Mandatory Military Service

[roadrunner]

I agree with you for the most part.

My idea is largely structured as an attempt to get people to either "put up or shut up" about veterans. To stop lying and saying they support them and would do anything for them while the current support system for vets is a nightmare. This proposal is a hyperbolic idea of what it would look like if we truly supported vets to whom we owed everything as so many people say.

My other idea with this proposal is to at least try to get the government and "the powers that be" to stop sending waves of young men to random foreign countries to defend the interests of billionaires rather than our 'freedom" like so many are convinced that they do.

The shortcomings are the promises made by the US gov't, not the general population. The citizenry already dumps a large amount into the military campaign for all aspects of it, the fed gov needs to pull its head out of its ass and stop using the military as its own personal brute squad...

 

[roadrunner]

I think you should definitely educate yourself on geo politics, I think you would learn very fast that they probably have more to do with the economy then any other metric period. I do agree that they know the Risks and should live with that decision as most do.

Incorrect. Not talking about current and ongoing military operations and global presence. Speaking simply to funding a living stipend of a retired military person's life from the time they leave to the time they die at whatever age that is without putting anything back in whatever form that may be.

Since you brought up geo politics, let's dive in from a high level view. Up until WWII, the gobal economy was minimal with larger countries controlling regions of economic activity. Trade existed, but limited and many smaller players were kept suppressed. After WWII. the dominant presence of the US military opened up global trade through its presence of protecting shipping lanes.

It brought world wide stability for the most part keeping smaller aggressive gov'ts at bay from taking advantage of smaller yet important economies.

It opened up these specialized economies to do what they do best in return to get what they weren't as good at getting.

Anything else I should learn?

 

[Andrew12gauge]

While mandatory military service is sometimes proposed as a societal reset for discipline and cohesion, most policy analysts see it as an imperfect fit for solving the drug and homelessness crises

AI chatbot much?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PARA1977]

Incorrect. Not talking about current and ongoing military operations and global presence. Speaking simply to funding a living stipend of a retired military person's life from the time they leave to the time they die at whatever age that is without putting anything back in whatever form that may be.

Since you brought up geo politics, let's dive in from a high level view. Up until WWII, the gobal economy was minimal with larger countries controlling regions of economic activity. Trade existed, but limited and many smaller players were kept suppressed. After WWII. the dominant presence of the US military opened up global trade through its presence of protecting shipping lanes.

It brought world wide stability for the most part keeping smaller aggressive gov'ts at bay from taking advantage of smaller yet important economies.

It opened up these specialized economies to do what they do best in return to get what they weren't as good at getting.

Anything else I should

Yes as a taxpayer your money goes towards paying
The service members retirement no question and I agree sometimes that feels Heavy especially with how inflated the NDAA is but those soldiers secure
Your economy on the frontside and we as taxpayers pay them on the backside for life if they earn a retirement through years of service or disability as it should be. But please know this system was started even before the constitution was signed, and remember we payed pensions to every soldier going back to the first war and by that I mean the Revolutionary War.

 

[Jpsmith1]

The shortcomings are the promises made by the US gov't, not the general population. The citizenry already dumps a large amount into the military campaign for all aspects of it, the fed gov needs to pull its head out of its ass and stop using the military as its own personal brute squad...

If you look at pur representatives as extensions of ourselves and our collective will, we keep voting for people who send our children off to wars over oil and pretending it's about freedom or something else.

 

[WoolOverAll]

Unfortunately I do not have the bank account to be properly represented by my 'representatives'. Take away corporate and special interest group donations and we may see some decent candidates emerge.

 

[roadrunner]

Yes as a taxpayer your money goes towards paying
The service members retirement no question and I agree sometimes that feels Heavy especially with how inflated the NDAA is but those soldiers secure
Your economy on the frontside and we as taxpayers pay them on the backside for life if they earn a retirement through years of service or disability as it should be. But please know this system was started even before the constitution was signed, and remember we payed pensions to every soldier going back to the first war and by that I mean the Revolutionary War.

I think the original comment was paying for everything as a free for all. A pension is different. That money is used in budget just like everything else. How it's managed is up to the individual.

 

[Beendare]

I like the idea of it being voluntary- we get a better class of soldier. I think we need to treat them MUCH better though, higher pay better facilities. Look at all of the soldiers getting Cancer/ sick off the water at some of the bases. Disgraceful.

 

[Bum8221]

I served eight years in the Air Force and was honorably discharged in 2009. I served with thousands of the best men and women that you could ask for. I served in an all volunteer force, meaning everyone that was there chose to be there for one reason or another. Although I’ve served with some of the best women you would ever want to meet. I also served with some knuckle, dragging heathens that I wouldn’t trust with the potato gun. When I was younger, I thought mandatory military service would fix a lot of problems in society as I’ve gotten older. I’ve come to realize that mandatory military service would cause more problems to the military than the extra bodies would be worth. I found it pretty easy to assimilate into military culture and lifestyle, but there were some parts of it that were challenging to me. I loved the black-and-white of the military, there were very few gray areas that didn’t have an established easy to follow standard for you to either achieve or fail.

 

[northdakotacanoe]

who knows

 

[mt terry d]

K thru 12 isn't enough brainwashing?

