Would you support mandatory military service for citizens once they turn 18?

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:27:11 -0400

Also to consider, do you think that women should also be included?

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Oct 10 at 2014 6:32 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:32:49 -0400

With 1 caveat, doesn't have to be military but some type of civil service instead if they choose.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 10 at 2014 6:38 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:38:02 -0400

I posted a very similar topic about a week ago. Similar, but not exactly the same, I guess. I'm for mandatory service, and like MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca, I think we should include the option for civil service as well.

https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/should-military-or-civil-service-be-required-of-all-americans-and-those-who-want-to-be-americans

Should military or civil service be required of all Americans and those who want to be Americans?...

I do apologize if this has been asked before. [~349223:Maj Shaun Stanton] replied to a different topic (about undocumented immigrants being allowed to join the military), and that reply prompted me to ask this question. I am 100% FOR mandatory military service, with an allowance for those who cannot do military service, conscientious objectors, etc., that allows them to do some sort of public service (hospitals, schools, etc.) Germany has a...

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 10 at 2014 6:51 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:51:50 -0400

I think in today's climate, a mandatory service obligation would be a disaster. It's pretty tough listening to folks who VOLUNTEERED for service bitching about it. Add people who are forced into it and it could be a deadly situation.

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Oct 10 at 2014 6:56 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:56:28 -0400

No...mandatory military service for all could accelerate the erosion of a professional organization we're trying to re-build.

Since society has been all about equality, I would like to see women added to our Selective Service System.

Selective Service System - Most male U.S. citizens and male immigrant non-citizens between the ages of 18 and 25 are required by law to have registered within 30 days of their 18th birthdays.

Response by SGT James Elphick made Oct 10 at 2014 6:55 PM

SGT James Elphick — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:55:39 -0400

It sounds great at first but is completely unfeasible. First of all not everyone is cut out for or even fit for military service. This is usually where someone comes in and says fine, civil service then. Not still possible. We are a country of over 300 million people, and over 4 million men and women will turn 18 this year. Even at E-1 pay (approx. $19k/yr) that's an additional $76 billion, not including clothing, housing, and feeding all the extra people who do enter the military. Then do we do away with the GI Bill? Or does college just become free (or government-subsidized I guess) because everyone served and earned it? Plus the VA is already a mess, and once everyone serves and is eligible it will become everyone's healthcare, so do we really want that too? And what about the labor pool and college enrollment the first year this goes into effect? No one enters the civilian workforce or college? Goodbye economy. Like I said, it looks great from the onset but there are too many issues.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Oct 10 at 2014 6:58 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:58:50 -0400

Simple answer. Yes! Guaranteed to build Character.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 10 at 2014 8:29 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 20:29:10 -0400

I am very mixed about this. As much as I agree that everyone should have a mandatory serve that just allows shit heads inside the military. Those who don't care will be rebellious and cause a stir. I have seen shit heads join volunteer and just over all be shit bags having myself wonder how the hell they got thru basic & ait being over weight, mouthy, not knowing standards…etc

Response by SFC Kenneth Hunnell made Oct 10 at 2014 9:23 PM

SFC Kenneth Hunnell — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:23:17 -0400

make it an even playing field

Response by SGT Kevin Adams made Oct 10 at 2014 9:41 PM

SGT Kevin Adams — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:41:48 -0400

I would say a mandatory service obligation for all citizens unless the individual decides to be a nurse or doctor. I say exclude nurse or doctor because it takes a lot of schooling.

Response by SGT Suraj Dave made Oct 10 at 2014 9:45 PM

SGT Suraj Dave — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:45:25 -0400

AT this point in history, this is incredibly un-neccessary. We have plenty of people lined up to join, and we kick people out daily.

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Oct 11 at 2014 8:32 AM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 08:32:51 -0400

I think that there should be some type of service obligation for all, be it military or some sort of civilian type service like the Peace Corps etc and that everyone, women included, be subject to it. However, I doubt our nation would go for it because far too few are interested in serving in any capacity for the good of our nation.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2014 10:51 AM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 10:51:26 -0400

I say why not, we can just make it for any civil service. People should be giving back to this country, instead of just taking from it. It would teach people discipline and respect more than a lot of Americans have today. Also the pay wouldn't necessarily be an issue, because if we had 4mil Americans being conscripted every year, we would probably cut back on a lot of the contracts that the DoD uses today.

Response by PFC Stephens Clark made Oct 11 at 2014 11:13 AM

PFC Stephens Clark — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 11:13:39 -0400

but Medical reason would exempt certain people. but would need to be severe medical reasons.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2014 11:24 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 11:24:51 -0400

My belief is every American should serve their country, but it does have to be mandatory military service. Why not just get a job and put money back into the American economy. Why not do community service or do an internship for a diplomatic mission. Keep the military a volunteer force and competitive.

Response by SGT Steve Oakes made Oct 11 at 2014 11:57 AM

SGT Steve Oakes — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 11:57:39 -0400

I agree with Mandatory PUBLIC service. Not exclusive to the Military, and not necessarily at the federal level. Firefighter,EMT, Law enforcement should all qualify. I also think that BEFORE we make it mandatory for all. That we should make it mandatory for anyone seeking public office to have FIRST served. I also think properly vetted Non-profits that do public service work should count.

Response by SGT Alicia Brenneis made Oct 11 at 2014 12:33 PM

SGT Alicia Brenneis — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 12:33:55 -0400

I still believe in the draft during war times. I think women should also have to register at the age of 18. I know this is a controversial subject but In todays times women are still fighting for equality in the military as far as MOS and schools. Well if you want equality it should include the "not so fun" portions as well and not just the parts that you pick.

As a second part: Soldiers today are getting disability for everything. I have seen soldiers claim injuries like wrist pain and get paid after only serving 2 years with 0 deployments. Another who served 3 years got 100% for PTSD because he went to KOREA! Can you imagine if every American had to serve at least 2 years? The government is already struggling to pay for true disabilities from a volunteer force.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2014 1:20 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 13:20:27 -0400

There has been a drastic reduction in force over the last several years with the near 2% of the population meeting of the total force, ostensibly due to lack of funding in the national budget. If we were to force 100% of the population into service, how on Earth would we ever pay for it?

