<!--quoteo(post=1590098:date=Dec 19 2006, 02:34 AM:name=Black_Mage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Black_Mage @ Dec 19 2006, 02:34 AM) [snapback]1590098[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> stalingrad, both the turning point of the war and the period with the highest loss of life. if the populace does not want to die for their country, maybe the problem lies with the country. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I wouldn't want to die for my country. It's just a coincidence I was born in America, I don't think it's a good idea to be super patriotic about it. I don't think the idea of a country is worth dying for, at least at this stage in the world. I also think it's very hard to make a case about dying for an idea in violence. Spreading an idea with words, absolutely, but it seems that (and the current situation in Iraq seems to reflect this) trying to spread ideas with violence doesn't work, you have to spread ideas with information.
For the sake of argument, and with the understanding that I honestly didn't create this thread with the thought of war in mind, what are the disadvantages of conscription <b>IF</b> one didn't have to worry about "dying for their country" or going to war?
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not.
<!--quoteo(post=1590098:date=Dec 19 2006, 08:34 AM:name=Black_Mage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Black_Mage @ Dec 19 2006, 08:34 AM) [snapback]1590098[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> stalingrad, both the turning point of the war and the period with the highest loss of life. if the populace does not want to die for their country, maybe the problem lies with the country. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Or maybe the problem lies with the people. If they are not willing to fight and die for their country, then maybe they would be better off going to another country that they feel more attached to? If they are not even patriotic enough to fight for their own country, then how can they claim the right to live in it?
<!--quoteo(post=1590161:date=Dec 19 2006, 11:24 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 19 2006, 11:24 AM) [snapback]1590161[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> For the sake of argument, and with the understanding that I honestly didn't create this thread with the thought of war in mind, what are the disadvantages of conscription <b>IF</b> one didn't have to worry about "dying for their country" or going to war?
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> In that case, waste of time and waste of tax money. What is the point of having an army if there is no war?
<!--quoteo(post=1590161:date=Dec 19 2006, 05:24 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 19 2006, 05:24 AM) [snapback]1590161[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> For the sake of argument, and with the understanding that I honestly didn't create this thread with the thought of war in mind, what are the disadvantages of conscription <b>IF</b> one didn't have to worry about "dying for their country" or going to war?
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I agree with the above, the military without war is a waste of resources, and our (America's) military is already way too big as is.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WorldMilitarySpending.jpg" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WorldMilitarySpending.jpg</a> Yes I understand it's only about ~4-5% of our GDP, but still. Is this really necessary?
I would say Dimplomacy cannot succeed without a credible military threat to back it up. Few people or countries will agree to your diplomatic demands because you ask nicely.
<!--quoteo(post=1590172:date=Dec 19 2006, 05:04 AM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lolfighter @ Dec 19 2006, 05:04 AM) [snapback]1590172[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Or maybe the problem lies with the people. If they are not willing to fight and die for their country, then maybe they would be better off going to another country that they feel more attached to? If they are not even patriotic enough to fight for their own country, then how can they claim the right to live in it? In that case, waste of time and waste of tax money. What is the point of having an army if there is no war? <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> they were born there? they were moved there with their parents? they enjoyed it twenty years ago but the current regime sucks? if the country i live in sucks and is being invaded by a country that sucks less, i reserve the right to: 1) fight for the country i live in. 2) fight for the attacking country because it sucks less. 3) do nothing because i really don't care. one can show patriotism without supporting (or by actively working against) those who wage war by it.
also. mandatory military service without risk of death/war/stuff sounds a lot like school with an extra four years and one hell of a gym teacher, depot.
<!--quoteo(post=1590161:date=Dec 19 2006, 05:24 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 19 2006, 05:24 AM) [snapback]1590161[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> For the sake of argument, and with the understanding that I honestly didn't create this thread with the thought of war in mind, what are the disadvantages of conscription <b>IF</b> one didn't have to worry about "dying for their country" or going to war?
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> To clarify, I meant if one was forced to join the military at peacetime (meaning there is currently not a conflict we are involved in) they would probably be less inclined to object, as opposed to being forced to join at a time we're at war.
