Shouldn´t soldiers sent to war have a minimum age ?
What can you expect from not mature teenagers at war ?
Are they old enough to be responsible of their acts on the field of battle ?
Do they really know what they are doing ?
Shouldn´t the average soldier be over 30 and already a dad to realize the value of human life ?
Aren´t soldiers just young unfortunate people sent over by older people watching them on their screen ?
2007-03-26 10:56:59 · 19 answers · asked by NLBNLB 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
minimum age is 18 or up
They are professionaly trained and displined
2007-03-26 11:00:08 · answer #1 · answered by GoAndComeback 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The minimum age is 18 years of age. After boot camp, they go to infantry school and yes, after training. They know what the rules of engagement are and what they mean. War is fought by the young and strong. (thats the easy answer) Becuase having to move with 50 to 80lbs of gear is not ease. The young are easier to train to follow orders, which if not followed quickly, could cause the death of that soldier or others. It does'nt take long for anyone in a war zone to realize the value of human life. Last ..... Soldiers are not unfortunate people. They are those of us that volunteered to serve a (sometimes) ungrateful nation. We fight because we can and the old can not. We know that all that served before us fought when we were too young to fight or understand. I am now 45 years old and would return to the Marine Corps in a heart beat if they would let me. Not for another chance to go into battle, but if my being there kept one young Marine home or from seeing what war is truly about. Then I would gladly go. I know many more like me that would go as well. It is easy to judge our boys as too young to know what their doing, but it is their training that kick in and keeps many of them alive. So don't sell them short. The ones that have already served one tour in Iraq are considered the old guys. Some of those old guys are 19 and 20 ........
2007-04-02 17:50:32 · answer #2 · answered by Gunny 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who are you to say that just because someone is under the age of 30 they dont realize the value of human life? That is absoloutely ridiculous. Age does not make a person mature, or more aware of the value of things, life experiences do.
Obviously you don't know much about the Army or you wouldn't have even asked the question "do they really know what they are doing"...its called BASIC and AIT.
The age to join is 18 years old (17 with a waiver), and at that same age you're old enough to decide who you want to be president of this country, its a responsibility and it doesnt matter what age they are.
Lastly, all soldiers aren't young kids, there are grown men who are grandfathers still in the army. When they join the army, its their own decision and they know what they are getting into, so why are you catergorizing them as unfortunate? They are proud to serve their country and of what they do. That is stupid and you shouldnt be so narrow-minded.
They all know what they're doing, and they are proud of it!
I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!
2007-03-30 21:19:27 · answer #3 · answered by ArmyWife0412 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Judging from your question I assume you don't have the honor of knowing a soldier personally. Two of my good friends enlisted at 18 and they did as damned good a job in Iraq as the men and women older than them--to be specific, as the ones over 30 with children. These "not mature teenagers" as you say (the word is "immature" o wise one) are no better or worse than the soldier laying next to them in a trench. To realize the value of human life, you have to first see how others do NOT value life--and there is no one who sees that more than a soldier. As far as your last (& ridiculous) question about being "watched on a screen," these "unfortunate people" (your quotes just get better and better) were not drafted, they volunteered. I have never seen any member of any branch of the service refer to themselves as "unfortunate"--they are as proud to serve their country as you should be of them. If you don't know what you're talking about, you shouldn't waste time posting idiotic questions.
2007-04-03 01:39:55 · answer #4 · answered by dmarie2101 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm 38 and in the military. I thank all of you who have answered this with supportive comments for your military. I feel neither young nor unfortunate. We absolutely should not raise the min age. Military service requires tremendous stamina and agility. Look around and show me a 38 year old civilian who can make it through BASIC training? They're few and far between. We go into combat as a unit: with ages spanning 18 to 50. Us older guys take care of the younger guys. They in turn do alot of S**ty Little Jobs. You make it sound like there's just a bunch of young kids out there with no direction or support. That may be al Qaeda's method, but its not ours! Do we know what we're doing. Yes. Do you? clearly not.
2007-04-01 21:48:24 · answer #5 · answered by smartr-n-u 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Our soldiers are volunteers. They have not been drafted. When they enter the service they know the possibilities. Our soldiers may enter as a "boy" or "girl" of 18 or 19 But they soon become Men and Women willing to protect our country. There are many soldiers/officers active inthe service who are well over 30. And some have been there since they were 18. I am so proud of these young Men and Women.
2007-03-26 11:05:52 · answer #6 · answered by Proud Nana 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Soldiers that are 18-25 are the best equipped physically to fight. They have more endurance and energy. I joined the army when I was 19, and after training I could do anything. Now I'm 24 and not quite as strong or fast as I used to be but have experience to make up for that. Guys that enter in their 30's don't have the same kind of motivation or physical abilities that their younger counterparts do. But they can be excellent soldiers due to their experience. I'm getting out of the army because I don't want to go to war anymore, but if you are over 18, I think you realize what you're getting into with the military.
2007-03-26 11:09:43 · answer #7 · answered by redguard572001 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Let me address the last first. The service men and women serving in every branch of our military is ALL VOLUNTEER. This means that no one sent the "young unfortunate people" anywhere without their concent. These brave young people looked outside themselves and voluntarily signed up to serve their country.
According to Lt.Col. Oliver North, they are the best trained and most disciplined that our country has ever had. Don't belittle their service to our country. They know what they're doing! and most have re-upped for second and third tours of duty.
2007-03-31 11:58:10 · answer #8 · answered by billquantrill 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the minimum age is 18 i went to war at 18 and would do it agin now that im 30 + years older i would go in a hart beat if they would let me
2007-04-02 09:07:46 · answer #9 · answered by Dennis 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
18-30 yep
teenagers that are not mature before going in are mature by the time the get out of boot (USMC) and are heads above the others. Yes they know what they are doing and are wll trained for it. No the average soldiers shouldn't be over 30, it's because you do valure life that you are a soldiers moron! And the llast statement is too stupid to answer!
2007-03-26 11:06:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Um, the soldiers joined the army in the first place. But I agree, the minimum age should be 22 or something.
2007-03-26 11:01:13 · answer #11 · answered by justagirl 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