2007-07-23 01:37:04 · 23 answers · asked by talkland72 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I do not think conscription is the answer to the military's staffing levels or society's problems. I think the government needs to pay and supply our soldiers with decent equipment and training. If they had proper support, the recruiting levels would not be a problem. I do not believe the military would want unwilling conscripts fighting in their army and one of volunteers or people who want to be there is far, far better.
I think a better solution to crime and anti-social behaviour is education and opportunities for poorer young people coupled with longer prison sentences.
2007-07-25 03:16:39 · update #1
No. I think we all have an obligation to do SOMETHING in our lives to make society better. But not everyone is cut out for the military. We are just as much in need of doctors, teachers, police, and firefighters. Forcing people to join the military will only create an army full of people who don't want to be there and will not put everything they have into their assignment. That could spell disaster for our entire country.
2007-07-23 01:54:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
In the UK - yes. There is no other way of continuing the "war on terror".
Despite what the MOD and Government would have you believe our forces at breaking point. More resignations than recruits and more to the point more casualties than they let you know. They give you the KIA but hardly any wounded - serious or otherwise.
The options are, pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan and concentrate what we have left in one theatre or conscript to keep the pressure on in both theatres of operation.
The one problem would be kitting out a large influx of personnel. With 8 cutbacks in 10 years the forces no longer have the equipment available and to provide it would take months if not years.
2007-07-23 03:19:04 · answer #2 · answered by one shot 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you have got a diverse theory in case you had teenage sons who have been good difficult working to blame teenagers who by no ability led to absolutely everyone a difficulty. i think of those they might desire to deliver, male or female are those that reason the difficulty, that could cease a number of them. good teenagers have a uncooked deal these days because it is, the undesirable teenagers get the college journeys and all of the help in the international. If there undesirable........sign em up! Thank God we do have brave adult men and ladies folk who combat for this u . s . a . in spite of no count if or not they suspect in the conflict, yet dont tension people into struggling with. My cousin is in Basra with the British military on the 2d, he believes pressured conscription is risky.
2016-12-14 16:34:36 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think it should be... not just for the sake of having a bigger army, but to improve society. if conscription was brought back then people would be more respectful to each other and respect to life a whole more better. i really think it would lower crime rates.
people just do not have any morals no more, or the means of working hard. going into the army for a few years will straighten all these criminals out.
2007-07-23 02:07:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. Vietnam proved a conscripted army is an army that will fail. All volunteer is the way to go. This way you get people who want to be there (or at least think they do.) In order to attract the best, however, we need to do more for the military and support them better.
2007-07-23 01:40:50 · answer #5 · answered by sc_conservative 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The US has never has conscription.
Conscription is when every male at a certain age, has to join the military and serve a certain amount of time.
Even during WW ll and Vietnam, we had a draft, not conscription.
Not every male had to join the military.
A draft, only takes as many men, as are needed to fill the manning levals authorized by Congress.
In vietnam, that was about 10% of draft eligible males, were actually drafted.
2007-07-23 07:31:46 · answer #6 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. It has worked well enough since about 1972 and we don't need it now. If Hillary wins that might be a different situation. She and her husband have so totally alienated the military I believe you will find many unwilling to serve under her as Commander-In-Chief.
2007-07-23 06:17:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No and God I hope not! We don't need anymore people in the military who don't want to be here! It's already bad enough dealing with the ones who volunteered and don't want to be here but at least we can tell them they did it to their self! If we conscript them.... F... That!
2007-07-23 01:52:36 · answer #8 · answered by fiestacarsrule 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The last thing our armed forces want is thousands of, mostly unwilling, raw recruits being landed on them to train into soldiers. They have far more important things to do.
2007-07-23 01:51:00 · answer #9 · answered by Spacephantom 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Do you think a reguilar soldiier wants to have amoaning reluctant National Serviceman backing him up when S hits F ?
2007-07-23 02:50:44 · answer #10 · answered by Scouse 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