Reinstatement of The Selective Service

It is my belief tat if the "Selective Service" is reinstated ,a lot of our social problems can be resolved. In stead of folks standing on the corners looking for trouble,they will be doing close order drill.Education would be mandatory. The illegal aliens would dry up let a wet sock lying on a rock in a desert....its our only option for the nation to regain its national prominence....Crime will go down,and the gang bangers will have a new home away from the hood...think about it! Less crime and more products being produced....We have a choice in 2016....The great experiment is over and is a failure...

 

The Army is not a giant training ground for wayward youth and it seems insane to me to suggest that the solution to having millions of idle and violent young men is to arm and train them for combat. Now if you would suggest that we require some compulsory service doing something necessary and useful, such as learning a useful skill in rebuilding our decayed infrastructure, I might listen, but if we remove the compulsory part that is simply spending the money at home on full employment instead of sending it to Iraq or the Ukraine to help those denizens continue to kill each other .

There are practically NO military pundits who seriously advocate any return to a conscript Army. The Military is a highly technical profession now, demanding unflagging dedication, high intelligence and a well-developed work ethic, not indentured slaves whose only thought is to serve their time and escape.

 

Taxcutter says:
Brain-dead idea.

The Navy is laying off its chiefs - the guys who make the Navy work.

What earthly use would there be for a bunch of semi-military losers standing around?

Crime was higher in the 1960s when the draft was in place than it is today.

 

Brain Dead? 50 yr old NG units fighting a young mans war? ISIS has 15 yer ols fighting for them,we have no...no trained reserves to with stand the hoards of Muslims that will attack our nation..I think you folks have your heads in the sand....Any country that depends on Mercenary troops to defend its borders is doomed...and all you women that don't want your kids to serve,well they can serve their new masters, The Muslim nations and Allah!

 

We already have Selective Service in the United States. Almost all male U.S. citizens, and male immigrants living in the U.S., who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. This law was enacted in 1980. I think you mean conscription. The draft ended in 1973 and the military has been all-voluntary ever since.

As I understand your comment you're calling for a return of the draft.

 

I think at a minimum anyone who calls for the return of the draft must either be an active duty service member- or an age eligible for the draft in order to be given any consideration.

I can't think of a single thing that the OP got right in his post.

 

It's immoral for a nation to ask it's citizens to kill for them, unless the fate of the nation itself is at stake.

Most leaders in the services, whether commissioned or NCO, do not want a return of the draft. It is easier to train motivated and willing participants.

Very few want a return to forced military service.

 

My experience while on active duty is no draft. Who would want to lead a bunch of soldiers that want nothing to do with being in the military? Bad formula wanting failure.

 

My experience as an NCO was that the vast majority of the platoon could be run on automatic, but one or two folks who had discipline problems could take 80% of my time. I can't imagine a platoon of resentful conscripts who didn't want to be there. How could anything get done?

 

NCOs are the engine of the armed forces, so your opinion on the subject s duly noted and respected.

 

The Army for one is modernizing they need people with High School Diplomas either pre-college or strong technical skills and prefer those who want to go or have been to college. Its complex work and getting more complex its not longer common men with rifles. This old video will demonstrate the classic issues and this was several decades ago you want the modern Army among others to get saddled like this if one is undereducated?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxmIFbfhuew&index=23&list=PL8914666A000F8459

And there is another issue if one is a woman they can do in most cases over half the military jobs and it might be tough to draft in men and not do so with women. If one is disabled like I was I would want to do military work and I could have worked at eighteen at a sitting job so would they get a shot at some kind of military posting like the old WACs to take spaces in jobs so fit people could serve in other duties. In any case I would insist on doing my part and the ADA would have required that at the time and would now even if very disabled.

 

I was both an 'E' and an 'O' and I also agree completely.

 

We need soldiers period,and I think every able bodied man should serve just like they do in Israel and Germany(2 years).If you don't want to kill anyone,so be it,but you still need to serve the nation.Discipline is the major cause of delinquency.....Without a trained inactive reserve,the nation will become inept to protect itself....Look at the soldiers in the field,old and fat... we need young full blooded Americans...I served with both ,enlistees and conscripts...some performed and some didn't...but both served well...Look at the records, a call to duty is paramount to protect the nation...Professional soldiers come from all ranks...It is your obligation to serve,whether by being drafted are by volunteering...

