Do you support freeloading? Is it right for those who can work, do work and provide for themselves? Or is it right to be lazy and seek entitlements just because one thinks they are deserving? I support a volunteer military, and was a member of it in the past. Would you pick up a gun laying next to you and defend your loved ones being attacked in a home invasion? Would you also pick up a rifle and begin firing from cover if you saw terrorists killing innocents? Or would you run and save yourself?
Well, in a moral world, I am able to own my own gun to defend my own face. If my neighbourhood is under attack, I and my neighbours would mobilise to ward off the threat. If every citizen owns- and knows how to operate a gun it is much more effective than just having a state-military with advanced weapons that only a few can operate. Guerilla warfare>Government warfare.
The scenario you describe above will be Chaos (note the capital C) you'll only end up shooting your neighbours. Military training teaches you discipline, how to behave and what to do under fire, even exposes you to what it's like being under fire.. minimise the shock for when it actually happens. Besides by the time the fighting hits the streets it's over, you'd want to stop them looooong before they get there In today's world war is high tech and you'd need the know how and cohesion of a group to win or survive, every man for himself is for the movies. ps. for Guerrilla warfare you need to be highly trained, like special forces, it's stealth, it's speed and it's hitting very hard and with accuracy, take it from someone who's ancestors developed guerrilla warfare
It's not immoral, but we will never see it in this country. For starters, career officers and NCOs will never buy into it. Talk to some of them who served during the Vietnam era when we had a draft of the unwilling. And now we're talking about making it compulsory? Dream on.
I served during the Vietnam era and was registered for the draft. My number was low so I joined the Navy so I would have a choice instead of being drafted. It did not harm me to serve my 4 years and I learned that many others did the same thing I did to avoid being thrown in somewhere not of their choosing. I think we need the draft like we had for so many years before with the exception that it should also include women. The ones who were drafted generally conformed and complied and the ones who didn't were in the minority. There are many jobs in all services who do not use guns and are not in combat even though they are all trained for combat to a degree in boot camp. To answer a post above most people will use a gun to protect their families if it came down to it. I myself carry a gun everywhere I go and have been trained to use it by the Navy and the police department. It is better to have one and not need it then to need it and not have one. Having been in law enforcement before I know they cannot be everywhere all the time and we have to be able to protect ourselves for the average 15 to 20 minutes it takes them to arrive. I should be an honor to serve and protect your nation and if you don't think so then you should relocate to France or somewhere else that will have you.
Yes, it violates in almost all cases fundamental human equality since those disabled or otherwise unfit for military service can't participate therefore being unequal. Now if all citizens can serve regardless of disability, age, mental capabilities and so forth then its fair and moral. Alternative service isn't equal, separate cannot be equal.
We all have been selected from city and from farm They asked us lots of questions, they jabbed us in the arm We stood there at attention, our faces turning red The sergeant looked us over and this is what he said: This is the Army, Mister Ritter No private rooms or telephones You had your breakfast in bed before But you won't have it there any more This is the Army, Mister Ritter We like the barracks nice and clean You had a housemaid to clean your floor But she won't help you out any more Do what the buglers command They're in the Army and not in a band This is the Army, Mister Ritter You and your baby went to town She had you worried but this is war And she won't worry you anymore A bunch of frightened rookies were list'ning filled with awe They listened while a sergeant was laying down the law They stood there at attention, their faces turning red The sergeant looked them over and this is what he said: This is the Army Mister Ritter
We need this in the US. It'll whip some people into shape *cough* Donald Trump *cough*. It'll make liberals who want to just give people free everything understand a little bit about how the world works and it'll teach conservatives who sit in their armchairs and talk about the military just what their advocating for.
If only that was the case. Discipline and learning how to make your bed is a good reason to have military service, I guess. But Swedish Army owns appartments which will be handed to the soldiers.
Well Donald Trump is in the military he is the highest commanding officer of all branches of the military and he took about the same oath I did when I enlisted. To serve protect and defend the constitution of the United States.
I've always been of the belief that the US military is so good because people choose to join it, and as such you should only join if it's something you want to do. Along with that, "serving" the country isn't limited to just shooting at other people in foreign nations.
Forced military service is not immoral, it's just stupid. Why force people who don't want to be in the military, when you can have a perfect, 100% volunteer military?
Sweden, and any other nation on the planet, should increase soldier pay and benefits if it wants more soldiers to fight for it. Enslaving people against their will and forcing them to kill other people is immoral.
Name a single time in modern history when guerrilla warfare prevented the invasion and occupation of a country.
Correct. Plus Guerrilla warfare leads to disorganization. Trained government agents (soldiers, marines, airmen, sailors) hold that organizational professionalism and structure. I would still take my squad over 10 of my armed neighbors. Though they may know how to shoot, do they know how to breach urban facilities? Do they know how to fire an AT4? Do they have fallback plans and other contingency orders? Probably no.
Even if a neighborhood militia did drill regularly, they are still just light infantry. No light infantry force is going to prevent an invasion. Hell, they're worse than light infantry. Professional light infantry have mortars, MG's, grenade launchers, and anti-tank weaponry to back up their rifles.
I get into this debate all the time with Anarcho Capitalists and Right Libertarians who think volunteer militias are all we need for defense. They love to point to insurgents in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam as defeating invaders but don't have anything to say when I point out that in none of those cases did the insurgents prevent invasion and that each nation suffered hundreds of thousands to millions dead during the occupation.
Yes, it's why I'm not completely a libertarian. Ron Paul gets under my skin. We need defense forces and we need them to be capable of pre-emptive attacks if the time comes. Air superiority being a HUGE part of our programs. If we just had this hippie utopia where we just had militias, Costa Rica could take us over by night fall.