The threat of going to war would still exist though.
four (substitute all instances of "four" with "two" "three" "seven" "eleventysix" or "pi" at your option) years of service are: - four years that i am not being educated in an area relevant to my feild of specialty (network systems administration) - four years that i am not applying my area of experties to anything useful - four years that i am not paying income tax (at least not as much as i would at almost any other place of employment) - four years that i am not promoting the local economy by: - - paying rent - - buying food - - using gas - any physical benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i return to my dr pepper and pizza pocket diet - any disciplinary benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i will, again, be able to read my boss' email and blackmail him/her at will
the government will gain nothing from training and employing me in an area that i have no interest working in, i will gain nothing from said training or employment and those around me will gain nothing (save a few moments of sanity) from my absence.
<!--quoteo(post=1590494:date=Dec 20 2006, 02:45 AM:name=Black_Mage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Black_Mage @ Dec 20 2006, 02:45 AM) [snapback]1590494[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> four (substitute all instances of "four" with "two" "three" "seven" "eleventysix" or "pi" at your option) years of service are: - four years that i am not being educated in an area relevant to my feild of specialty (network systems administration) - four years that i am not applying my area of experties to anything useful - four years that i am not paying income tax (at least not as much as i would at almost any other place of employment) - four years that i am not promoting the local economy by: - - paying rent - - buying food - - using gas - any physical benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i return to my dr pepper and pizza pocket diet - any disciplinary benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i will, again, be able to read my boss' email and blackmail him/her at will
the government will gain nothing from training and employing me in an area that i have no interest working in, i will gain nothing from said training or employment and those around me will gain nothing (save a few moments of sanity) from my absence. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You don't need the military - you need <i>Depot's Boot Camp</i>.
But yeah, I think at least one of the four branches could find use for a networks systems administration person if not all four of them, and you'd be applying what you know too. You'd also receive X years of free rent, free foodage, and could drive a 2-1/2 or hummer all over at will for free. Don't forget the free medical attention you'd get, and the fact you'd get to see places around the world you'd never see otherwise (for free). If you like you can go to war and get to shoot guns and kill enemies (instead of attacking skulks, fades, and onos). Doctor Pepper won't be available in the remote countries they'll be sending you to, nor will pizza pockets, so you'll remain fit and trim. And go ahead and hack your bosses computer and access classified information, then enjoy your stay in Leavenworth.... ... .. . <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
No, what they need is a transport layer protocol that is robust, dynamic and scaleable. It should have failsafes (node transmission reciepts, dynamic routing tables, network location awareness) for guaranteed packet transmission and should have low latency for realtime or near-realtime transmission. Adding people to the problem does nothing.
<!--quoteo(post=1590365:date=Dec 19 2006, 07:47 PM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 19 2006, 07:47 PM) [snapback]1590365[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> To clarify, I meant if one was forced to join the military at peacetime (meaning there is currently not a conflict we are involved in) they would probably be less inclined to object, as opposed to being forced to join at a time we're at war.
The threat of going to war would still exist though. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> supporting conscription, for the sake of the conscripted, only in peace time, and abondoning it in war time is an utterly convoluted proposal.
The reason the discussion keeps going towards the legitimacy of war, or putting your life on the line for your country, is because thats what military service IS. This insisted separation of issues is ad hoc and confusing.
a draft or conscription or whatever you want to call it is characterized by the fact that it is enforced, regardless of how the conscripted feel about it. That naked force, and coercion, the revoking of the dignity and freedom inherent in each human's intelligence to make choices concerning their live's investments, is utterly abhorant.
<!--quoteo(post=1591210:date=Dec 22 2006, 04:49 AM:name=Router_Box)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Router_Box @ Dec 22 2006, 04:49 AM) [snapback]1591210[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> a draft or conscription or whatever you want to call it is characterized by the fact that it is enforced, regardless of how the conscripted feel about it. That naked force, and coercion, the revoking of the dignity and freedom inherent in each human's intelligence to make choices concerning their live's investments, is utterly abhorant. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Perhaps, but sometimes it is necessary. I support it not only because of the many benefits most of todays youth would receive from it, but also because the U.S. has the greatest armed forces in the world, and we need to always be prepared to maintain our freedom and security.
<!--quoteo(post=1591229:date=Dec 22 2006, 06:55 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 22 2006, 06:55 AM) [snapback]1591229[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Perhaps, but sometimes it is necessary. I support it not only because of the many benefits most of todays youth would receive from it, but also because the U.S. has the greatest armed forces in the world, and we need to always be prepared to maintain our freedom and security. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Once again it is strictly opinion, there is nothing you can learn in the military that you can't learn elsewhere, especially without breaking of ones spirit and having to follow orders which do not allow you to object even when they make absolutely no sense.
