Mandatory Military Service?

[TillEulenspiegel]

I'm afraid your numbers are a bit muddled.

The Army expressed concern that it began the year with only 18% of the year's quota in the pipeline (already signed up and just waiting for their training to start or for graduation etc). Army target is to have 25% of their yearly quota in the pipeline at the start of the year. They are concerned about the shortfall but it is nowhere near as dark a picture as you paint.

Well if that's true I stand corrected. My source was a news story accurately quoted . News stories that are "Breaking" sometimes must be corrected later.
Mae Culpa.

 

[kalen]

It surprised me that Noam Chomsky is for the draft. I think he has some very compelling reasons.

Noam Chomsky on Yasser Arafat, Iraq and the Draft (Democracy Now website)

...
I think it's extremely unlikely. I should tell you this as a word of personal background. I was very much involved in the resistance movement in the 1960's. In fact, I was just barely -- the only reason I missed a long jail sentence is because the Tet Offensive came along and the trials were called off. So I was very much involved in the resistance, but I was never against the draft. I disagreed with a lot of my friends and associates on that, for a very good reason, I think at least as nobody seems to agree. In my view, if there's going to be an army, I think it ought to be a citizen's army. Now, here I do agree with some people, the top brass, they don't want a citizen's army. They want a mercenary army, what we call a volunteer army. A mercenary army of the disadvantaged. And in fact, in the Vietnam war, the U.S. military realized, they had made a very bad mistake. I mean, for the first time I think ever in the history of European imperialism, including us, they had used a citizen's army to fight a vicious, brutal, colonial war, and civilians just cannot do that kind of a thing. For that, you need the French foreign legion, the Gurkhas or something like that. Every predecessor has used mercenaries, often drawn from the country that they're attacking like England ran India with Indian mercenaries. You take them from one place and send them to kill people in the other place. That's the standard way to run imperial wars. They're just too brutal and violent and murderous. Civilians are not going to be able to do it for very long. What happened was, the army started falling apart. One of the reasons that the army was withdrawn was because the top military wanted it out of there. They were afraid they were not going to have an army anymore. Soldiers were fragging officer. The whole thing was falling apart. They were on drugs. And that’s why I think that they're not going to have a draft. That's why I’m in favor of it. If there's going to be an army that will fight brutal, colonial wars, and that's the only likely kind of war, I’m not talking about the militarization of space and that kind of thing, I mean ground wars, it ought to be a citizen's army so that the attitudes of the society are reflected in the military.

 

[jj]

I would love to see the pierced hair-dyed punks getting "the treatment".

Yeah, I'm sure you'd enjoy seeing people who aren't just like you humiliated.

Why?

 

[Tmy]

People act as if the military is some sort of magic factory. Ive known plenty of a-holes who joined the military. And after they get out of the military, THEY ARE STILL A-HOLES!

There are plenty of boneheads in the service. Joining the militray doesnt mean you will pick up honor, good manners, and a higher IQ, as the commericals would suggest

 

[crimresearch]

Absolutely.

On the other hand, it doesn't mean that you *won't* come out changed for the better.

 

[Leif Roar]

I'm for compulsory military service primarily because I see that as an extra safety against the army being used against the citizenry or as a tool in a coup de etat. While it's not a perfect guarantee, and while we might not be needing this extra safety today, I'd still rather have it than not have it.

 

[LW]

What I AM looking for is thoughts on the matter. A number of developed nations already have mandatory service periods of typically 2-5 years, around the ages fo 18-20. They meet with a high lvl of success, and little resistence. Most people after their term tend to leave with (relatively) positive impressions.

I went through 9.5 month military service in Finnish army. Around that time there were three different serving times: 8 months for basic grunts, 9.5 months for specialists (I was a coastal artillery weatherman), and 11 months for NCOs and reserve officers. A couple of years afterwards they changed the times so that now the times are 6 and 12 months.

Here the support for mandatory service is higher than in many other countries. This is partly due to geographical realities: we have the Great Bear as our neighbour. Our political relations with Russia are very good at this moment and I'm glad of it, but we Finns have 27 reasons to remember that roughly once in a century Russia goes into expand mode and wants to spread its influence over neighbouring regions.

The objective of Finnish military service is not to provide a highly-trained professional force capable of being sent into combat all over the world. Six months is too short time for that. However, the idea is to provide enough men with basic training that can be quickly called into arms to raise a big enough force that makes it uneconomical for the enemy to invade.

Finland is both too large and too small country to maintain a full volunteer army. I can say with all confidence that if those who lobbied for such an army in the 1920s had succeeded, I would never have been born. In all likely war situations the enemy had and has so great numerical superiority that a smaller but better trained volunteer army cannot effectively defend anything at all: the land mass of Finland is large enough to allow the enemy to find a route through and encircle the defenders.

