Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the 1950s my Grandad had to go into National Service when he was a young adult.
He thinks that there should still be mandatory National Service as it ensures that a teenager becomes a man.
However, I believe that teenagers shouldn't be forced into a situation that makes you kill or increases the chances of being killed. I understand why teenagers were called up in the second world war, as even I would love to kill those Nazi, racist basta*ds, but why did teens have to do it after the WW2? I mean, unlike WW2, the Korean war in the 50s wasn't a war that would threaten the very foundations of British society. But they (the government) sent teenagers trying to live their day to day lives to a war that was obviously going to be stalemate! In fact, I feel that the government who allowed mandatory national service to go on after the WW2 all hould have been put into prison as they intervened in peoples lives, and caused many teenagers to die when they should have been going to parties or having fun! But that's my opinion!
Also, if I was a teenager in the 50s then I would have rather gone to prison, like Mohammed Ali, than to kill or be killed!
So what do you think:
Should mandatory national service come back like my Grandad so highly believes?
Or
Was it wrong completely and should never happen again (unless the foundations of ones society is under threat)?
Or
Should it just never happen again?
I believe that every 18 year old boy and girl should serve two years service to their country. Have the pay scale for subsistence scaled to the job with military being the most. But all go through the same military basic training.
We could use these youngsters for janitorial services in government buildings, workers in our national and state parks, and also for temporary help with FEMA and other relief agencies.
First, there has never been general mandatory national service in the US. There has been the draft, which is possible mandatory national service.
And the draft in the US has always numerous ways for those with money or political pull to evade it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichTales
I believe that every 18 year old boy and girl should serve two years service to their country. Have the pay scale for subsistence scaled to the job with military being the most. But all go through the same military basic training.
We could use these youngsters for janitorial services in government buildings, workers in our national and state parks, and also for temporary help with FEMA and other relief agencies.
First, there are about 1,500,000 new 18-year-olds in the US every year. That would increase the size of the government by 3,000,000 essentially useless bodies.
Second, the career staffs of whatever agencies got saddled with them would have to be doubled just to train (even to do janitorial work), feed, manage them. The DoD only handles about 100,000 recruits annually today; your proposal would require 30 times more training facilities. Oh, and military hospitals with that much more staff. Better build more brigs and hire more lawyers, too, because that's the age group that needs them.
Talk about "big government." There is certainly no need in government for them. That would be just a huge government daycare system. It would also take away jobs that private industry is contracted to do in government today.
Henry Ford never served in the military(civil war times)
Thomas Edison never served in the military
Albert Einstein never served in the military
Bill Gates never served in the military
Steve Jobs never served in the military
Some people have a great upbringing and make great contributions to the human race, others need a kick in the ass. Our voluntary system works just fine.
National service in the United States has a long tradition, extending to the founding of the country. National service takes multiple forms in the U.S., including community service, military service, and other forms...
Conscription in the United Kingdom has existed for two periods in modern times. The first was from 1916 to 1919, the second was from 1939 to 1960, with the last conscripted soldiers leaving the service in 1963. During the First and Second World Wars, it was known as War Service or Military Service. From 1948 it was known as National Service.
Last edited by Poncho_NM; 09-27-2014 at 07:45 PM..
I think the volunteer military is better, as long as enough quality people can be recruited to do the job. It probably suffers a little by not getting the cream of the crop, but those it does get have chosen to enlist and are more apt to do their best, rather than drag their feet until the enlistment is up.
I joined during the draft. I didn't want to be in, but I still did my best because that's how I was raised. Others, friends of mine, only did what they had to do to get through the enlistment period the easiest way they could. Other friends actually wanted to be in and make it a career. On the whole, they were better enlisted men, even if their natural ability (read "smarts") left a little to be desired.
In the 1950s my Grandad had to go into National Service when he was a young adult.
He thinks that there should still be mandatory National Service as it ensures that a teenager becomes a man.
However, I believe that teenagers shouldn't be forced into a situation that makes you kill or increases the chances of being killed. I understand why teenagers were called up in the second world war, as even I would love to kill those Nazi, racist basta*ds, but why did teens have to do it after the WW2? I mean, unlike WW2, the Korean war in the 50s wasn't a war that would threaten the very foundations of British society. But they (the government) sent teenagers trying to live their day to day lives to a war that was obviously going to be stalemate! In fact, I feel that the government who allowed mandatory national service to go on after the WW2 all hould have been put into prison as they intervened in peoples lives, and caused many teenagers to die when they should have been going to parties or having fun! But that's my opinion!
Also, if I was a teenager in the 50s then I would have rather gone to prison, like Mohammed Ali, than to kill or be killed!
So what do you think:
Should mandatory national service come back like my Grandad so highly believes?
Or
Was it wrong completely and should never happen again (unless the foundations of ones society is under threat)?
Or
Should it just never happen again?
I am like your grandfather, who believes that National Service should be mandatory. I like the European model, which mandates two years of military service for able-bodied men and women, and then provides them with two years of college education at taxpayer expense. It benefits the nation, and the individual.
Registration for National Service (called Selective Service in the US) is still required in the US at age 18, but the draft was suspended by Congress in April 1975.
I volunteered for military service in 1972, when the draft was still in effect. I received my draft notice in the mail while I was already in boot camp.
One solution needed is to update the structure of the military to the current world reality and our desire to launch preemptive strikes in foreign lands under the veil of terrorism. We need to divide the military into two departments. Just as we have now the Department of Defense we also need the Department of Offense. The DOD should have a draft and the DOO should be volunteers.
Every good sports team knows the benefit of both. War is becoming our national pastime replacing all other sports. The DOD would be used for defense of the nation and authorized by Congress to be deployed if necessary overseas. The DOO could be wielded by the President for a limited time say 90 days to play Whack A Mole around the globe. No reason to drag out the destruction for years as proposed currently.
Lots of benefits to this structure if you think about it. I won't list them all here.
A draft doesn't mean that all who reach the required age are drafted. But that enough are drafted to accomplish the objective, what ever the military decides according to it's needs.
I am like your grandfather, who believes that National Service should be mandatory. I like the European model, which mandates two years of military service for able-bodied men and women, and then provides them with two years of college education at taxpayer expense. It benefits the nation, and the individual..
Many European countries, as well as most members of the transatlantic NATO military alliance, have already done away with compulsory military service. Of the 28 NATO countries, 23 have full-time professional armies, and 21 of the 27 European Union nations have abolished the draft. The latest to do so is Sweden, which ended conscription on June 30.
Alongside Turkey, Germany remains the only major NATO country that sill requires its young men to serve in the military. Conscription also still exists in Austria, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Greece and Norway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