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2014 4:49 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 16:49:55 -0400

That would turn out really really bad.

Response by SFC Lloydwatkins Kahaloa made Oct 11 at 2014 5:37 PM

SFC Lloydwatkins Kahaloa — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:37:09 -0400

I entered into the Army at age 17. It was an All-Volunteer force then (1977).
I still believe (Call me Old fashion) If it an't broken, don't fix it. With that said and the situation of a cut in forces, I'd think that a Mandatory 2-Year service obligation for all citizens (both sexes) when they turn 18, is the path we may need to take, obviously.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 12 at 2014 12:09 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 12:09:50 -0400

In today's society with people that want something for nothing "Welfare State", I would rather have people to my left and right that want to be serving and not made to serve. I am not saying that we do not have people in our ranks currently that expect things to be given to them, but it is easy to spot those people and usually they can be weeded out early in their career. Besides some people are just not cut out for a military life style.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 12 at 2014 12:32 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 12:32:23 -0400

I'm really on a fence here. I think that an all volunteer force is the proper path for the Military. But with regards to the nation, I believe that a mandatory 2-year obligation is the best. Only because everyone in this nation could benefit from some of the fundamentals that the military teaches. If this were the path, there should be a distinction between the branches. For instance National Guard or Reserve units for conscripted folks and Regular Army (etc.) for career minded military members.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 12 at 2014 7:19 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:19:45 -0400

While mandatory service does have some benefits, overall I don't think it is a sustainable model.

On the other hand, the lack of a draft and the volunteer nature of the military, combined with the shrinking size of the military, is part of why our civilian leadership is willing to use the military so quickly, with no declaration of war or even congressional approval...because the bottom line is, most of America doesn't care. Most Americans don't even know someone currently serving, they haven't seen the cost of war in their taxes, and they aren't being forced to cut back on red meat or fresh vegetables. Basically, war costs the average American nothing. Institute mandatory service, and suddenly many more people have a vested interest in using military force. That creates a much stronger advocacy for the military in congress (both against using force arbitrarily and taking care of veterans when they return).

Unfortunately, I don't think we can sustain that model with our current manning and funding. Putting millions through basic training every year will require more facilities, more equipment, and most importantly, more people qualified to do the training. Where do we find enough people to do the training while continuing to support our ongoing operations around the world? Which career fields do we pull them from? Do we abbreviate the training given to MTIs in order to get enough of them to train our fresh recruits? Or do we give the compulsory service types abbreviated training, and put them through more rigorous training if they choose to re-enlist after the two-year mark?

Response by SSG William Patton made Oct 12 at 2014 9:43 PM

SSG William Patton — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 21:43:18 -0400

I think it would be good for all young people to serve in the military. It would teach valuable skills like working in a team, communcation, and they would learn self discipline. I watched my oldest son undergo a positive transformation from a green kid to a confident man. Prior to enlisting he was undisciplined and irresponsible and those qualities disappeared after his enlistment was over. I am not so naive the believe all who entered the military would go through a similar transformation, but many would and society would benefit greatly.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 13 at 2014 3:32 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 13 Oct 2014 03:32:37 -0400

I don't think it should necessarily be military service though. Perhaps send people to other forms of public service such as civil works (build/repair infrastructure such as roads), border patrol, or other pursuits.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 13 at 2014 7:06 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:06:24 -0400

i agree but disagree with this only because everyone to include political leaders would know what it is like to serve in today's military at the same time professionalism would go down but you will have a nation that is patriotic more than ever because everyone will have to serve at one point in time so the military will always have the general populations support

Response by SSG Maurice P. made Oct 13 at 2014 7:57 AM

SSG Maurice P. — Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:57:27 -0400

BACK IN THE DRAFTED ARMY YOU WERE EITHER (R.A)ENLISTED OR (U.S) DRAFTED IF YOU WERE DRAFTED THEY MESSED WITH YOU I SAW THAT AT THE ARMED FORCES ENTRANCE EXAMINATION STATION...LUCKILY I WAS GOING INTO THE MARINES BUT THEY EVEN DRAFTED BUT ONLY 5 TO MEET THERE MONTH END QUOTA

Response by SSG Ed Mikus made Oct 13 at 2014 11:57 AM

SSG Ed Mikus — Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:57:38 -0400

yes! but i feel we should take a hard look at the way some other nations do it. those serving their obligated time should be kept separate from the volunteers for the most part sorta like a different branch.

Response by SGT James S. made Oct 13 at 2014 12:02 PM

SGT James S. — Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:02:24 -0400

I think there should be some kind of mandatory service requirement but not necessarily restricted to solely military service. An option between military service or public service would be best.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 13 at 2014 12:25 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:25:42 -0400

I would have said yes, if it wasn’t for liberty… the government should not be able to force anyone to do something they don’t want to do. It would be nice if everyone joined the military or some form of civil service, give back to the system everyone uses and benefits from, but forcing service goes against everything the constitution stands for.

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made Oct 14 at 2014 3:01 PM

SPC Christopher Smith — Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:01:46 -0400

I voted for volunteer force, only because I do not believe everyone needs to do military duty. Some type of public service should be mandated, but I do not believe everyone should have to be in the military.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 14 at 2014 3:16 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:16:05 -0400

I strongly support an all-volunteer force because I want to be 100% sure that when things go south, the man or woman next me wants to be there. I don't want what is basically a draftee standing next to me whose only thought is how are they going to survive.

Response by SFC Stephen P. made Oct 14 at 2014 3:35 PM

SFC Stephen P. — Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:35:10 -0400

Other. I want absolutely no conscription.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2014 3:25 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 15:25:47 -0400

Though I personally believe we should for both genders that is not what should be done. Keep it as is--an all-volunteer force. Reasons being one: the budget we'er allotted, two: this generation (and those to come) are getting progressively more obese before they're even of age to enlist and would not be fit for service, three: younger citizens are becoming less and less capable of handling emotional strains because current and past generations coddle them to much so most wouldn't make the cut in basic training anyway. Let those who volunteer, that are willing to deal with the hardships and reap the rewards of their blood, sweat, and tears join. Only way to remain the best fighting force in the world is to accept the best--not everyone.

