil service (choice is free) would do a lot of good. This is similar to a program the Germans have. Exceptions, of course, would be given to those physically or mentally incapable. I believe the military would still be a professional, volunteer force and many civil projects would move forward. Again, the purse strings would have to be loosened to put this system into place.
I am not a fan of big government, but in this instance, I think it may be prudent. I'd be more than happy to listen to opposition to this idea.
2006-12-11 03:11:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by CPT Jack 5
·
0⤊
3⤋
The draft should be revised to reflect a true cross section of society. In other countries there is no deferment with mandatory two year service unless the person is going to a military academy.
In 1963, I had two that were drafted with third grade education. In that case, the army helped them get their high school which would never have happened otherwise.
In another case, I had juvenile deliquents who were drafted and never returned to jail.
The law needs to be revised and offer equity to all those subject to the draft. Then we would not have a George Bush or like members of Congress with only fourteen who were ever in the military. In fact some countries require an office seeker to be an exmilitary person, that way they get into less wars.
2006-12-03 15:22:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by x-factor 1
·
1⤊
3⤋
Most young people in the US could use the exercise they would get in basic training. Have you seen the fat kids in high schools, and college lately? Plus, it would show them how they got the freedoms they have now. It works well in some places and poorly in others. Isreal (who has a constant threat, mandatory service works well for them)(Russia on the other hand has more draft dodger than the US ever did, over 50%. AND only 11% of the people who are drafted or conscripted are fit for duty) The US would probably fall in the middle.
I like the voluntary military we already have.
2006-12-03 15:22:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by jessica a 2
·
0⤊
3⤋
IF they do bring the draft back, I think that the people who get drafted should serve atleast a 2 year term.
2006-12-03 15:24:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
there should diffidently be a mandatory term of service for a minimum of 4 years. It is the Constitutional obligation of every citizen to serve the country for a minimum term of 4 years. And I believe that institutionalizing the draft again would be a wake up call to everyone and make them see how wonderful America is and how they take for granted all the rights and privileges we have
2006-12-03 16:18:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by ibyt2692 3
·
0⤊
3⤋
No.
As a pacifist, I don't believe in war or killing. Further more, I don't believe in forcing people to fight for something that they may not support. That seems to go against the American dream of freedom and all that, and it's just wrong. If people want to join the military, great, but they shouldn't be forced.
Also, at the current time, we're not in need of more people in the military. Drafts are usually only put in motion when it's considered needed, and right now it's not.
2006-12-03 15:12:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by vedelan 1
·
0⤊
4⤋
I agree with the poster above who said civil service should be mandatory. If you choose the military the time required could be shorter than if you worked as a border guard.
Civil service is good for everyone and teaches a lot of values we are lacking, especially in the 20ish people. Values like nationalism, a good work ethic, and the value of hard work.
2006-12-03 15:58:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by justind_000 3
·
1⤊
3⤋
They should have mandatory civil service for everyone, but make serving in the military much shorter and serving as like a border patrol agent or working in an office.
2006-12-03 15:12:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Wocka wocka 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
No, my husband is in Iraq right now and I worry enough about him without worrying if the guy who is supposed to watch his back will. Yes I know it is a possibility that anyone could freeze under fire but I would worry more with someone who was forced to be there.
2006-12-03 19:20:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