Case in point, of my friends joined the National Guard (not the army I know) and she had to clean 30 rifles that were already clean just cause they "told her to." Not to mention, she didn't do something "wrong".
She now constantly questions her ability to make decisions, and thusly has very little direction in her life.
Breaking someones spirit is never justified. No matter what preconceived notion you may think is "right."
*Edit* She joined in peace time. (circa 1999) In addition it wasn't that single episode that broke her but a exponential compounding of useless orders that make no sense.
Chances are if her spirit was broken that easily she's not cut out to be a soldier. I saw a 90lb bunkmate attempt suicide because the drill sergeants rode him so hard. of course, recruits had no rights back then either.
That story reminds me of the classic "Dig me a foxhole, egghead!!!" and then having to fill it right back up - for no obvious reason. Yeah, I had to do that. Several times.
<!--quoteo(post=1591396:date=Dec 22 2006, 06:40 PM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 22 2006, 06:40 PM) [snapback]1591396[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Chances are if her spirit was broken that easily she's not cut out to be a soldier.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But, aren't you saying that it <i>should</i> be manditory? However, you just said that the person mentioned was "not cut out to be a soldier." So, are you agreeing that the military is not for everyone? As I said, yes, the military can be good for some people (heck, I'm planning on joining reserves), but not everyone.
But that would mean that conscription would leave a trail of broken spirits behind. At least therapists would never have to worry about unemployment.
Although I suppose that having civil service as an alternative to military service should alleviate that problem. Also, boot camp or basic training vary greatly from country to country. There's no universal law that claims that you HAVE to mentally abuse fresh recruits. Lanfear's friend probably just joined the wrong military.
Marik_SteeleTo rule in hell...Join Date: 2002-11-20Member: 9466Members
<!--quoteo(post=1591453:date=Dec 22 2006, 09:28 PM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lolfighter @ Dec 22 2006, 09:28 PM) [snapback]1591453[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> But that would mean that conscription would leave a trail of broken spirits behind. At least therapists would never have to worry about unemployment.
Although I suppose that having civil service as an alternative to military service should alleviate that problem[...] <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Aye, I was just thinking about that sort of thing. What if it was mandatory for all able-bodied citizens reaching a certain age to choose between several years of:
High-level (college, university, etc.) education Civil service (inside the country or in a government-funded organization reaching out to other nations) Military service
<!--quoteo(post=1591448:date=Dec 22 2006, 09:33 PM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 22 2006, 09:33 PM) [snapback]1591448[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I agree the military is not for everyone, but I don't know how this could be determined prior to joining. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Psychological evaluations, stress tests, or something? Either that or mass suicides/dodgers will occur.
I really like Marik's suggestion. Basically, have the person prove they are not a waste of matter, take responsibility for themselves, and choose what they want to do for their life.
In semi-related news... <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/22/national/main2291979.shtml" target="_blank">draft system testing</a>
<!--quoteo(post=1591464:date=Dec 22 2006, 10:22 PM:name=Marik_Steele)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marik_Steele @ Dec 22 2006, 10:22 PM) [snapback]1591464[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Aye, I was just thinking about that sort of thing. What if it was mandatory for all able-bodied citizens reaching a certain age to choose between several years of:
High-level (college, university, etc.) education Civil service (inside the country or in a government-funded organization reaching out to other nations) Military service
? <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Three options are better than none, so yeah I like your proposal, but still think the military would crank out some fine young men (and women) PLUS give them free room and board, medical, money for education, a trade, and a chance to see the world.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
It would also give them the chance to meet new and interesting people, and kill them <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" />
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
Yeah, I was being facetious, but my point is still valid: In a free society, I should have the option of a completely non-violent life. I should not be forced into a situation where I would be forced to take violent action against someone else. Yes, I might end up fighting for a cause I believe is just, but being forced to join the army would remove my right to choose to abstain from causes I believe to be unjust.