Response by SGT Frank Leonardo made Oct 18 at 2014 3:28 PM

SGT Frank Leonardo — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 15:28:49 -0400

I think it should stay the way it is. Only so many men and women can say yes I served my country and can be call Veterans and be thanked for the time they did. It is a honor and privileged to serve our country as far as I am concern that is why I served the USA. We could have mandatory for both sexes but I think it would cause issues for lots of people cause the service is not for certain people that honestly cant handle pressure cause I know the Marines and Army have that in boot for real. I am not knocking the other branches but for regular recruits they are the hardest. Having in open enlistment is good because at least people said they want to join maybe they change their minds after boot or a deployment but they raised their right hands and said they would just like we all did.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2014 4:30 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 16:30:44 -0400

mandatory male service. Mandatory Selective Service registration for all women.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2014 5:01 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 17:01:34 -0400

I wouldn't say mandatory military service, instead I would rather say mandatory civil service. Clearly some people are just incapable of being in the military. My brother-in-law for example has had a metal rod grafted to his spine since he was a child. He is still able to walk and work, but the strains of PT and rucking would be too much. However, doing civil service as a dispatcher or something else might be more beneficial. Also if civil service were to be mandatory then there should be some sort of compensation to all citizens who complete their service time, such as free higher education.

Response by PO2 Rocky Kleeger made Oct 18 at 2014 5:14 PM

PO2 Rocky Kleeger — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 17:14:20 -0400

I also think that anyone convicted of a gang related crime serve a mandatory 2-4 year tour, depending on the violation

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2014 5:49 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 17:49:04 -0400

i gotta say no just because i would rather have people by my side who want to be there instead of being there when they have too. i want to serve with real warriors not cannon fodder, i get the idea behind it but not everyone has the warrior mentality or just not ment to be in the military

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2014 6:19 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:19:33 -0400

I once thought mandatory service was a good thing to better prepare our youth. But after 14 years of active service, and seeing people come and go; not any more. People who volunteer (tho not all) have a sense of drive or ambition to be better than what they are. A desire to succeed. Mandatory service would do away with that. People just going thru the motions driving others crazy due to their laziness. Giving NCO's tons of extra paperwork just dealing with them. Wasting tax dollars to train them just to kick them back out. No! Stay with a volunteer force.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2014 7:52 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 19:52:02 -0400

I would go with a 3 year stint, because the 1st year trains the person, the 2nd year exercised the person's skills, and the 3rd year gives them experience, familiarity, and value to the experience of seeing other countries in contrast to the United States.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2014 11:38 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Oct 2014 23:38:35 -0400

There are few topics I feel as strongly about than mandatory service and conscription. Mandatory Service and conscription strip individuals of their freedom as they are forced indentured servitude. That is not what I volunteered to protect.

I don't understand why anyone would want to use the power of the state to force other people to live the way they think they should. If we are not free to live our own lives, make our own choices and choose poorly we are not free at all.

There are also negative impacts to conscription that I believe more than outweigh the positive aspects. Think of every young person in their 20s who is not in the military. Everything they do everything they accomplish and the taxes they pay would be wiped out by all the taxes it will now take to support them. Not everyone is ment to be in the military and maybe plenty of people live full productive lives without discipline and they don't want or need it.

If these policies were enacted I would resign.

Response by CPT Michael Moffeit made Oct 19 at 2014 12:05 AM

CPT Michael Moffeit — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 00:05:31 -0400

I think that for military service, it should remain voluntary. The goal should be quality over quantity, save for extreme cases. However, I do feel like a separate option would be to institute some form of civil service for everyone (male and female) to do for a couple of years. Volunteering through the Peace Corps, Red Cross, or other community/charity organization for a couple of consecutive summers would help broaden some horizons and hopefully get rid of the entitlement mentality a lot of people have.

Response by SGT Greg Gold made Oct 19 at 2014 12:14 AM

SGT Greg Gold — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 00:14:04 -0400

The last time the draft actually worked was the early 1960's. I've know numerous individuals from blue collar workers through doctors that all had the same story. You either enlisted, got drafted, or got a deferment to finish school. If your deferment was for education, you served as an officer. Everybody went because almost nobody got out of it.

Today there are too many whiners to make it work. I don't want a military made up of people who want to be anywhere else but here. They make shitty Soldiers, are constant UCMJ problems, and can't be counted on if they encounter s SHTF situation. We are better off without them.

Response by PFC Malik Rogers made Oct 19 at 2014 12:42 AM

PFC Malik Rogers — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 00:42:38 -0400

Mandatory public service at least.

Response by PO2 Jared Thomas made Oct 19 at 2014 1:21 AM

PO2 Jared Thomas — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 01:21:32 -0400

I personally think that everyone should do at least one enlistment. It was a great experience for me, and i wouldn't change a thing about it. Although, i do think it should not necessarily be mandatory, but instead heavily "suggested".

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Oct 19 at 2014 5:57 AM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 05:57:43 -0400

Non mandatory but more consideration for those who do, or atleast try. I once had someone tell me that my rights and oppions mean no more than anybody elses, including illegals (yes, a hard left winger). I told her being born here and 5 years defending your right to say that says otherwise.

Response by SSG Keven Lahde made Oct 19 at 2014 12:05 PM

SSG Keven Lahde — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:05:41 -0400

I think society as a whole would be better cause it would give individuals a sense of direction and meaning.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 12:09 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:09:21 -0400

I think mandatory service would be good for not only the country but for all of it's citizens. of course there would have to be deferments for college, but after college completing then a mandatory 2 years as an officer. Young people with not college aspiration would have a job to keep them off the streets and learn a skill at the same time, it's a win win for all. Some will object, and they can live somewhere else.

Response by SSG Keven Lahde made Oct 19 at 2014 12:59 PM

SSG Keven Lahde — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:59:45 -0400

I voted for Mandatory 2-year service for all citizens...why does it say different for??

