2007-06-17 00:36:41 · 17 answers · asked by bigdaddy33 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Reasons:
1) Discipline
2) Pride in country
3) Understand what your fighting for
4) Develop a more rounded leader
2007-06-17 00:50:05 · update #1
I'm not talking draft, which is only during a time of war.
I'm talking 1 term no matter what.
Yes I'm aware we have a voluntary force, I'm talking making it mandatory for at least 1 term and if you choose to stay in then great, if not then thank you for your service.
2007-06-17 00:55:57 · update #2
Yes, if you are unwilling to fight for and defend the freedoms you have been granted by our founding fathers...you should get the h*ll out of here... Its such bull to hear people say that it is against the constitution yet they are willing to turn their back on it when it comes to defending it.
2007-06-17 01:42:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Nobody should be forced to kill or die for a cause they don't believe in.
When you are in the military, you are a slave (or indentured servant to more exact).
Thus, you do not have the right to choose what people you will or will not kill, or die fighting.
People should only have to fight for causes that they believe are worth fighting and dieing for.
If a person can not be convinced that a cause is worth fighting for, then it isn't there duty to fight for it.
This country was founded on the Enlightenment ideals of 'natural rights'. And slavery, whether on behalf of the government or not, is not in line with these high ideals.
... and for good reason.
The worst form of abuse that any person or government can force upon you is to make you kill or die for a cause that you do not believe in.
Further, we don't need that big of a military. If the U.S. were actually ever in danger, and needed a big military, undoubtedly, many, many citizens would freely choose to protect it...as they did in World War 2 (if you recall).
2007-06-17 07:46:56 · answer #2 · answered by energeticthinker 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As long as there was some incentive for them to do that. Maybe more financial assistance with continuing education once they have completed there time. I don't really know what the overall feel of the public at large would be, because we currently have the volunteer service. Yet you have to register for the draft if your male. That's a real tough one.
2007-06-17 07:46:04 · answer #3 · answered by InDyBuD2002 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Sure why not. There seems to be a shortfall in the current recruitment numbers that I have seen on the news lately. Assuming the numbers that the government is supplying the correct stats in the first place.
2007-06-17 07:46:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I say that it should be either 1 year in the military, or 2 years as a guardsman on the US-Mexico border.
The "make them build houses" sounds like a good idea too.
Nice Suggestion!
2007-06-17 07:40:25 · answer #5 · answered by Wocka wocka 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think those that are able should have to serve in the military for a period of time. Many other countries have that type of policy regarding the military.
2007-06-17 07:45:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
That is called a draft. We have a voluntary army, and the system is working just fine. There is no need to force people to serve.
2007-06-17 07:47:21 · answer #7 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I agree with the extension of high school going to the 14th grade like other Countries have. I think this is why America is way behind with scholasticism.
2007-06-17 08:16:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I feel that maybe a year or two in some kind of public service would work, not necessarily military, unless chosen by the individual.
2007-06-17 07:56:36 · answer #9 · answered by Johnny Conservative 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes and to set a good example the bush twins will be first in line. then they can teach everyone how to avoid serving
2007-06-17 08:04:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