Do you think that Army service should be compulsory for everyone?

Question

Then we would have the biggest army in the world and we would take no **** from anyone!

Answer 1

yes and excluding no one unless they are locked up for murder

Answer 2

No, 1st let's look at the logistics of it, neither the pentagon or the any branch of the military wants a draft. A volunteer army fights much better then a conscript army. You're taking away time men and women can be spending in college, And look at the current budget, over $500 billion, and our troops still aren't getting what they need, imagine what our fighting boys would be getting if that budget had to be spread around to another 3 million military members.

Then more importantly there's the issue of liberty, conscription is worse then slavery since at least slaves don't normally get shot at and have to kill people. It goes against all princaples this country was founded on, there was never a draft untill the civil war, and even then it was highly unpopular and even then only 2% of the unions 2 million soldiers were draftees.

The only time a draft should be used is when there is a serrious global or internal threat to our country(i.e. WW1, WW2 and the civil war) and those times showed that if that's the case people will normally rally to the flag. Young men should not be drafted to go fight and be killed in wars most of the population is against in foreign countries most people can't point out on a map because we decided we should try to fix things.

Edit: Remember size doesn't make the difference too, it's weapons and tactics, look at the Germans in WW2 up to 1943, they were always winning and just about always outnumbered.

Answer 3

A compulsory "National Service" would be fine. You could have a list of jobs and different agencies in which to from including the military. Then you choose which service you wish to work under based on your interest, abilities, etc. This National Service requirement would be for all to participate after the age of 18. At least 2 years would be required. Also, a type of GI bill could be given after completing your service wherein you get a free or greatly reduced higher education. Other countries have such compulsory rules and they do fine.

Answer 4

As has been pointed out above

1. The number of people that a country can field at home has nothing to do with their ability to project power.
2. A draft for the military is only feasible in a true national emergency which Vietnam was not and Iraq is not.
3. A term of national service - you pick anything from the military to CDC to the Forestry Service - would, I think, be a good thing.

Answer 5

First off if something came up that forces our government into putting every single US citizen from newborn to elderly into military action, it would be useless unless we were invaded. If we did do that ( and we will never do that) then i am sure someone else would respond. For example China could force a draft of all fit and of age men which would out number our entire population. They could also draft fit and of age women which would then put them at 2:1 with over half of our people unable to fight. So seeing as how that idea would be horrid, there is the other side of the issue, the forcing everyone to join. Not everyone would want to join our army, now don't get me wrong for the right reasons i would fight for my country but our government isn't known for its great choices of combat. We would just end up with a few million people revolting against the government.

Answer 6

I think a term of public service of some type (not compulsory military) would be beneficial. However, I don't see how it could be implemented without it turning into a bloated, expensive bureaucracy that would have people with "connections" working as lifeguards in Hawaii while "ordinary" kids are clearing brush in Alabama or humping a pack overseas.

In this age of technology, the number of boots does not equate to the ability to project undisputed power.

Answer 7

NO, that sounds like a great idea but it just isn't. Some people just lack the temperament to take on the rigors of military service. They aren't bad or anything, they just don't belong in the military. It would be wrong to impose the military on them, and it would be worse to impose them on the military. A squad of volunteers is better than a Company of draftees.

Answer 8

I think two years of service to the country should be mandatory for everyone right after they graduate from high school. The service could be in the military, performing public works projects, or other type work that provides a benefit to the people of the nation.

Answer 9

Walk down to the corner and look at the guys standing there or sitting along the fence.

Are those good soldier material?

No, you would have the weakest army and we would take **** from everywhere.




g-day!

Answer 10

The Chinese have more than 3 times the number of people in its country. If they wanted to, they could easily outnumber any army we put together.

Also, the idea of mandatory military service is pretty much like slavery. You are being forced against your will to serve in the military. That goes against everything that our Bill of Rights stands for and is completely against the freedom of our citizens.

Answer 11

In my country, it is. I think it is good. A squad of volunteers is better then a company of Conscripts?

Maybe...but a Motor Rifle Corps of Conscripts will crush your Battalion of volunteers by sheer weight of fire.

Quantity has quality of its own" So said one of our leaders, just as we shattered the German line a rock though a window.

I think it a good thing, it teaches the youth respect, honour, and courage.