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 2:29 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:29:12 -0400

Absolutely. Lets do this immediately.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Oct 19 at 2014 3:34 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 15:34:53 -0400

Works for Israel. My friends had to return to Israel before senior year to go to basic training for Military Intelligence. If not, they would have lost dual citizenship. I don't see any harm coming from a mere 2 year contract. It isn't like your life will be all over. Plenty of time to get on with your life if military service isn't for you. It will teach discipline, selfless service, leadership, etc etc. Also, if anyone gets uppity with your country, you have an entire "over 18" population of defenders. That alone is a deterrent for opposing nations.

Response by SSG Pete Fleming made Oct 19 at 2014 4:32 PM

SSG Pete Fleming — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 16:32:15 -0400

SGT (P) E.w. B., I am of two minds in this. We are a free society and should have the voluntary military as we do. The population is large enough to sustain the numbers with a draft (unless we return to a WWII sized conflict). So as such it is not right to make it mandatory.

However, I think every able bodied member of society should serve, at least in the reserves/national guard, regardless of social status. I do think it should be a consideration for citizenship and in lieu of smaller criminal offenses. (I know a lot of people don't like the 'go to war or jail' concept. Sometimes people make mistakes, sometimes they just need a way out or a little direction... and our prison system is overcrowded with nonsense anyway).

So If I were asked to vote, knowing my daughter would have to serve I would still vote for it, yes. But I completely understand why we don't have mandatory service and I would never go out of my way to push that issue. I think we have too many other issues that are far more pressing issues than forcing military service at this time.

However... I do like what Germany does. Either mandatory service or mandatory public/civil service. That I like. And that I would push for.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 6:22 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:22:17 -0400

We are not like Israel where we need the numbers at this point. We should stick to how it is now as we have issues now of people coming in that shouldn't be rather than opening up the pool of people that will potentially make it worse. Also, with numbers and funding be cut it is not needed at this time. If we ever did need it then open up to both men and women.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 7:37 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 19:37:55 -0400

Grateness

Response by 1SG David Niles made Oct 19 at 2014 7:57 PM

1SG David Niles — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 19:57:49 -0400

Part of being a free country is being free, telling someone they have to serve that country that gives them their freedom, kind of defeats the free thing, don't you think. Don't get me wrong, I think all able bodied young adults should serve their country, but that is not what I fought for.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 9:25 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:25:32 -0400

One word, unconstitutional. End of discussion.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 10:04 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 22:04:12 -0400

I do NOT nor will ever support any type of law making military service mandatory regardless of the overall time. As much as I would love to see all youth serve for a couple years after high school, I would never force such an idea on others. I am a staunch conservative and support true freedom. If a person is not freely willing to serve then that is on them.

Response by 1SG Rich Martinez made Oct 19 at 2014 10:11 PM

1SG Rich Martinez — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 22:11:22 -0400

I like the mandatory two year service but spread it out to public service not just the military.

Response by PO1 Rick Serviss made Oct 20 at 2014 3:24 AM

PO1 Rick Serviss — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 03:24:10 -0400

That means every criminal would have to serve. I guess it would be ok if you don't mind sleeping with 1 eye open.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2014 7:15 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 07:15:32 -0400

Great topic!

Response by Cpl George Goodwin made Oct 20 at 2014 7:42 AM

Cpl George Goodwin — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 07:42:48 -0400

We are doing very well with an all volunteer service. Making mandatory service may further limit those who wish to make military service their career.

Response by LTC Joseph Gross made Oct 20 at 2014 11:31 AM

LTC Joseph Gross — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 11:31:23 -0400

I don't see any benefit to turning back the clock on our professional military. I approve of the possibility of a national conscription should it become militarily necessary. But for that to be the case, we're talking about a war with China or the Martians. In those cases I only support the draft as it was intended which is to fill out the manpower "of our most numerous branches". That means filling out combat arms services which should exclude women. Women should be included in the less well known medical professional call up should we not be able to meet those needs by only calling up male medical professionals.

Response by LTC Charles Sherman made Oct 20 at 2014 12:39 PM

LTC Charles Sherman — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 12:39:07 -0400

Having been around the military during the last years of the Draft, and having discussed this many times with my father who lived with it, my answer is NO.

Draftees are by definition unwilling soldiers. Unwilling soldiers will rarely attain the skill level and commitment that we currently achieve in our volunteer force. The fact is, despite the dirtbags that occupy much of our time and attention, the overall American military is the best educated, most intelligent, most technically savvy, and most capable in the world today. Few of us would find a drop-off in that ability to be acceptable, and compulsory service would cause such a drop-off.

Compulsory service or a draft would inevitably have exceptions built into it, for education, fitness, family situations, etc. The best qualified candidates would quickly learn to manipulate those exceptions, while the less capable would not. Thus, compulsory service would actually reduce the raw potential of the recruits it gathers. Without a national service system that found a place to counter every possible exception, this would be unavoidable.

Another issue is numbers. The American military is smaller now than it has been in many years. Short of a declared war, this is unlikely to change much over the next decade or two. We already recruit less than 5% of the potential pool of enlistees in any given year, so what do with do with twenty times that number who will be pulled in by compulsory service? They all need to be fed, and housed, and paid, and even a pittance would be hugely expensive.

Popularity would also be an issue with compulsory service, especially if draftees were to die in an overseas conflict.

The most important question is what problem are we trying to solve here? Although it can be a challenge in some years and career fields, we meet most recruiting goals each year with volunteers, so manpower isn't the problem. Even during the Vietnam War, more soldiers volunteered than were drafted, and far fewer draftees served in combat than volunteers. If a citizenship "qualification" is desired (a la Heinlein), then it needn't be compulsory to do so.

Compulsory service is a good concept for a smaller country where their military is short-handed if everyone doesn't serve, but the US is beyond that.