<!--quoteo(post=1591572:date=Dec 23 2006, 07:38 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(puzl @ Dec 23 2006, 07:38 AM) [snapback]1591572[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Yeah, I was being facetious, but my point is still valid: In a free society, I should have the option of a completely non-violent life. I should not be forced into a situation where I would be forced to take violent action against someone else. Yes, I might end up fighting for a cause I believe is just, but being forced to join the army would remove my right to choose to abstain from causes I believe to be unjust. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> There's always the "conscientious objector" status if you have religious or moral issues with going to war. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink-fix.gif" />
<!--quoteo(post=1389031:date=Feb 20 2005, 11:44 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Feb 20 2005, 11:44 AM) [snapback]1389031[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Having served a 3 year hitch with the U.S. Army following the completion of high school, I was recently forced to reflect on how this affected the rest of my adult life. In doing so I determined it was probably the most influential and character-forming time in my life, short of the fine job my parents did in raising me. It has forced me to wake up when the alarm goes off <i>early</i>, to appreciate a <i>hot</i> home-cooked meal, to be orderly, organised, and disciplined, and to respect authority, just to name a few things. It made a young man out of me.
I contend that it should be mandatory for all graduates of high school (or the equivalent thereof) to do a 2 year hitch in the armed forces of their choice, minimum age 18. That's my oppinion, we welcome yours. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very few things should be required in this free country. Military service should not be one of them. Forcing people to join the military when we have plenty of personnel is not a good idea.
<!--quoteo(post=1592287:date=Dec 26 2006, 05:54 AM:name=Black_Mage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Black_Mage @ Dec 26 2006, 05:54 AM) [snapback]1592287[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> i like how the few people who seem to be in favor of this are the ones who would not be affected. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Perhaps the few people who seem to be in favor of this have <b>ALREADY</b> been affected, or someone close to them has. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink-fix.gif" />
<!--quoteo(post=1389066:date=Feb 20 2005, 04:32 PM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Feb 20 2005, 04:32 PM) [snapback]1389066[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I understand fully. I simply feel the benefits from it far outweigh any cons. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Asside from the fact that more troops means it's more likely they will be used in military action. And of course it assumes you're not physically or mentally handicapped once you leave, as many overseas are. Or worse yet, dead.
Not to mention how military pay and compensation keeps getting slimmer and slimmer as years go by.
"Assuming nothing goes bad", anything can far outweigh the cons.
Comments
stalingrad, both the turning point of the war and the period with the highest loss of life. if the populace does not want to die for their country, maybe the problem lies with the country.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I wouldn't want to die for my country. It's just a coincidence I was born in America, I don't think it's a good idea to be super patriotic about it. I don't think the idea of a country is worth dying for, at least at this stage in the world. I also think it's very hard to make a case about dying for an idea in violence. Spreading an idea with words, absolutely, but it seems that (and the current situation in Iraq seems to reflect this) trying to spread ideas with violence doesn't work, you have to spread ideas with information.
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not.
stalingrad, both the turning point of the war and the period with the highest loss of life. if the populace does not want to die for their country, maybe the problem lies with the country.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or maybe the problem lies with the people. If they are not willing to fight and die for their country, then maybe they would be better off going to another country that they feel more attached to? If they are not even patriotic enough to fight for their own country, then how can they claim the right to live in it?
<!--quoteo(post=1590161:date=Dec 19 2006, 11:24 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 19 2006, 11:24 AM) [snapback]1590161[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
For the sake of argument, and with the understanding that I honestly didn't create this thread with the thought of war in mind, what are the disadvantages of conscription <b>IF</b> one didn't have to worry about "dying for their country" or going to war?
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In that case, waste of time and waste of tax money. What is the point of having an army if there is no war?
For the sake of argument, and with the understanding that I honestly didn't create this thread with the thought of war in mind, what are the disadvantages of conscription <b>IF</b> one didn't have to worry about "dying for their country" or going to war?
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with the above, the military without war is a waste of resources, and our (America's) military is already way too big as is.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WorldMilitarySpending.jpg" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WorldMilitarySpending.jpg</a>
Yes I understand it's only about ~4-5% of our GDP, but still. Is this really necessary?
Or maybe the problem lies with the people. If they are not willing to fight and die for their country, then maybe they would be better off going to another country that they feel more attached to? If they are not even patriotic enough to fight for their own country, then how can they claim the right to live in it?
