People have talked about a requirement of all people, with some exceptions should serve (x) number of years in the military.
I don't completely disagree with this idea, as a note I did not serve in the military.

However, I did while a senior in High School start my volunteer service as a first responder in the town I lived in.
First on a local first aid squad then as a fire fighter and continued that service till I moved to Florida fifteen years later.
Because I met certain requirements during that 15 years, to this day I am still a member however I am considered an inactive member of my department.

I think some sort of service to either your country or local community is a good thing that builds structure and character in a persons life.

It is really easy for me not to care about what foreign military engagement our administration sends soldiers to. My kids are all too old to be drafted in anything other than true world war. My grandsons are 5-6 yrs old right now, so nowhere near military age.

That means my kids and their spouses also have higher priorities when they vote than whether volunteers are being sent far away to fight.

But my some of granddaughters are teens. Put them in the draft and suddenly a lot more voters will care.

Better yet, compulsory 2 year military service would bring the topic to the top of voter concern.

I admire those who have served, and the older I get the more I believe we should be avoiding all the foreign entanglements. I don't think there is any way to motivate voters (on any topic) until they have a personal reason. That's why I support a mandatory 2 yr service or at least universal draft registration.

I think registering for the draft should be mandatory for all eighteen year olds, male AND females.

I have a son and daughter both of draftable age and would be OK with both being registered. I had to, and both would have something to offer.

I agree completely!

quote:

Originally posted by Beancooker:
I’ll be the voice of unpopular opinion…

I think that every American, male, AND female, should be required to serve two years active duty, and be a permanent reserve member. There should be exceptions for mentally disabled, however even the physically disabled should be required. There are non physical roles that can be filled.
Similar to how Israel and Korea (Korea only requires men) have that requirement. You should be allowed to delay your service if you are headed to college, however after x number of years, your service is required. Failure to report for service, you can spend those two years in incarceration, with a mark on your record noting that you failed to serve your country. That should follow you when you apply for a job. It should be a mark that is black enough that it puts you to the end of the hiring line.
I’m certain many will disagree. Thank you to those who fought for me to have the freedom to say this.

Having our sons AND daughters being put on the front lines, very well may change what bullshit conflicts we get involved in.

If you don't make women eligible for draft, a metric shit-ton of males would just claim they're transwomen, today-and get away with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus Dei:
If you don't make women eligible for draft, a metric shit-ton of males would just claim they're transwomen, today-and get away with it.

i don't think pajama boy is gonna go along with this

This thread is pretty interesting. Obviously I don't know any specifics about members and posters here but I'm comfortable with the idea that it (we) lean right, some more than others with a touch of libertarianism. Now consider the split in the discussion here, which by the way has been entirely civil. Without counting there are probably more posts pro-draft than anti, moderated with thoughts on the ladies. Another of my wild-ass guess is that the only libs that will be pro draft are those that are one way another protected from grabbing the shitty end of the stick.

With the split we have here and the expected outrage from the lefties, the prospect dims.

In 1971 I was on a bridge in WA D.C., I've long since forgot its address, the one that leads into the city with a pleasant view of the Pentagon, when Abbi Hoffman and 400,000 of his closets friends showed up to levitate said Pentagon. How much of that can an administrator stand before they rethink the problem.

What do I think? Keep in mind that it doesn't matter, but I think a Republican would see the coming riff with a draft and take a different route. A Dim would see glory and power and a bigger office and do it.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus Dei:
If you don't make women eligible for draft, a metric shit-ton of males would just claim they're transwomen, today-and get away with it.

We keep hearing that Trans men are men and you just don’t understand if you think any other way.

Are they going to go with what they truly believe and sign up for the draft or are they going to come up with some b.s. excuse and show how hypocritical they are and prove us right.

Many countries have sent us plenty of military-age men.

quote:

Originally posted by downtownv:
Many countries have sent us plenty of military-age men.

And... this is in NO WAY a solution. They must be deported.

quote:

Originally posted by downtownv:
Many countries have sent us plenty of military-age men.

Sarcasm

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by downtownv:
Many countries have sent us plenty of military-age men.

And... this is in NO WAY a solution. They must be deported.

if the dems win the WH, they'll plan to enlist as many as they can, problem solved

quote:

Originally posted by sse:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by downtownv:
Many countries have sent us plenty of military-age men.

And... this is in NO WAY a solution. They must be deported.

if the dems win the WH, they'll plan to enlist as many as they can, problem solved

I don't see it. Would you care to elaborate?

let's just say with millions of illegals beholden to, and at the mercy, of democrat leadership, they will be used to further the agenda, the possibilities are endless. this has not been perpetrated on the basis of altruism.

Like many things, here’s their MO.

Create problem.
Deny problem exists.
Deny problem exists again.
Admit problem and blame it on the Republicans.
Introduce legislation to fix problem (that they created).
Add tons of unneeded leftist BS to said legislation.
When Republicans vote against said legislation with tons of unneeded leftist BS, blame Republicans for not wanting to fix the problem (that they created).

Politics 101.

quote:

Originally posted by sse:
let's just say with millions of illegals beholden to, and at the mercy, of democrat leadership, they will be used to further the agenda, the possibilities are endless. this has not been perpetrated on the basis of altruism.

Got it, thanks

The reason why recruitment levels are so low is because people are realizing that being in the US military isn't about possibly fighting for your country, it's about fighting for your government. They're not the same.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
The reason why recruitment levels are so low is because people are realizing that being in the US military isn't about possibly fighting for your country, it's about fighting for your government. They're not the same.

It doesn’t help that the government hates the people that want to and would fight for their country.

I've never been a fan of forced military service. In fact I despise the idea of someone being forced against their will to do anything for government. This isn't serving your country, it's serving the interests of politicians and their benefactors.