Response by Sgt Jerry Rue made Oct 20 at 2014 1:14 PM

Sgt Jerry Rue — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 13:14:55 -0400

I guess I am just Old School, and also see the importance of a young man serving his country with a minimum of 2 yrs. obligagionl. After I finished my tour with the Marine Corps I became a Houston police officer. Not to tell everyone my history, but to say that we could see the difference in the young men who served and the one's who didn't. A young man who does a tour learnes two things the he may or may not have learned at home. Disipline and Respect,not only to others but for him self also.
As for the women, I think it should be volunteer, and not on the front lines.
I know from experience what having a woman with you on the line. Now they may be able to handle themselves, but it is human nature for the male to worry about her safety, and that my friend weakens your line. I know because I worried about my female partner in a very dangerous situation and liked to have exposed who we were, which would possibly gotten us both killed. That was the last time I excepted a female partner.
Semper Fi, Sgt. Jerry Rue.

Response by CPO Rick Felty made Oct 20 at 2014 1:22 PM

CPO Rick Felty — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 13:22:33 -0400

For all illegal immigrants, once you turn 18and older serve in our military for 4 years and earn your citizenship after you get an HONORABLE discharge. For those too old you will do 4 years of community service, the with no. Criminal violations you will be considered for. Citizenship.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2014 1:24 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 13:24:12 -0400

Mandatory service in some capacity should be considered. Local public works or community involvement. One nice aspect of our educations system is for High school student to graduate they are required to have 200 hours of volunteer service. I think some type of intern system would work, but not in the military.

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made Oct 20 at 2014 1:44 PM

COL Jean (John) F. B. — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 13:44:52 -0400

I believe that there should be a mandatory 2-year service obligation, but not necessarily only military service.

Although, at this point, I believe the mandatory obligation should be male only, I believe that, if women want all the same rights and privileges of men, they should have a mandatory obligation, as well. Can't have it both ways...

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2014 4:00 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 16:00:44 -0400

If it turned into a mandatory 2 service obligation i think that would fail, just due to its not made for everyone, in the long run we will have wasted man hours trying to make them into something good for the military. Will some get it yes and it might be good, others will probably cry, whine, complain and oh why me and soo on...So this would be the down fall.....Haveing a volunteer force allows us to train the ones that want to be here...

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2014 6:12 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 18:12:35 -0400

I think two years of mandatory service after High School would be beneficial - to the individuals and the country as a whole. First hand (hands-on) interaction with foreign cultures and environments will broaden their awareness of the current state of the world and give them a much better appreciation of life here in the United States. Plus, for some it could give them the structure they need and others would benefit from learning a job skill (not talking about basic military training - but specific jobs that have civilian counterparts) this would provide the United States with a more knowledgeable work force for those that got out after the two years. Sure, there are always Pro's and Con's to both side of the issue - but I think the benefits would out shine the negative's.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2014 11:38 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:38:26 -0400

Has anyone yet addressed how this would be paid for? The U.S. Military has been hemorrhaging personnel for the last three years, due to the fact that Uncle Sammy couldn't afford a force that topped out at a mere 2% of the U.S. population. If we couldn't afford to keep the people who were dying to stay in the Service, then how on earth would we afford to keep them in...along with everybody else?

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2014 4:09 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:09:42 -0400

Other countries have this implemented, I think it would instill a lot of what many young men and women lack these days. Motivation, responsibility, accountability and pride in their country. There are plenty of young people out there that have these qualities already, but I think it will also keep a lot of them form taking a wrong path later in life.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2014 4:22 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:22:22 -0400

I would support this. I have always believed that everyone should at the least bo through basic training if not a 2 year commitment. At the very least it would teach people to be respectful and courteous, asses their aptitudes, and teach them a skill to transition into the work force.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2014 7:18 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 19:18:20 -0400

No. The reason we have an effective military is because we are an all-volunteer force. Forcing everyone to serve would only bring even more socio-economic flaws into the military (I.E., wealthy teens would either go straight into officer training or be exempt all together, whereas deprived youth would be forced to serve from the bottom). Corruption in the military would overflow; when 3/4 of those serving don't want to be there, the ways they will manipulate the system would shock you.

Also it takes the wonder and honor of military service out of the picture- it wouldn't be young men wanting to break the enemy lines, it would be young men being forced to break the enemy lines... well, I guess it worked at Stalingrad, along with the highest casualties of the war.

To conclude, the military is just fine the way it is. Let the nasty civilians stay the way they are, and let the men and women that actually want to serve do just that.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2014 7:22 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 19:22:02 -0400

While it seems to work in places like Israel - I think that today's youth would turn that experiment into a disaster! The sense of entitlement that I have seen over the past decade from youngsters is only getting worse. Not a good mix with military service in my humble opinion.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2014 9:09 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 21:09:59 -0400

One word, unconstitutional.

Response by MSgt Roger Lalik made Oct 21 at 2014 9:37 PM

MSgt Roger Lalik — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 21:37:20 -0400

One of the things that resulted from the draft was high school kids learned to make quality decisions about their life and future. Don't worry about the "quality" of those forced to serve. For the most part. They'll be just fine.

Today, too many of our youth find deciding between video games and cruising the local Sonic drive in to be their tough one for the week. They need to be trained up to make good quality decisions about their life and the rewards of following through or the consequences of not.

As for both men and women... Ladies you wanted in, so welcome.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2014 1:31 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Oct 2014 01:31:22 -0400

I rather serve with men and women who want to serve not foxed to. Cause then I know who I can trust.

Response by SGT Ronald Creech made Oct 22 at 2014 7:27 PM

SGT Ronald Creech — Wed, 22 Oct 2014 19:27:20 -0400

A minimum2 year service obligation would eliminate retention problems to stay with. Also it would get kia or of there parents house so they can see the world. I was in for 3 years before i was even deployed. Another plus side is they would have the option to buy into the gi bill. I strongly believe that if the kid doesn't go directly to college then the kid should go to the military or some forum of public service like the fire dept, police dept, etc

Response by SGT Scott Curtice made Oct 23 at 2014 1:20 PM

SGT Scott Curtice — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 13:20:25 -0400

I actually would support it, sacrifice for your country, build up many that need it, but it would hurt us if we are holding up great minds from college, and does anyone really think the uber rich would allow their family members to serve? Don't get me wrong, I had a few uber rich kids in my units, some better, some worse than the rest. In the end, I don't think it's possible, it'd be a mess, with trainees dropping left and right, think for the sake of the military it's best to stay all volunteer.