 

So long as you support such slavery you're no better than ISIS.

 

Why just men except for the US Marines every branch has a majority of positions fillable by women, I think with that in mind you need to open the program to women the old "readiness" defense when men did much more of the military work went right out the window with a modern military. And to be fair disabled people should do such work in and out of the military where they can be accommodated. And further anyone should be able to do this at any age in two year periods that would end unemployment and the need for programs like SSI unless unfit to do any tasks anywhere a very high bar.

It would be simple your an American you must do two years of "Service" in either the military or not, you can choose, regardless of gender or other factors and if you want to stay in you can or re-enter for two year periods at will. Set the pay fairly for all and cover any expenses and training.

I see no reason a disabled young person can't fill a post in the US or friendly foreign nation behind a desk or fixing things etc. for the armed forces OR do other kinds of work in fact this could be a great option to always have work for the hard to employ for reasonable grounds.

 

You didn't read a single reply to your OP did you?

" full blooded Americans"- what on earth does that mean?

 

The military disagrees. They would prefer to deal with motivated volunteers. Also, how would this do a thing to illegal aliens? If anything, it would give them even mroe job opportunities.

 

Germany gave up on the draft in 2011. The military doesn't want this. They don't want to be babysitters for draftees.

 

I'm not unsympathetic to your argument. I think on practical grounds and on liberty grounds it's just not practical or desirable. Let me suggest a secondary proposal that may meet some of your requirements:

We alter selective service so that it's both open to women and voluntary. If you hate the idea of serving, you don't have to sign up. However just like today, Federal student aid such as loans and grants would be limited to those who sign up for selective service. Also you might want to throw in Federally backed mortgages. Then, if there is an emergency where you need to draw a great deal of people, you have a pool of people who have essentially pre-volunteered, so there is no liberty issue involved. And it's a pool of people that hopefully attended college and have some sort of useful skill.


Of course in my perfect world, military service would be a requirement to vote, but we'll never see that.

 

This sentiment is straight out of Heinlein's Starship Troopers. I can't say that I agree with it. There are already plenty of government sponsored incentives to encourage military service. The new GI bill for one thing. The new GI Bill offers generous tuition support when you attend either a public or private institution, and support for your choice of a wide variety of educational programs.

Incentivising a basic right of the citizenry to vote by turning it into a privilege only obtained by military/Federal service, is taking things to the extreme.

Give the public a justifiable reason to fight for their country and they will enlist voluntarily in sufficient numbers.

 

Well you don't have to worry about ever seeing it. You're more likely to see interstellar travel and a Bug invasion then voting based on military service. But the purpose isn't to encourage military service, but to select voters who are more likely civic minded and able to vote for the national good rather than for goodies. As Heinlein said, "The moral difference between a soldier and a civilian is that the soldier accepts personal responsibility for the safety of the body politic of which he is a member. The civilian does not."

That's a pretty good basis for a Republic. Fogging a mirror at age 18 is not.

 

Yes, however that's a flawed argument in my opinion. It infers civics courses and military service are the only means in which to produce a good citizen. This simply isn't true.

I'd be more interested to instill basic knowledge in personal finances in the average 18-24 year old than I would be in training them to field strip an M16A1 rifle blind folded.

The country is in the shape it is in, because from the TOP down...from the executive/legislative branches of government to the ordinary citizen; spending beyond one's means is more likely to collapse our Republic than an invasionary force.

 

Well I don't think I'm saying anything controversial by saying our society has failed to produce that hypothetical "good citizen."

It's easy to blame the people at the top for the mess we're in, but by and large the citizens voted them in and they're doing the job the citizens elected them to do, or they wouldn't be elected and re-elected. You don't like a Starship Troopers Republic? Fine. But I suspect it would be better than what we have now.

 

The book, Starship Troopers, is required reading for most military academy cadets...so clearly it has merit.

I was ROTC, I thought All Quiet on the Western Front was more up my alley. The characters are youthful, enthusiastic, they become soldiers. Not people against bugs or skinnies...war is people against people.

The basic premise...
War is based on the principles of hate pitting young men against young men...although more and more women are exposed to combat and I don't want to leave out their level of sacrifice either. Eventually as wars plod on, and the enthusiasm for it has long since faded; the primary goal is simply to survive it.

It may be necessary on occasion, but I see no reason to glorify it.

 

How do you figure the ones who didn't perform 'served well'?