Should you have to Serve inorder to "EARN" your Rights of Citizenship?

I think that you have some valid points here and I definitely like the idea of service for citizenship, however, if we begin compulsory enlistments, we may have units surrendering to the enemy without much of a fight (i e Iraqis fighters). Perhaps it would be prudent to offer citizenship in return for honorable voluntary service.

Well, with compulsory military service, there loses a bit of freedom, and that's the fiber of the majority of both our problems and virtues. Israel has to sacrifice that liberty of volunteer military because they're quite frankly, puny and surrounded, outnumbered and hemmed in. Not to tear them down though. They can really fight! However, if they were ever in any sustained conflict, they would fall apart, as their entire population would be mobilized to war immediately. Also, they have a history of being bullied. (Egypt, rome, crusades, pogroms, Spanish inquisition, WW2, ..now[though some can argue that Israel is the bully now and a form of colonism])

With America, we have the freedom to choose. It has it's ups and downs. Ups being we can be in sustained conflict both economically and politically (detachment from foreign policy and all that). However, it also means that our citizens have no connection to their service members and as a result are not familiar with the potential sacrifices and as a result are on an individual basis capable of expressing their ignorance.

As much as I would like compulsory military service, it is not for America, and not a feasible thing socially or economically. I mean, 350 million people being pushed thru the country's forts? Ft. Knox can hardly handle 5,500 cadets for a month, let alone the nation in increments for at minimum of ten weeks, just for a taste of military service at least. Just not feasible. Social security is bad? just imagine THAT bill. Soldiers are expensive, really. not to mean the social implications: militant society, oriented to the profession of arms, and with our technology? I see another Reich coming if we do that (if we had the money)

Also, I guarantee you those people who sit, keep their hats on and don't know the words are spurned by the rest of the civilian population for their blind contrariety. They just want to be different and don't know what to be different about because they don't know a thing (national anthem as an example).

My opinion: let them be ignorant. One day they'll notice how important it is for them to not be involved, and give thanks.

Starship Troopers was on the Commandants reading list while in the Marines. Some form of public service whether military or civil service should equal citizenship. The term citizen is defined as: one owing allegiance to a state in which sovereign power is retained by the people and sharing in the political rights of those people. After reading that I think I would like to be a citizen by definition.

I have historically been adamantly against this idea. The older I get, and the more I see of the absolute disconnect between actions (which votes are - delegation of force plain and simple) and consequences in people's minds.

I don't think restricting the franchise would lead to smarter or more informed voters. Heinlein covered that very well. However, as he pointed out, you would know that - at least once, for a while - the voter understood that they had skin in the game.

It might not make things better, but I'm hard-pressed to see how it would make things worse.

Note: Yes, I can come up with a theoretical list. Slots in the military reserved for the rich, "disenfranchising the common man." Pressure for a revolving door of 6-12 month "enlistments", with lowered standards, etc. They just don't resonate with me today. Especially not if service were defined in some way other than just military.

But the Merchant Marine can't count. Heinlein was very clear on that score. ;-)