Response by TSgt Jaclyn Brittain made Oct 23 at 2014 5:00 PM

TSgt Jaclyn Brittain — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 17:00:26 -0400

The reason I say this is because it will cost far too much. Taxes will raise then.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2014 5:10 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 17:10:55 -0400

I think this would be a good thing for our country overall. We have too many people in America today that just don't understand what it means to be in the military. All they see are lone-wolf super Rambos on movies and TV and think that is what its all about. They don't understand why it takes multiple years to fully accomplish a mission and they really don't understand why a lot of veterans have PTSD and other issues. Again it goes back to them seeing super-soldiers on TV who kill tons of people yet never have any problems. I also think doing mandatory service would help restore some of the lost patriotism in this country.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2014 7:11 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 19:11:11 -0400

NEVER! An all-volunteer force is the way to be in this democratic free world of ours. God forbid I have to manage kids whom the government dragged into military by the ears!

My older brother did a mandatory 2 year 'sentence' in the Russian army upon turning 18, still haunted by it. Not here, not in USA, please!

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2014 8:09 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 20:09:48 -0400

If you want federal grants for college you need to earn them. Seems to work for other countries.

Response by PO1 Michael G. made Oct 23 at 2014 8:19 PM

PO1 Michael G. — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 20:19:42 -0400

It is one of my firmest beliefs that freedom is, despite what many believe, free. What I mean by this is that it is not a privilege that is earned as a reward for services rendered, and it is certainly not a government construct. Human beings have the right to be free. Obviously, history tells a story of the countless many who violated the freedom of others through fear or force. For example, in Nazi Germany or even in pre-Civil War America, there were groups of people who were denied freedom, but that didn't make them less human or less entitled to the natural right to be free.

To that end, I believe that mandatory service, especially in the military, is a violation of the founding principles of America which state that our fundamental rights to freedom are ones that endowed as part of Creation, not by state permit.

Response by SGT(P) Harry Clyde Jr. made Oct 23 at 2014 8:21 PM

SGT(P) Harry Clyde Jr. — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 20:21:45 -0400

Everyone should serve in some capacity. CIvil Service, Peace Corp etc. WHAT is 2 years of a lifetime?
Sometimes the best or worst of your life. But at least you can say you did it.
I help my predecessors in Georgia through House of Heros. Volunteer my time often. Serving public saftey and former/ retired military is serving. And the stories they tell, youll learn something!

Response by LCpl Rick Ponton made Oct 24 at 2014 3:18 AM

LCpl Rick Ponton — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 03:18:49 -0400

I DO NOT LIKE IT WHEN VOLUNTEER MILITARY GETS WOUNDED OR KIA AND I THINK SOMETIMES THE DRAFT WILL START BECAUSE GOD IS ANGRY AND THE SCUM CAN GET WASHED AND CLEANSED IN OUR MILITARY AND LEARN TO LOVE THE USA THE WAY PEOPLE WHO VOLUNTEER DO

Response by MSG Chuck Pewsey made Oct 24 at 2014 4:02 AM

MSG Chuck Pewsey — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 04:02:09 -0400

The draftees provided interesting viewpoints, sometimes pointed out the silly crap a careerist might not - some of those things are gone now as a result. One of my officers bemoaned that we didn't get the college kids in any more (not long after the all vol started). They were used to writing essays, etc, and he could rough out what he wanted written, give it to them and forget about it until the polished result showed up on his desk, correctly spelled, punctuated and in the right format on the right form. (The volunteer clerk we had at the time might have had something to do with his musings.)
I don't think an army composed of people who all entered at age 18 is a good idea either. Some older enlistees bring in more experience and a different outlook.

Response by Cpl Joshua Wehrman made Oct 24 at 2014 11:17 AM

Cpl Joshua Wehrman — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 11:17:27 -0400

I am not even going to try to read all 107 responses thus far but I think it is a terrible idea to say the least the the military is not for most ppl and when I was training the rock marines in South Korea (who have a manditory enlistment) so many ppl were suicide risks that they had to account for every single round and peice of brass on our ranges because the risk was so high this is just one of the incredible risks associated with this

Response by LCpl Antoinette Coy made Dec 11 at 2014 2:38 PM

LCpl Antoinette Coy — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 14:38:09 -0500

It should be mandatory for both it sure would straighten out a large percentage of them. Maybe even keep out of jail.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 11 at 2014 2:53 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 14:53:00 -0500

I think Mandatory 2 year service obligation- Unless they have an acceptance into a University but after college they must serve 2 years in some type of GOV civil service job.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 11 at 2014 3:00 PM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 15:00:32 -0500

Hind site is 20/20. Knowing what I know now, I would absolutely be all for mandatory 2 year military service. I feel the military, no matter what branch you enlist in would offer our youth a solid foundation for entering adulthood. Especially the young men and women that come from under privileged and broken homes. Preaching to the preacher here, but think about most at 18yr old. Establishing a bank account, balancing a budget, potentially paying rent for an apartment, paying bills, car payment and insurance. I learned all of this by entering the service. Don't get me wrong, it's not for everyone and I understand that, but I would venture to say it's probably a great opportunity for at least half. Very good question, I'm glad you asked it SGT. E. w. B.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Dec 11 at 2014 3:33 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 15:33:31 -0500

Change that to Mandatory service , be it military or public service as a dog catcher, ambulance driver, ER worker, city park cleaning crew.. Then yes, service to ones country as an obligatory thing I would go with.
Military service obligation? No

Response by 1LT Keith Gannon made Dec 11 at 2014 3:44 PM

1LT Keith Gannon — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 15:44:37 -0500

I have a lot of friends in the Nordic countries where military/public service is mandatory for young males. Their societies have lower crime rates, higher education, and higher income across the board. They also have higher alcoholism and depression, so it's hard to say what you can attribute to what lol.

I would be a fan of 6-12 months of military training & non-deployable service for all young adults who do not enter the work force or seek higher education.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 12 at 2014 12:45 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 12 Dec 2014 12:45:01 -0500

No one should be considered a citizen until they have served their country according to their ability and the nation's needs.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 12 at 2014 1:02 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 12 Dec 2014 13:02:12 -0500

I would not support mandatory military service, but I would support a mandatory public service, similar to what Germany has established.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2014 4:55 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 29 Dec 2014 16:55:08 -0500

With some of the soldiers I've had to work with, who VOLUNTEERED to be in, I don't want to have to think about dealing with guys who DIDN'T!

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Jan 22 at 2015 7:27 AM

SGT Jim Z. — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 07:27:09 -0500

I vote to continue the current all-volunteer force but with a stipulation that all able body me and women register for the draft. I do not agree that males who fail to register for the draft cannot receive Federal Financial Aid but a female in the current system does.

Response by MSgt Daniel Harrison made Jan 22 at 2015 7:34 AM

MSgt Daniel Harrison — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 07:34:15 -0500

Yes, I think this country's youth would be better equipped to handle themselves in society if they did two years of military service after graduating High School. They would have more respect for what this country stands for and the freedoms they enjoy.

Response by LTC Scott O'Neil made Jan 22 at 2015 8:29 AM

LTC Scott O'Neil — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 08:29:30 -0500

I believe mandatory military service for citizens once they turn 18 is best for this country. They provide security and continuity in the Armed service incase this country is attacked and requires an immediate recall to service.

Response by CSM David Heidke made Jan 22 at 2015 10:10 AM

CSM David Heidke — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:10:52 -0500

I have enough of a headache trying to get volunteers to comply with Military life, I can imagine the ulcers I would get dealing with conscripts.

Response by PO1 Jason Taylor made Jan 22 at 2015 10:15 AM

PO1 Jason Taylor — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:15:54 -0500

I think it's a great idea! It will help put today's youth on the right path. I think it's time for more Americans to start to earn some of the rights they abuse and take advantage of.

Response by Sgt Sherry Taylor-Bruce made Jan 22 at 2015 11:12 AM

Sgt Sherry Taylor-Bruce — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:12:06 -0500

I think it's time for the youth of today to start giving back instead of having their hands out. I also believe a service commitment should be for Men AND Women.

Why should Women get a pass on serving their country? What better training for future employment for our youth not to mention a little discipline.

This is REAL work for the Free College the President wants to provide.

Response by SGT James Elphick made Jan 22 at 2015 1:37 PM

SGT James Elphick — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 13:37:19 -0500

I posted this separate but it is relevant here as well

http://www.wearethemighty.com/stanley-mcchrystal-americans-draft-plan-2015-01

Gen. Stanley McChrystal Has A Plan For All Young Americans To Serve Their Country

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons It all started with a question. In the summer of 2012, Gen. Stanley McChrystal was wrapping up an onstage conversation at t

Response by Sgt Sherry Taylor-Bruce made Jan 22 at 2015 6:51 PM

Sgt Sherry Taylor-Bruce — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:51:39 -0500

I think the implementation would take a lot of "tweaking" but a manditory two or three year service commitment to the Reserves or National Guard with the option of Active Duty for all men and women after age 18 would be a workable solution. Obviously convicted felons would not be included in the mainstream plan but work camps would be an option for them.

Just imagine how many improvements to infrastructure could be made by guard and Reserve units, not to mention skills gained during the time of service. I know it sounds a little like socialism but it might keep some people out of jail or unemployment or welfare lines.

The majority of full time Active Duty could remain unchanged meaning men and women would still volunteer for this.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2015 10:42 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 Jan 2015 22:42:58 -0500

I'm a patriot to the bone. I joined the military because I feel the need to serve my country and because I felt that it was the best path for me to follow. However I do not feel that people who would be un comfortable, or those who are not quite as patriotic should be forced to join. Even if they are not given a combat related job it would still take away the honor of volunteering to join the service. That being said we still have the draft available for severe war-time situations.

Response by SSG William Patton made Jan 28 at 2015 12:35 PM

SSG William Patton — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:35:43 -0500

I support a mandatory service obligation for all citizens. Our youth today need a mechanism to build self discipline and they are not getting it at home or in schools like my generation did.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Jan 28 at 2015 12:54 PM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:54:27 -0500

A mandatory service obligation, with military service as just one of several options, might be a net positive for our nation in the long run. I would offer several options including the Peace Corps, a Forestry/Park Service, a Border Service, and a Conservation/Infrastructure Corps.

- Not everyone is suited to military service, and we do not want those who would hate themselves and the rest of us for their 2 years (or 1 year if overseas).
- The service obligation would reduce the gap between public at large and military perceptions of foreign affairs and policy
- Service obligation would broaden the perspective, regardless of the path chosen
- Would grow a skilled labor workforce
- Would enhance border security, upgrade & maintain roads/rails/bridges infrastructure, maintain forests and park lands
- Broader perspectives and labor skills would have tremendous positive 2nd and 3rd order effects on voting patterns, foreign policy, and industrial capacity

Response by MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2015 1:03 PM

MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:03:33 -0500

Easy no. For one, we cannot afford it. But, more importantly, it would dilute the ranks. Leaders would spend more time dealing with forced entrants rather than fostering the volunteers to become better.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2015 10:42 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 10:42:27 -0500

No, I would not support it. Prior to becoming a recruiter for the Air Force, I was completely behind the idea of a mandatory service obligation. However, considering how may individuals were disqualified on a daily basis, in order to made it mandatory, we would have to lower our standards.

However, I do completely support this: "With 1 caveat, doesn't have to be military but some type of civil service instead if they choose",as Maj Petrarca stated.

Response by SPC Elijah J. Henry, MBA made Mar 22 at 2015 8:50 AM

SPC Elijah J. Henry, MBA — Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:50:44 -0400

I believe that we should leave the military as all-volunteer.

I also believe that we need to revitalize the Constitutional Militia, with enrollment, mustering, equipment, and training requirements starting at age 16.

The Constitutional Militia is the single most neglected and misunderstood institution in our Republic, even though it is the only thing that the Constitution specifically says is "necessary" for anything, and that for "the security of a free State."

