quote:

...it is good for a young man to have to do things, get up early, make his bed, arrange his belongings, follow a schedule, be uncomfortable under pressure, wear clothes, get haircuts, shine shoes, all imposed by others. Exposure to discipline, responsibility, requirements, consequences, doesn’t hurt anyone in moderation. ...

We need cumpulsory parenting.

That comes from familiy and friends shaming those who do not step up to their responsibility.

Compulsory "National Service" is passing the buck to a State/Government and more likely creates "subjects".

I preferred the "volunteer" forces, up and until the Political Correct "Social Actions" crap started becoming the Nourriture de Jour.

Allowing it to become a "social experimental lab" really screwed the pooch sideways.

Folks like Mattis can correct this and get things back on course.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:


I wouldn't make strictly military service mandatory, but I'm in favor of requiring some sort of obligatory structured public service (military or civilian) to trigger certain civic rights, like voting. That would include both military service as well as service in something like the National Health Service, Civilian Conservation Corps, Americorps, etc. I'd even allow working in certain public service fields to quality, like LE/Fire/EMS, teaching in underprivileged schools, working for a non-profit medical provider, etc.

Don't want to serve your nation/community? That's fine. That's your choice. But you don't get a say in how it is run.

As you noted, there are many ways to serve one's country and community other than the military. There are also many people who are unable to do any of these jobs due to health and other restrictions that prevent their acceptance into such positions or which prevent their doing the jobs. Such should not have their citizenship hung over their heads, simply because they are unable to serve.

Yes, I wish the 'draft' was re-instated.

I enlisted in the Army, but quite a few of my fellow trainees had been drafted. For the most part they did a very good job.

It was a good experience for them.

Most, had never lived outside Mom & Dad's care and this was a whole new rather frightening program, but they managed just fine.

Later they were willing to say they benefited when once it was over and most said it was a giant step up in maturity.

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:
Personally I don't think it's a good idea here.

The military doesn't make anyone something they're not. It can't instill discipline.

What the military can do is chip away at bad habits and the rough exterior to expose what's under the surface.

I disagree with this, having experienced both Navy boot camp and OCS. It was conducted much the same, out of the rack when they wanted, uniform worn just so, buttons, buttoned, haircut, shoes shined, marching in formation, eating a certain way, intense attention to sometimes preposterous detail, stay awake in class, inspections, cleaning stations, standing watches, salutes, aye, aye, sir!

I especially remember in the last month of OCS bringing the FNGs in and getting them started. They were like wild horses, college kids, flailing around, goofy, gaping and gawking, stumbling all over themselves, shirt tails and ties every which way. It took about a week to knock those rough edges off. Four months later, the ones who made it were ready to pretend to be Navy officers, and could pull it off mostly, with a lot to learn.

It might not instill discipline but it does introduce them to the idea, and force a certain prowess.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:...I think it is good for a young man to have to do things, get up early, make his bed, arrange his belongings, follow a schedule, be uncomfortable under pressure, wear clothes, get haircuts, shine shoes, all imposed by others. Exposure to discipline, responsibility, requirements, consequences, doesn’t hurt anyone in moderation....

I read that and started laughing. That was my life growing up! From about 7 on.

But unfortunately, that kind of upbringing is rare now a days.

It's a difficult balancing act, the paradox and the awful circle pointing out the problems with both big government and human nature, especially "modern American nature".

I think most here would agree that compulsary military service would be good for both the country and the individual. Prosperity has always been detrimental to any society. We can't help it.

But.. while probably not as many, many people would strongly disagree with the idea of the government forcing you to do something. It's not supposed to be that way in this country.

But that freedom is what has lead our society to be what we have now, one really needs something like cumpulsary national service.



"You know, son, people used to tell their kids
'Now, I don't want you to have to work the way I did.' They don't and some will tell you that it's a shame. But you have to think before you place the blame."(Tom T. Hall)

I would much rather the guy to my left or right be there because he voluntarily signed up, not because he had to or else.

Compulsory national service? Sure, but military service should be one of the options, not the ONLY one.

My musical thoughts on the matter:

chorus:

I don't want to join the army, I don't want to go to war.
I'd rather hang around piccadilly underground,
living off the earnings of a high born lady.
I don't want a bayonet up my arse-hole,
I don't want my bollocks shot away. I'd rather stay in england,
in merry, merry england,
and fornicate me fucking life away.
cor blimey.

Now Repeat, 1..2..3

Why don't we just use college kids to clear out the mine fields? or to deplete the enemies machine ammunition before the real assault?
Survival of the fittest right?...or luckiest I guess.

It sounds good in theory. I don't think it would work well in practice.

The military has no need for and wouldn't have the resources to train, arm, feed, house, and medicate that many recruits. This is especially true given that a lot, probably most, would be well below the standards the branches now have. To try to do this would likely divert resources from from programs the military really needs to do its job .

Trying to do this is probably a complete political non-starter. And even it it somehow got enacted, it would cause chsos, any would likely be widely resisted

Trying to do some sort or civilian compulsory service would likely be unconstitutional. The draft was declared constitutional on the basis that the constitution grants congress the power to declare war and raise armies. That wouldn't apply for some sort of non-military service, and the 13th Amendment would likely come into play.
.

