what would you think and say if American did a mandatory 2 year service in the military?

Question

a lot of countryes do it. and for the stupid people thats going to diss me I was in the USMC and have 2 deployments in Iraq under my belt so chill out.
This is for a class discussion Thanks

Answer 1

I'm a strong believer in compulsory service, but I do believe that one should have a choice in the nature of that service (ie, active duty military, reserve, Peace Corps, service ministry, etc.).

Answer 2

Ok for a classroom discussion..... these links are from the Joint Special Forces Command website.

This one shows in a report that came out this month that each service either met or exceeded recruiting goals...
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec2005/d20051213mythfact.pdf

This one is about who is actually joining the military. The link is on the first page but.....http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec2005/d20051213mythfact.pdf

The second one will be good for a discussion. There will be talk about if there was a draft that the poor would bear the burden. Current enlistment shows that it is high school graduates that are solidly middle class that make up the bulk of enlistments. The poor or inner city people, those who could benefit the most to change their situation and return and make a difference are not signing up.

The region that South out of all of the nation supplies more recruits than any other. For one they say that the south has a higher percentage of eligibable men in the right age range. But they also attribute it to the more patriotic family values of the region....... this is percentage wise and not saying that there are not people who feel the same elsewhere.

Do I think that America could handle conscription? I don't know. Do I think that it would help many of the social ills and blaming other racial groups or wealthier people? Yes. I do think that kids are becoming more isolated in this day and age and could do well to earn something and learn something before college.

Then there is the whole immigrant issue. If one could speak english they could offer citizenship after a few years.

Anyway it's complex so I hope you find these links usefull. If I did them wrong just email me.

Answer 3

It might be a good and a bad idea at the same time. I am currently in the Army and I must say 2 years mandatory for all Americans is a double-edged sword. Sure I agree that an all volunteer military is a stronger fighting force. But you also have to imagine how much stronger it can be if it were mandatory.

Making all Americans and those who wish to be serve will boost up our manpower, our retention would sky-rocket due to the fact that more Americans would realize how good they might have it in the military and wind up re-uping after their original time is over.

Just the same you will have some who do the 2 years with a bad attitude the costant whining and overall selfdestuctive mindset that can be a sore on any Unit, heaven forbid you have to be in a foxhole or on patrol with one of those.

How do you pay these 2 year soldiers by the way?? As a Sergeant in the Army I get over $2000 in base pay along with housing and other benefits. It would be really hard to cough up that money to all Americans from 18-20, not to mention those immigrants who wish to take part in our services. What you forgot to mention is that even though other countries do have mandatory service the soldiers they have get paid next to nothing. Korea has it they pay their soldiers less than $400 a month. Italy where I am now had it (those born after 1980 no longer have to) they got paid less than $300 a month.

I believe that even if we do see a mandatory service in the future it will still have the same amount of hiccups that our all-volunteer service have. Instead, why not have our reserve and national guard do a 2 year mandatory active duty service before going to their units in their home state??

Answer 4

Okay I will start a discussion that will have a few go " high and to the right!"
You have to look at the men right now. I am on the west coast and most guys wouldn't pass the physical.They are either way over the weight limits or they have been taking drugs so much they are totally wasted or they have criminal records, even if the military waived some of that stuff , these guys still have records as long as your arm! So the quality isn't there anymore. ( not unless we took them at 13 years old before they really got in trouble and even then some start vandalism and theft as young as 9)
Not only is there a dumbing down of America but the the physical shape is nil.. the only guys in half good shape are over 40 and on Bowflex commercials ;-))
(Oooooh rah (former Marine's wife and AFEES employee ;-))

Answer 5

I think it would be a bad idea if it were limited to only military service and only to men. First, there are a lot of people who, for better or worse, shouldn't be in the military. You're a Marine, I'm sure you know what I mean. There should be some Civil Service option for those people. Second, in the past its only been men who've been expected to step up to the plate and serve their country. Women share equally in the blessings of liberty and should be expected to pay equally for it. To not require women to serve is at the very least sexist. The Israelis do it!

Answer 6

At present, a disportionate number of poor minorities are serving in the military, because their employment options were very limited other than military service. Most, join for the college benefits after completing their military service. The U.S. has even recruited from desperately poor countries like Honduras in South America, with promises of full U.S. citizenship upon completing a tour in Iraq, and completing honorable military service. The result is, a very poorly educated military force, with officers and medical personnel who, (if they were even marginal) could make 10 times the money in the private sector. IF we returned to a nation-wide mandatory draft, we would have a full cross section of talent and education, much higher educated soldiers, and much more qualified medical personnel. You also might have a few more senator's and congressman's sons and daughters serving in the military, and they might not be so eager to send our troops into harms way. We should have a mandatory military enlistment policy, but because our leaders shoot first and ask the RIGHT questions later, they cannot be trusted to have an unlimited supply of bodies to throw at the "evil empire of the week". Unless we are attacked by a sovereign country with an organized military force, we will not have a draft. Period!

Answer 7

A lot of SMALL countries have mandatory conscription in order to be able to put a force together large enough to count.
Some POOR countries have mandatory conscription as a way to get near-free labor for public works.

The United States is neither small nor poor - and the public is ultimately in control of the military. The necessity of attracting volunteers is a good curb on the temporary employee who is acting as Commander in Chief. The American public would not stand for mandatory conscription.

Answer 8

That would be fine in addition to, but not instead of, our current military. Two year conscripts are fine for a base of reservists who could later be recalled and trained up, but it takes longer than that to be of much use in our current force structure, even for you jarheads (just ribbing you, guy). One of the lessons of Vietnam was that it took more than the usual 12 months (Army) or 15 months (Marines) in-country to learn how not to be a danger to your squad but actually be useful. And long, continuous time in combat degrades efficiency (from WW II studies), so the repetitive rotations and training that are hodge-podged together now are actually close to the best system, although it's not really planned that way still. As a reserve force that fits somewhere between the ready reserve and inactive reserve, though, universal conscription could be useful. I think we just view it as an unnecessary expense with current and foreseeable circumstances.

Answer 9

Well, I wouldn't have listened to a DS yesterday shout about how "Y'all wanted to be here. You took the oath, you signed the papers. If you don't wanna be here, leave! You said you wanted to be here, so be here!"

So on and so forth.

Honestly, there are a lot of scum in our society today who would benefit from compulsory service. However, people like me would probably screw over the sytem. I'm way overweight, and I was pregnant at 17. I'm living my dream--I'm a novelist with a family (who, ironically, includes an Army husband). Why should my life be interrupted for military service?

It goes both ways. Thank you for your service for this country, don't think it goes unappreciated!

Answer 10

Mandatory military service is used by many countries in the world. I think it is a good idea with a couple of changes that would make it suitable for the US. It should be mandatory public service, and the conscripts should be utilized where their skills are needed. It could be the military, the police, the conservation corps, firefighters, park rangers, etc. There are so many jobs in the government that could be performed by these people that the savings to the economy would be huge, while the training they received could aid them for the rest of their lives.

Answer 11

Aside from the debate on freedom of choice and the ethical reasons some people have for being against this idea, think about the amount of money the government would have to spend to support such a large military. It would be astronomically ridiculous. Wouldn't most people agree that the government spends enough already?

Out military is voluntary based and should stay that way.