there would be nobody to maintain the country, everybody would be a soldier, so we would have no economy.
2007-01-29 11:24:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, maybe I can help with this. I served in the Army twice, including a recall for Operation Desert Storm and served also in Europe, where many of the countries have mandatory service in the military. What results from mandatory service is that the quality of the soldiers that you have on the battlefield is extremely low. The soldiers that I knew in the Dutch and German armies were total jokes. Nice guys, and I loved hanging out with them, but the Armies of those countries couldn't be counted on to protect a candy store. Observe the consequences of any UN military operations, they're all total disasters, usually resulting in massive deaths in the populations they have been deployed to protect. On the other hand, look at the current batch of soldiers in the USA. They are tough, disciplined and motivated. They have CHOSEN to enlist, not been forced. Consider the relatively low body count in the Iraq conflict (although every life lost is a real tragedy,) I bet if we had a drafted military as we had in the Vietnam era, the body count would be much higher (no disrespect to the Vietnam Vets.)
2007-01-29 11:36:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by michaelh1268 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
All citizens would not be affected. there would always be some exceptions just as there were when there was a military draft up until 1971. People with disabilities or illnesses would not have to go. A person who was the sole source of support for the family would be exempt. Look under selective service act. Or Military Draft to get your data.
2007-02-02 08:21:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Sandi Beach 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Um, are you sure you want people like Dick Chaney carrying a machine gun, or worse operating an M-1 Abrams Tank or to operate any kind of rocket system? Think, man, think! What could the US Army have to do with a Mr Hannity, who would complain about getting sweaty or dirty during training, or better yet, a Rush Limbaugh that would constantly be on sick call because of a boil on his butt? Even in the days of the draft, there were ways to weed out 'MOST' of the morons.
2007-01-29 11:31:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by ProLife Liberal 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not all citizens would pass the physical or mental tests for the military. Those with GED's would be excluded. Those that would not be comfortable serving in the military based on their religious beliefs ie. Quakers could serve their country in other capacities as civillians working in hospitals, retirement homes, schools or other community agencies for two years. I think this could have a very positive affect on the country. Americans take for granted what we have in this country.
2007-01-29 11:50:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by mr_methane_gasman 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Freedom and conscription tend to be opposing words. as quickly as I joined the militia, it grew to become into to grant others the liberty to no longer could. The militia for a while have served the government and that's agendas, no longer defended the liberty of the human beings. Requiring all electorate to serve only promises a rigidity that is used to pursue such agendas. whether one is of an identical opinion that (as an instance) Iraq could have been liberated, that's no longer the job of any citizen to take part in such adventurism no longer quickly with reference to the protection of the country. Conscription lowers the standard of the militia forces in assessment to volunteerism. There are some arguments; you may seem for articles to lower back them up. it is your task, no longer mine.
2016-11-23 12:58:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You call it Conscription, an involuntary labor demanded by authority.
Arguments against conscription:
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Slavery
Ageism
Sexism
Discipline problems
Nationalism and promoting militarism
Justification for attacks on civilians
Quality
Economics
Check it out below
2007-01-29 12:00:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Willie Boy 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It would increase the discipline over all, deflate over inflated egos, and educate Americans about the world beyond their own little community. It would require dismantling the volunteer military as the people liking the military and wanting to stay for a retirement would crush the national budget.
2007-01-29 11:30:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your English teacher asked for only negative effects? Aside from being able to write a decent few paragraphs, what does this have to do with the learning to use the English language?
2007-01-29 11:32:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by mattzcoz 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
There would be lots of protests by people as evidenced by the frequent protests of the War in Iraq and the fact that during the Vietnam War many people left the country to avoid being drafted, also as previously mentioned- who would run the country?
2007-01-29 11:29:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Synchronicity 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The governement would be forcing people to do something, they don't want to do. The US is supposed to be a democracy, little government and more individual rights. It would cause most of the Americans to flee to other countries, and it also would make the people here upset with the country. Our Country doesn't need more wars, we need peace.
2007-01-29 11:33:33
·
answer #11
·
answered by ۞ JønaŦhan ۞ 7
·
0⤊
0⤋