In that case, waste of time and waste of tax money. What is the point of having an army if there is no war?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
they were born there? they were moved there with their parents? they enjoyed it twenty years ago but the current regime sucks?
if the country i live in sucks and is being invaded by a country that sucks less, i reserve the right to: 1) fight for the country i live in. 2) fight for the attacking country because it sucks less. 3) do nothing because i really don't care. one can show patriotism without supporting (or by actively working against) those who wage war by it.
also. mandatory military service without risk of death/war/stuff sounds a lot like school with an extra four years and one hell of a gym teacher, depot.
For the sake of argument, and with the understanding that I honestly didn't create this thread with the thought of war in mind, what are the disadvantages of conscription <b>IF</b> one didn't have to worry about "dying for their country" or going to war?
A few of you have already commented on this - many have not.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To clarify, I meant if one was forced to join the military at peacetime (meaning there is currently not a conflict we are involved in) they would probably be less inclined to object, as opposed to being forced to join at a time we're at war.
The threat of going to war would still exist though.
- four years that i am not being educated in an area relevant to my feild of specialty (network systems administration)
- four years that i am not applying my area of experties to anything useful
- four years that i am not paying income tax (at least not as much as i would at almost any other place of employment)
- four years that i am not promoting the local economy by:
- - paying rent
- - buying food
- - using gas
- any physical benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i return to my dr pepper and pizza pocket diet
- any disciplinary benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i will, again, be able to read my boss' email and blackmail him/her at will
the government will gain nothing from training and employing me in an area that i have no interest working in, i will gain nothing from said training or employment and those around me will gain nothing (save a few moments of sanity) from my absence.
four (substitute all instances of "four" with "two" "three" "seven" "eleventysix" or "pi" at your option) years of service are:
- four years that i am not being educated in an area relevant to my feild of specialty (network systems administration)
- four years that i am not applying my area of experties to anything useful
- four years that i am not paying income tax (at least not as much as i would at almost any other place of employment)
- four years that i am not promoting the local economy by:
- - paying rent
- - buying food
- - using gas
- any physical benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i return to my dr pepper and pizza pocket diet
- any disciplinary benefits gained from boot camp will be lost within a week as i will, again, be able to read my boss' email and blackmail him/her at will
the government will gain nothing from training and employing me in an area that i have no interest working in, i will gain nothing from said training or employment and those around me will gain nothing (save a few moments of sanity) from my absence.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You don't need the military - you need <i>Depot's Boot Camp</i>.
But yeah, I think at least one of the four branches could find use for a networks systems administration person if not all four of them, and you'd be applying what you know too. You'd also receive X years of free rent, free foodage, and could drive a 2-1/2 or hummer all over at will for free. Don't forget the free medical attention you'd get, and the fact you'd get to see places around the world you'd never see otherwise (for free). If you like you can go to war and get to shoot guns and kill enemies (instead of attacking skulks, fades, and onos). Doctor Pepper won't be available in the remote countries they'll be sending you to, nor will pizza pockets, so you'll remain fit and trim. And go ahead and hack your bosses computer and access classified information, then enjoy your stay in Leavenworth.... ... .. . <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
also, i live near leavenworth.
To clarify, I meant if one was forced to join the military at peacetime (meaning there is currently not a conflict we are involved in) they would probably be less inclined to object, as opposed to being forced to join at a time we're at war.
The threat of going to war would still exist though.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
supporting conscription, for the sake of the conscripted, only in peace time, and abondoning it in war time is an utterly convoluted proposal.
The reason the discussion keeps going towards the legitimacy of war, or putting your life on the line for your country, is because thats what military service IS. This insisted separation of issues is ad hoc and confusing.
a draft or conscription or whatever you want to call it is characterized by the fact that it is enforced, regardless of how the conscripted feel about it. That naked force, and coercion, the revoking of the dignity and freedom inherent in each human's intelligence to make choices concerning their live's investments, is utterly abhorant.
a draft or conscription or whatever you want to call it is characterized by the fact that it is enforced, regardless of how the conscripted feel about it. That naked force, and coercion, the revoking of the dignity and freedom inherent in each human's intelligence to make choices concerning their live's investments, is utterly abhorant.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps, but sometimes it is necessary. I support it not only because of the many benefits most of todays youth would receive from it, but also because the U.S. has the greatest armed forces in the world, and we need to always be prepared to maintain our freedom and security.