I served in the army for 11 years. And we had draftees for that whole time. Every one of them did their job!

They did their 2 years and went home. And 10 of those years were in combat units in Germany, along the east-west German border.

I am firmly convinced that when the draft was eliminated it was the beginning of what we are seeing now.

Oh, BTW. . I saw a number of those draftees re-enlist. Some for three years, some for that "burst of 6" as we called it.

Should military be the only form of government service? Probably not, but any other form of it should also include the discipline as well as the shock of discovering there is a whole world outside mommy's basement.

Fort Sill/Lawton; Lived there from fourth grade through college graduation. 1964-76

Snow Hall; Was presented my Eagle ribbon in the big auditorium

[quote]Personally I don't think it's a good idea here.[/quotes}

Seem to have worked well in the past.

quote:

Originally posted by Wino:
Hard pass on slavery, Eric.

+1000

The government exists to serve the citizen, not the reverse. While I am happy to volunteer and to donate for causes I support, coming in with a gun to force compliance- which is what 'mandatory' means in this context - is not viable.

It is no great harm to have the opinion that

quote:

it is good for a young man to have to do things, get up early, make his bed, arrange his belongings, follow a schedule, be uncomfortable under pressure, wear clothes, get haircuts, shine shoes

recognizing that it is an opinion, not a statement of fact, and someone one holding it is free to implement it themselves and those who disagree are free not to implement it.

However, someone coming in to impose that with a gun on me or mine, or setting up some poor uniformed guy to do it on their behalf? Nah, thanks for dropping by. Now scat. And look up the word 'tyranny' as you go.

Some latter-day Yamamoto pulls a Pearl Harbor, different deal, fire up the draft, and no complaints here.

However, the Republic is not under mortal peril (except, possibly, by those who wish it get larger and to throw its force around, but that's a different discussion) so that's not what we're talking about here.

RE: "National Service" - NFW. Doing what, for whom, under whose supervision, instead of what, and by what right are people to be compelled to stop doing what they want to knuckle under for some clowns? You will NOT see this right delegated to the Federal government in the Constitution, and for the simple reason that if the Constitution said this, it would not have been adopted.

Not even going to say 'thanks for dropping by' on that one. Just 'scat'.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Rey HRH:
I think it's a great idea to build a nation's citizens and to give them a shared experience. I'd even make it a requirement in order to have voting rights.

Either two years of military service or if you're a conscientious objector, some form of peace corp service.

Agreed.

I wouldn't make strictly military service mandatory, but I'm in favor of requiring some sort of obligatory structured public service (military or civilian) to trigger certain civic rights, like voting. That would include both military service as well as service in something like the National Health Service, Civilian Conservation Corps, Americorps, etc. I'd even allow working in certain public service fields to quality, like LE/Fire/EMS, teaching in underprivileged schools, working for a non-profit medical provider, etc.

Don't want to serve your nation/community? That's fine. That's your choice. But you don't get a say in how it is run.

I agree with this, but only if the organizations have $ and not enough bodies. I would be against it as a jobs program. The Army needs more bodies but isn't getting them, so lowered the recruiting goal. I would support a draft to make up the shortfall.

Gawd no.
Think of McNamara's 100,000. "the program offered a one-way ticket to Vietnam, where these men fought and died in disproportionate numbers...the men of the 'Moron Corps' provided the necessary cannon fodder to help evade the political horror of dropping student deferments or calling up the reserves, which were sanctuaries for the lily-white."
The follow up found: "Comparisons between Project 100,000 participants and their nonveteran peers showed that, in terms of employment status, educational achievement, and income, nonveterans appeared better off. Veterans were more likely to be unemployed and to have a significantly lower level of education. Income differences ranged from $5,000 [to] $7,000, in favor of nonveterans. Veterans were more likely to have been divorced."

What is it? 70% of military age males don't qualify for the military now? What will the military do with people they don't want, who don't want to be in the military and who will be more problems then they are worth.

Government forcing people to labor against their will? Whatever good it does for the citizen or the country is irrelevant. It's tyranny, plain and simple. Giving government the power to force someone into service is absurd. It's incompatible with the idea of a government that serves the people.

Not a fan generally of compulsory service. It makes some sense in a country like Israel, but in the US, it seems to make much less.

Also, it would require a constitutional amendment to condition voting rights upon such service.

At the end of the day, I believe it is the responsibility of parents to instill in their children a sense of patriotism, humility, independence, etc - all the things that are listed as personal benefits of military or other national service. In the absence of proper parenting, some will benefit from compulsory service and "see the light" but most will not. You will have a large contingent of incompetent to mediocre individuals who are just biding their time to fulfill their obligations.

Another downside is that if the government compels the service, it will have to make accommodations for every bizarre identity division that the left can dream up. With compulsory service, the left will bring constant pressure to bear to create equality of outcome, to lower standards and otherwise impose social engineering.

Not a rebuttal of the idea but something interesting to think about.

quote:

Originally posted by thunderson:
Not a rebuttal of the idea but something interesting to think about.


[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5-Ur71ZnNVk" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Not sure where his info came from but military used GCT until the ASVAB was developed in the 70's. The GCT/ASVAB scores may give an indication of IQ but they used the test scores to qualify/disqualify applicants.