English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In the movie Starship Troopers before a person could participate in politics they had to serve at least 2 years in the military. I think this would be a good idea becuase it would produce a greater level of respect for the nation and would remove a lot of the selfishness we find in politics today

2007-01-16 10:59:51 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

The military would have to be changed to allow people of sexual orientation, and hadicapped to serve in positions that would not be affected by the diability. Clerks, and recuiters could be filled by those people not able to fight.

2007-01-16 11:09:13 · update #1

22 answers

Same as Israel and Switzerland- every citizen has military training. If not military training, some sort of civic work.
But Fish, we know Americans would never accept this. And there are so many lowlifes that would ignore this and don't participate anyway. Perhaps we have gone to hell in a handbasket and just don't want to admit it.

2007-01-16 11:05:19 · answer #1 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 3 2

An interesting idea.

I would go even further: everybody for 4 years, say from the age of 17 to 21 must perform a mandatory service for the country. The military would be one option, but others could be the Peace Corps, work in hospitals, or helping the homeless. It would have to be something where they are away from home, subject to rules and discipline where they are, and have requirements on what they must accomplish within the 4 years.

I think this would solve a lot of my country's (the U.S.) problems: a LOT of crime is committed by this age group, they will learn morals and community service, they will become less selfish and more understanding of how others live.

2007-01-16 19:13:28 · answer #2 · answered by clueless_nerd 5 · 0 0

I think it would be a bad idea. A lot of people cannot serve in the military for whatever reason, whether it being that they are gay or have a permanent injury. I have a friend who would love to serve but he can't because he has 3 screws in his elbow. Plus, it is important to haven people without a military background involved in the political process, just like it is important to have people from all kinds of backgrounds in the political process today.

2007-01-16 19:05:26 · answer #3 · answered by SatanicYoda 3 · 1 0

Isreal requires it's citizens to ALL serve in their military. There are pros and cons to that as well as to your proposal.

As we "know", George W. Bush supposedly did serve in the Air National Guard... do you think it made him a better politician? I just think we as the voting public need to quit looking for the government/politicians to do our jobs in our communities and we need to pull together and take more responsibility to serve ourselves. I think it would be MORE appropriate to make political positions "volunteer" positions with no monetary compensation. When you think of the majority of the people that even serve in organized religions, most (definitely not all) do so while holding a full-time job in addition. The reason we even "need" full-time persons in our organized religions is because there again, we expect to pay someone else to do our job.

There is nothing less selfish than servanthood. Don't you think that would be even better?

2007-01-16 19:08:26 · answer #4 · answered by PerfectlyOK2BImperfect 2 · 0 0

Good movie, but being a voluntary military we get those who want to be there and not those who have to be there. Putting people in the military who do not wish to be there would really put troops at risk. I agree to the fact that a lot of people out there need the "boot camp" training to learn respect and discipline. But one cannot make someone learn these values unless they are willing.

2007-01-16 19:33:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

What type of military service? Most officers are just kids that were lucky enough to have the money to stay in college and graduate - their common sense and life experience is limited.
I think most politicians should have to do at least 6 months in the trenches of combat. During peace time - at least 6 months as the lowest enlisted so they know what life looks at from the bottom.

2007-01-16 19:08:03 · answer #6 · answered by Akkita 6 · 0 1

Yes, but at the same time this would prevent people who physically can not join the military, not be able to be politicans

EDIT: There may still be some technically things that would need to be worked out, but that sounds like a fantastic idea to me

2007-01-16 19:02:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Not to long ago was the Draft. How about after finishing school serve a couple of years in the millitary and maybe everyone would show a little more respect and have a different attitude about everythng around them.!

2007-01-16 19:04:17 · answer #8 · answered by grainy33 3 · 1 1

Actually in the book by the same name it was a longer time period and they separated the sexes, only men could be grunts and only women could pilot spaceships. Heinlein had a lot of kooky ideas like that.

2007-01-16 19:07:57 · answer #9 · answered by corvuequis 4 · 0 0

Actually, it is not a bad idea for citizens to have to serve their country in some way for a period of time. Every Israeli citizen has to serve 2 years.

2007-01-16 19:03:52 · answer #10 · answered by David M 7 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers