Which of these do you believe would be better? I personally think a mandatory two-year military service system like Israel's is better than drafting during times of war. Not only is the populace more fit, which helps fix our obesity problem. They're all military trained badasses, and in the case of America, trained badasses with guns, no one's going to mess with that.
-
Edited by Recon Number 54: 2/5/2016 2:24:41 PMI am imagining it, but would want to see some incentives, rewards (for both the individual and the country) and still leave it optional (where if you opt out, you don't get the incentives or rewards). The service could be either military or civilian. The military option is well known and there's no need to go into how it trains and what its typical mission is. There used to be a Civil Defense department in the US. It's since been merged into Homeland Security and FEMA. But a steady flow of youthful numbers into a volunteer service for natural disasters, ecological cleanup and recovery, and other hands-on, help those in desperate need could be seen as a valuable and beneficial contribution to everyone. Such a corps, with proper training could be nation-wide and capable of mobilizing and responding in large numbers to assist. Right now, in such situations FEMA and the National Guard are usually called, but a specialized service with a two year program where someone "climbs the ranks" and gets specialized training that will serve them and others throughout the individuals life. Additionally, I could see that anyone who chose and served the 2 year stint in either the civilian or military service, would then be "on standby" for say 5-10 years and only called back up and mobilized in situations where the current forces (military or civilian) require more personnel In appreciation for that 2+5 or 2+10 years of commitment, an incentive or bonus could be either college assistance (similar to the GI bill) and/or a lifelong income tax break (20, 30 or some percentage less that someone who opted out of service would pay on the same amount of taxable income), That'd be a hell of an incentive and would pay off throughout the persons life as thanks for their service in their youth.. But, what age or more precisely, at what stage in life would be best to do this? After high-school and prior to college? Or after college? Maybe both? Some folks would find that the 2 years of service (and the tuition assistance) to be a good practical decision, and their time during service (military or civilian) right out of high school would give them both training and experience to make better informed decisions as to their skills, goals when it comes to their higher learning. Someone who were to serve (military or civilian) after their college education would bring that education and training to add to their service and would likely be considered as officer/leadership roles within the military or civilian service. And those who choose not to? Not a problem. Nothing changes in your life. You can go to college or not. You can get a job or not. Those people who chose to serve and commit 2 years full time and 5-10 years of standby for call-up, they would be gaining experience, training and lifelong tangible benefits for choosing to put in 24 months of service. Experience that would still benefit themselves and others long after their stint is over. Interesting idea, Would need more fleshing out though.
-
I feel rather disinclined to believe I have freedom when my country is forcing me to kill and die for a cause I don't believe in. So you can take all your flag waving, and all your military pride and shove it, because at the end of the day you're no more free than the criminals in your jails. Difference is, they see the bars.
-
3 RepliesNot every one is cut out for service. It's better to let the people who want to serve, serve, and let the people who do not, contribute to society in their own way. That is my two-cents.
-
I think people are confused with this concept. Ever since the U.S. went to an all volunteer military, they forced people to sign up on a draft list in the case they needed more troops during war or to replenish the ranks. Making a two year mandatory requirement means you could take away the draft list because most would be required to serve. Then if they needed people it would be a recall and not a draft.
-
We (developed countries) would have to adapt to that kind of lifestyle. Israel has continues to have that policy possibly due to the state of conflict that Israel is in. Maybe the U.S would benefit from that, as they seem to always be at war, and love violence and guns. Maybe Russia. But there are not many other places that u can see where that could work.
-
I believe every single person should serve in the military for at least two years so they don't bïtch about the military doing nothing.
-
1 ReplyTwo-year mandatory service. This generation doesn't need to worry about growing hair on their balls. They need to grow a pair first.
-
I would sign up for the robocop project and go iron man and whoop some ass....then come home n eat sum cheeseburgers.....
-
The draft should be kept in place like how it is now. If it is needed, then it will be helpful, but if we don't then it doesn't affect anyone.
-
2 years required service hmm, If that's the case a psychiatric evaluation should be required so these "military trained badasses" with guns don't come home and go Rambo on their communities.
-
8 RepliesMilitary will teach respect and discipline. Something everyone in this world needs
-
I'm going to enlist no matter what, and if I die in service, to hell with it. At least I would have died with honor, and I'm cool with that.
-
2 RepliesWhy don't they just let the prisoners fight instead of those who wouldn't want to?
-
4 RepliesWould the younger generation take military service and then college, or college first, and then military service?
-
3 RepliesI technically can say I have asthma so I will be able to skip any draft. SUCKERS!
-
There's a lot of people that have no business being in the military and it does't 'straighten out' everyone like you think it would. Its certainly helpful for a lot of people but its not a magic cure.
-
Hell no. I respect those who serve but I have no desire to be in the military at all.
-
Comparing these two is quite irrelavent as they are put into effect for two completely different reasons. A manfatory two years of service like that of Isreals is put in place because of the constant need for a well trained standing army due to the large number of enemies that are constantly trying to attack them. The draft on the other hand is put into effect because of a large conflict emerging on a global scale that requires not only an army but an entire country to go to war. These conflicts do not arouse much but when they do they have great need for a great number of people to contribute to the effort quickly. Comparing these two has little effect as they are for two completely different situations.
-
2 RepliesWhat if everyone was in the reserves?
-
2 RepliesWe don't need either, quite frankly unless you're desperate or surrounded by enemies it's wrong to press your citizens in to military service plus our full time professional military is leagues above any other. In terms of which one is more effective I'd say it's mandatory military service as it fosters a sense of nationalism and ensures all would be adequately trained beforehand as opposed to being drafted on the spot.
-
Yet most people would have shell shock. Not to mention if there was a American threat ie shoot out at school. Then that person can kill off the non trained people. There are reasons why people shouldn't join the military and why we have a low population of militaristic force. Not only giving a fat guy a gun but he is mentally incline and so is most people going to shoot others based on their views.
-
I know that if I was drafted I wouldn't try to worm out of it. Would the two year service be before or after college?
-
All these youngster chumps need to learn respect, the Military can do this.
-
Hell no...
-
I like the idea of not having over half the American population being fat slobs, but two years of [i]mandatory[/i] military service seems silly. What a waste of time it would be for people, especially considering the insane military budget already in place.
-
12 RepliesWith mil tech heading where it is and our already huge voluntary force we have, neither should be needed.