During WWII the Finnish conscript army worked very well. Most of the men were highly motivated (at least pre-1943/44) because they were not enthuastic about becoming citizens of Soviet Union. I can't really say what would happen if a war broke out tomorrow.

The mandatory military service has the drawback that a lot of men end up with having training for roles where they are not at all suitable. I was lucky in getting training for a specialist role since I would be completely useless in an infantry platoon. Unfortunately, not all are so lucky. A large portion of those who choose to drop out of army and take the longer civilian service instead are men who receive completely unsuitable postings.

 

[Mosquito]

People act as if the military is some sort of magic factory. Ive known plenty of a-holes who joined the military. And after they get out of the military, THEY ARE STILL A-HOLES!

There are plenty of boneheads in the service. Joining the militray doesnt mean you will pick up honor, good manners, and a higher IQ, as the commericals would suggest

This of course is true, but you forget the benefits: At least they will be trained to be physically stronger and more efficient killers. It's not like it's a total waste of resources.

Mosquito

 

[bigred]

No, I am not giong to post some lame conspiri-thread about 'The US is going to make everyone serve in the army! Egads!'

What I AM looking for is thoughts on the matter. A number of developed nations already have mandatory service periods of typically 2-5 years, around the ages fo 18-20. They meet with a high lvl of success, and little resistence. Most people after their term tend to leave with (relatively) positive impressions.

So... (and this is for Yanks and non-Yanks alike) how do you feel about it?

It's an outstanding idea. A mandatory service of even a year or 2 would make total sense in many diff. ways. Sadly, it will never happen in our spoiled whiny society...even if we guarunteed that they wouldn't see combat. Shame.

 

[bigred]

Re: Re: Mandatory Military Service?

In times of peace (which includes this contrived war), it is equivalent to stealing 'n' years of life from each person who would not volunteer.

To my mind, stealing years of life is close on to murder. Life is finite, and short enough already.

Well I'm glad you didn't get melodramatic on us or anything.

Cmon.....I'm pretty sure that they would be able to "have a life" for that whole whopping year (give or take) that they'd be in such a "horrific" situation. They might even learn something, mature a lot, and realize they're the better for it. And although it is not always exactly a total joyride for anyone, by golly they might even manage to ENJOY it a little. (!!!!!)

God forbid people be forced to do something they don't want to do. Based on that, how about we make going to school optional too? Most kids sure as heck hate going. I'm betting that would save a ton of taxpayer money too.

PS I agree the logistics of this would make it a lot easier said than done. But IMO it's do-able.

 

[POTA]

Being an ex-active duty Marine I figure I would chime in with my two cents on this subject...

While I enjoyed the hell out of my time in, the military is not for everyone...I think it is best that the military is made up as much as possible of people that want to be there...not those that are forced to be.

I would hold off on mandatory military service for as long as possible, and only use it in very extreme circumstances.

Again, just my opinion, take it for what it's worth,

Semper Fi

 

[IIRichard]

Being an ex-active duty Marine I figure I would chime in with my two cents on this subject...

While I enjoyed the hell out of my time in, the military is not for everyone...I think it is best that the military is made up as much as possible of people that want to be there...not those that are forced to be.

I would hold off on mandatory military service for as long as possible, and only use it in very extreme circumstances.

Again, just my opinion, take it for what it's worth,

Semper Fi

Well, being Army soldier, no longer on active duty except for funeral duty, I have to agree. Frankly, there are a whole lotta folks I would not want covering my flank, Tony comes to mind.

My son did a four year active duty tour in the Corps and it DID turn his life around. My nephew will graduate from Parris Island tomorrow. I'm waiting to see what my sister thinks when she sees him for the first time but I'm willing to bet she'll be pleased.

However, both my son and nephew both volunteered, just as I did so many years ago.

Oh, and Semper Fi POTA.

 

[Tmy]

Re: Re: Mandatory Military Service?

It's an outstanding idea. A mandatory service of even a year or 2 would make total sense in many diff. ways. Sadly, it will never happen in our spoiled whiny society...even if we guarunteed that they wouldn't see combat. Shame.

How would makeing our citizens slaves of military/government make sense.

I think a big stregnth of the US is that the military heads do not have any power over the regular citizenry.

 

[IIRichard]

Re: Re: Re: Mandatory Military Service?

How would makeing our citizens slaves of military/government make sense.

I think a big stregnth of the US is that the military heads do not have any power over the regular citizenry.

Well, mandatory service would show the average twit that there is a price to be paid for our liberty. The press doesn't defend the first amendment, the MILITARY does. Likewise, most of the other freedoms we enjoy. Or would you prefer to speak russian, japanese, chinese, arabic?

I agree with your second thought.

 

[Tmy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Mandatory Military Service?

Well, mandatory service would show the average twit that there is a price to be paid for our liberty. The press doesn't defend the first amendment, the MILITARY does. Likewise, most of the other freedoms we enjoy. Or would you prefer to speak russian, japanese, chinese, arabic?

I agree with your second thought.

While it may make for a good line in an ad campaine, the military does not defend the first amendment. When you join the military you actually lose your right to free speech. They physically protect the country and do a good job at it.

Isnt it kinda ironic that you want to rip away liberty and force service in order to show these "twits" the price that is paid for liberty,,,,,,,liberty they dont have.?

 

[SixSixSix]

The problem with the idea of a "citizen's army" is that the implication - that the citizens will refuse to fight for unjust causes, while the "mercenary" volunteers won't - seems to be wishful thinking at best.

For a start, those "mercenaries" are citizens as well, surely? I know the Australian army doesn't recruit in lower Doesnotexististan, and I doubt that the US does either.

Secondly, citizens can be fooled. There are many controversial conflicts, and few that are outright clearly wrong from the start. Maybe I'm cynical, but I'm not convinced an army of draftees would bring themselves to refuse orders, especially if basic training really is so good at "making a man of them".

So basically you're looking at an institution of legalised slavery-with-an-option-to-kill-you, with no real benefits. I don't see why you would ever want this other than desperation - and of course in desperate straits the number of volunteers would also increase.

 

[IIRichard]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mandatory Military Service?

While it may make for a good line in an ad campaine, the military does not defend the first amendment. When you join the military you actually lose your right to free speech. They physically protect the country and do a good job at it.

Isnt it kinda ironic that you want to rip away liberty and force service in order to show these "twits" the price that is paid for liberty,,,,,,,liberty they dont have.?

I'm not in favor of the draft as my original post shows. The people who physically guard the printing presses do more for free speech than the journalism school grads. If you like, we could have a duel. I get an M-14, you get a blue pencil.

 

[bigred]

Re: Re: Re: Mandatory Military Service?

How would makeing our citizens slaves of military/government make sense.

More melodrama. First it's "murder," now it's "slavery." Anyone want to try for arson?

Oh btw: yes, the military DOES protect your first amendments rights, and just about every other right/privilege you enjoy, thanks to the blood they've spilled while protecting your way of life in this free society against numerous threats. You're confusing that w/the fact that soldiers' rights are a little more restricted due to the UCMJ....and again, blow it way out of proportion. Troops do not have their right to free speech stripped so severely/absolutely as you imply.

This again reminds me of 2 things so many people don't seem to get (or keep forgetting): 1) Freedom isn't free 2) Freedoms and "rights" are not absolute - for anyone.

If your logic is that the gov't forcing someone to do something they don't want to do is "slavery," then again we better eliminate schools, and hey taxes and speed limits while we're at it. Forcing me to pay the gov't money and drive slow violates my rights! And I'm offended to boot! It's hate crimes I tell ya Anyone know a good lawyer? Maybe I could get that coffee spilling guy....


Again, if they were assured of non-combat positions, it's an excellent idea. Why?

- A lot of spoiled brats would get some desperately-needed discipline (not saying everyone is like that of course)
- Learn to appreciate the freedom they have
- Get training for free (in fact get paid to get it)
- Maybe do some travelling to other areas of the country, perhaps even overseas,
- Get another year or so under their belt to mature and "find themselves" (do you have any idea how many college students change majors, often multiple times, because they don't know what they want to do for a living, to say nothing about ignorance on what it's like in the "real world" - ?).

Oh the horror.

Unfortunately, it'll never happen.

(PS: how about if we view their salary while in the military as "slave reparations" )

 

[corplinx]

It surprised me that Noam Chomsky is for the draft. I think he has some very compelling reasons.
[/URL]

I've seen Chomsky make some clever observations, but this blurb you pasted was pretty dumb.

Instead of me picking it apart, why don't you tell me what is so brilliant about it?

 

[Tmy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Mandatory Military Service?

Originally posted by bigred If your logic is that the gov't forcing someone to do something they don't want to do is "slavery," then again we better eliminate schools, and hey taxes and speed limits while we're at it. Forcing me to pay the gov't money and drive slow violates my rights! And I'm offended to boot! It's hate crimes I tell ya Anyone know a good lawyer? Maybe I could get that coffee spilling guy....

[/B]

If I dont want my kid to go to school, I can home school them. If i dont want to pay income or property taxes, i can just decide not to work or own real estate. If i dont want to do the speed limit, I can just not drive, Or drive on private property.

Now if I dont want to join the mandatory military my options are.........GO TO JAIL! Military jail, which could actually mean hard labor. Is that not a form of slavery? I have no options what so ever.

When has the military directly protected free speech? First of all most of the attacks on free speech have come from within our own country, usually by the governement. I dont recall our country ever being attacked by another country whos motives were to stop our free speech.

As for soilders vs journalists. Whats the old saying? The pen is mightier than the sword.