 

[medvedyt]

Many European countries have a military service and civil service pathway that people can choose between. It's a great way to build community, experience, and get things done. I love the idea for the US. It might save us money in the long run.

in my time the choice was 1 year of military service or 2 years of civil service they then reduced to 18 months at the end both were removed and now they are talking to reinstate it but i do not think there is an army aside of the finns, the norwegians or the swedes that will be able to accommodate soldiers in training. many bases has been removed from duty and i do not think the forces are ready to take whole groups like it was done.

 

[OsoMountain]

Absolutely not. I don’t agree with or support it in any form.

 

[Aussie Dan]

Considering how many of those homeless drug addicts and whatnot are former military who were used, abused and forgotten by your government, id strongly suggest that your idea would only exacerbate the problem and would likely lead to a lot more lost lives on home soil through acts of extreme violence, self harm and further addiction.

from the outside looking in, it seems like things need to change over there (and here) from school age, change the curriculum- add some life skills, big focus on physical health and its links to mental health, get rid of all the alphabet Mafia groomers in teaching roles, get back to teaching more traditional values and community spirit. Get to know your neighbours, Limit social media for kids under 12-16, they dont need the kardashians and their ilk teaching them a goddamn thing.

 

[Jusgunn3]

I think we should let folks serve if they want, I joined at 19 because I had shit grades, could not afford college and was just getting into trouble and could not hold a job. I enjoyed my time and it shaped who I am today, even though some times were horrible and a pain to reflect on today. Would I want my kids forced to do what I did, absolutely not. I do agree we need to change the way we do things and make men men again but not sure that’s the right way. Read the post above, it’s pretty much sums it up.

 

[StuckoYota99]

I have couple thoughts on it.
1. Unless exempt all men from 18-25 are already registered into selective service for the draft .
2. If there was Mandatory military service for at least two years between the ages of 18-25 it would dramatically effect the incentive to vote because they now have skin in the game if politicians want to go to war.
3. No exemptions for politicians kids.
4. Young men need more discipline in their lives and a sense of purpose.

 

[OsoMountain]

I have couple thoughts on it.
1. Unless exempt all men from 18-25 are already registered into selective service for the draft .
2. If there was Mandatory military service for at least two years between the ages of 18-25 it would dramatically effect the incentive to vote because they now have skin in the game if politicians want to go to war.
3. No exemptions for politicians kids.
4. Young men need more discipline in their lives and a sense of purpose.

Well they aren’t gonna gain a lot of purpose and discipline from killing other human beings. I promise you that.

 

[NRA4LIFE]

This would have probably ruined my life. I got an engineering degree and worked for a defense contractor my entire career. I feel like I contributed.

 

[Robobiss]

I was in the Marine Corps, GWOT era.

There was no shortage of turds (in my opinion) in any direction you looked, and those were all people that CHOSE to be there. They weren’t forced.

Change that dynamic and the fighting unit gets less and less effective. There would be more and more losers for everyone else to pull the weight of. The most effective military is the one in which everyone chose to be there.

I like the spirit of the idea, but it’s easy to forget that at the end of the day it is/can be an incredibly dangerous job in which you have to rely on others to keep you alive while you shoot people and get shot at for a meager paycheck.

 

[jakeyjohn1]

Interesting thread, wasn't expecting to see this.

I like the idea of kids who never had any role models or meaningful opportunities being given some. I also like the idea of kids with silver spoons who have never been told no or had any responsibilities having their spoons taken, being told no, and held accountable for meaningful work.

I think the arguments made here that mandatory service would be bad for the military were very strong arguments. But most of the posts seem to treat all military service as combat. Aren't most military jobs logistics? maybe I'm ignorant. Doesn't effect those arguments, just noticed most of the military specific discussion here was related to combat and its effects on people.

The idea of a civil service program as an option instead of forcing everyone to the military or national guard is really interesting. CA is using prisoners for wildland fire fighting, so I think there is an obvious need for more labor. Government gives $250b+annually to NGOs for all sorts of community service needs, so I think there is an obvious need there too. There is a thread on here about the roadless rule repeal and the forest service not maintaining all their roads was brought up. Maybe with 8mil 18year olds those roads could be maintained. Its interesting to think about how different government agencies could use all that labor. the national parks, forest service, fema, even noaa. Things would be very different.

I do think such mandatory service would be within American principles. Some people seem to disagree, but the way I read the constitution and federalists papers it seems to me that citizen participation is intended. Article 1 gives congress the power to conscript a militia and the 2nd amendment says a militia is necessary. the 6th amendment also requires citizens do jury duty. So while a 1-2 year general mandatory service would be unprecedented outside of the drafts, I don't think it would be contrary to American principles of freedom, liberty, etc.

Government paying wages and housing etc for everyone involved is a non starter. maybe there is a clever way to lower the logistics cost, but this whole concept is probably just hypothetical from a financial standpoint. The money going to NGOs covers less than half of those NGOs costs on average, so no matter how you slice it such a large labor force would cost way more than what we currently spend.

To add to the discussion, if this service requirement existed then it could be extended to immigration as a requirement before getting citizenship. The idea of it being optional, but mandatory in order to vote is something I have never considered. Apparently I need to read starship troopers.