Perhaps, but sometimes it is necessary. I support it not only because of the many benefits most of todays youth would receive from it, but also because the U.S. has the greatest armed forces in the world, and we need to always be prepared to maintain our freedom and security.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Once again it is strictly opinion, there is nothing you can learn in the military that you can't learn elsewhere, especially without breaking of ones spirit and having to follow orders which do not allow you to object even when they make absolutely no sense.
Case in point, of my friends joined the National Guard (not the army I know) and she had to clean 30 rifles that were already clean just cause they "told her to." Not to mention, she didn't do something "wrong".
She now constantly questions her ability to make decisions, and thusly has very little direction in her life.
Breaking someones spirit is never justified. No matter what preconceived notion you may think is "right."
*Edit* She joined in peace time. (circa 1999) In addition it wasn't that single episode that broke her but a exponential compounding of useless orders that make no sense.
That story reminds me of the classic "Dig me a foxhole, egghead!!!" and then having to fill it right back up - for no obvious reason. Yeah, I had to do that. Several times.
But, aren't you saying that it <i>should</i> be manditory? However, you just said that the person mentioned was "not cut out to be a soldier." So, are you agreeing that the military is not for everyone? As I said, yes, the military can be good for some people (heck, I'm planning on joining reserves), but not everyone.
Although I suppose that having civil service as an alternative to military service should alleviate that problem. Also, boot camp or basic training vary greatly from country to country. There's no universal law that claims that you HAVE to mentally abuse fresh recruits. Lanfear's friend probably just joined the wrong military.
But that would mean that conscription would leave a trail of broken spirits behind. At least therapists would never have to worry about unemployment.
Although I suppose that having civil service as an alternative to military service should alleviate that problem[...]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Aye, I was just thinking about that sort of thing. What if it was mandatory for all able-bodied citizens reaching a certain age to choose between several years of:
High-level (college, university, etc.) education
Civil service (inside the country or in a government-funded organization reaching out to other nations)
Military service
?
I agree the military is not for everyone, but I don't know how this could be determined prior to joining.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Psychological evaluations, stress tests, or something? Either that or mass suicides/dodgers will occur.
I really like Marik's suggestion. Basically, have the person prove they are not a waste of matter, take responsibility for themselves, and choose what they want to do for their life.
In semi-related news... <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/22/national/main2291979.shtml" target="_blank">draft system testing</a>
Aye, I was just thinking about that sort of thing. What if it was mandatory for all able-bodied citizens reaching a certain age to choose between several years of:
High-level (college, university, etc.) education
Civil service (inside the country or in a government-funded organization reaching out to other nations)
Military service
?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Three options are better than none, so yeah I like your proposal, but still think the military would crank out some fine young men (and women) PLUS give them free room and board, medical, money for education, a trade, and a chance to see the world.
Yeah, I was being facetious, but my point is still valid: In a free society, I should have the option of a completely non-violent life. I should not be forced into a situation where I would be forced to take violent action against someone else. Yes, I might end up fighting for a cause I believe is just, but being forced to join the army would remove my right to choose to abstain from causes I believe to be unjust.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There's always the "conscientious objector" status if you have religious or moral issues with going to war. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink-fix.gif" />
Having served a 3 year hitch with the U.S. Army following the completion of high school, I was recently forced to reflect on how this affected the rest of my adult life. In doing so I determined it was probably the most influential and character-forming time in my life, short of the fine job my parents did in raising me. It has forced me to wake up when the alarm goes off <i>early</i>, to appreciate a <i>hot</i> home-cooked meal, to be orderly, organised, and disciplined, and to respect authority, just to name a few things. It made a young man out of me.
I contend that it should be mandatory for all graduates of high school (or the equivalent thereof) to do a 2 year hitch in the armed forces of their choice, minimum age 18. That's my oppinion, we welcome yours.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very few things should be required in this free country. Military service should not be one of them. Forcing people to join the military when we have plenty of personnel is not a good idea.
i like how the few people who seem to be in favor of this are the ones who would not be affected.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps the few people who seem to be in favor of this have <b>ALREADY</b> been affected, or someone close to them has. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink-fix.gif" />
I understand fully. I simply feel the benefits from it far outweigh any cons.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Asside from the fact that more troops means it's more likely they will be used in military action.
And of course it assumes you're not physically or mentally handicapped once you leave, as many overseas are.
Or worse yet, dead.
Not to mention how military pay and compensation keeps getting slimmer and slimmer as years go by.
"Assuming nothing goes bad", anything can far outweigh the cons.