Response by SSgt Dan Montague made Mar 22 at 2015 10:03 AM

SSgt Dan Montague — Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:03:46 -0400

Years ago I thought it would be a good Idea. Not now. Sgt Erin Wilkins spells it to perfectly.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 27 at 2015 7:55 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 27 May 2015 19:55:53 -0400

I voted to keep our current system, but if it did come to mandatory service, everyone should go.

Response by MAJ Keira Brennan made May 28 at 2015 5:19 PM

MAJ Keira Brennan — Thu, 28 May 2015 17:19:46 -0400

Public service for conscientious (sp?) objectors. Men and women. Offer a good junior college/university stipend.

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Jun 13 at 2015 11:55 PM

LTC Kevin B. — Sat, 13 Jun 2015 23:55:07 -0400

No, I don't like this idea. While I think it does someone a lot of good to serve their country, it's not the military's role to teach America's youth how to be upstanding, responsible, patriotic citizens. In my opinion, that is the parents' and the individual's responsibility.

Response by SSG William Patton made Jun 18 at 2015 12:16 PM

SSG William Patton — Thu, 18 Jun 2015 12:16:57 -0400

I support all citizens performing some type of mandatory service. It does not have to be in the military, but it does need to have a regimented structure where the citizen learns how to operate within a team environment and learn self discipline. I know, despite going to war, that military service benefitted me and helped mold me into the citizen I am today. If nothing else, I learned how to cope with the difficulties life has thrown at me.

Response by SGT Robert Hawks made Jun 24 at 2015 6:57 PM

SGT Robert Hawks — Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:57:26 -0400

Yes to both questions

Response by SFC Stephen King made Jun 25 at 2015 7:42 AM

SFC Stephen King — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 07:42:55 -0400

I would like it but it is not a feeble action in today's society. Instead revamp the current selective service system to include females 18yrs of age.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Jul 8 at 2015 3:31 PM

LCpl Mark Lefler — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 15:31:39 -0400

Dont want people to be there who dont want to be there.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Jul 8 at 2015 3:39 PM

SrA Edward Vong — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 15:39:42 -0400

Does that mean everyone gets a mandatory GI Bill, TA, benefits, pay. Sounds like a lot of government spending for people who don't even want to be there.

Mandatory guard or reserve sounds like a better idea, but I'm still against that as well.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Jul 8 at 2015 3:44 PM

MSG Brad Sand — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 15:44:27 -0400

In this Nation today? 2 year Mandatory Service would be fulfilled handing bottle of water to illegals coming across the border and the only out cry would be because of the plastic bottle they were handing out the water in. The Nation has gone so far off the tracks that I fear what is going to happen when things start swinging back the other way.

Well, since I answered no, then no to women too BUT if one is calling for mandatory service and they think it should be only apply to men...well then they are a misandrist...or misogynist depending on if they hate men or women...but a bigot either way.

Response by SFC Brian Barnes made Jul 8 at 2015 7:17 PM

SFC Brian Barnes — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 19:17:05 -0400

mandatory three year obligation, with an overseas deployment.

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Jul 8 at 2015 7:36 PM

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 19:36:45 -0400

In my opinion supporting DUTY HONOR COUNTRY at 18 will entice patriotism among Americans and make it a better Nation for all.

Response by CSM Darin Smith made Jul 8 at 2015 7:55 PM

CSM Darin Smith — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 19:55:22 -0400

I think all citizens of the males gender should have a 2 year obligation to serve the Armed Forces of the United States after completion of high school or receiving there GED.

Response by SPC Margaret Higgins made Jul 8 at 2015 10:38 PM

SPC Margaret Higgins — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 22:38:05 -0400

No, but I would support mandatory service for citizens once they turned 18; if they volunteered to help this country out- in general. They could work in an environmental field, helping the disabled and disadvantaged, helping the poor, helping the uneducated (tutoring), helping the elderly (the lonely, the sick, the injured, the weak, the shut-ins, the dying.), and they could help with any number of things: meal planning, finances (budgeting), etc.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jul 8 at 2015 10:39 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 22:39:01 -0400

I was reluctant to get behind the all-volunteer force when first proposed. However, time and experience have proven beyond all doubt that my concerns were not justified. (Sadly, I learned that I am not as prescient as I once thought.)

Yes, we need to register young men (and women?) for the draft. Any threat requiring massed armies will develop slowly enough to build, train, organize, and equip a large force. What we need are highly trained, motivated, and well-led special forces to respond to the real threats that dominate our world today - principally terrorism. The all-volunteer force deals with that.

However, I must add that I would like to see Civil Defense re-established to recruit, train, equip, and organize civilian teams to deal with emergencies (natural and man-made disasters). I never again want to see news videos of people sitting on their roofs waiting for big brother to come rescue them...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2015 3:46 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 03:46:15 -0400

Absolutely it would teach discipline and respect

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Jul 9 at 2015 3:51 AM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 03:51:51 -0400

Can I imagine working with someone who not only does not want to serve but was forced to serve? What about giving someone who hates the military, and hates the government training they can use against me later? Maybe I am what if-ing this too much but, we live in a democratic society and once we force people to join the military we are moving away from that.

Response by SGT Roberto Mendoza-Diaz made Jul 9 at 2015 7:51 PM

SGT Roberto Mendoza-Diaz — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 19:51:06 -0400

Yes to both questions.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2015 7:52 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 19:52:06 -0400

Our service in the armed forces is an honor and commitment that should remain for those committed to the job and volunteer to make the choice. I disagree that it is a sacrifice because I choose to serve and no one makes me put on the uniform. It is of my own free will, choice, and pride.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jul 9 at 2015 7:54 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 19:54:11 -0400

Actually, I wanted an "other" choice. I am all for mandatory IET for all citizens once they turn 18. Only folks who volunteer to serve further will go to AIT. We don't need (or can afford) a conscripted force. Having all citizens undergo IET could include not only military skills but citizenship and civics instruction. Provides the US a true trained reserve pool to pull from as well as give kids a real sense that they are enfranchised members of our society.

Response by PO1 Michael G. made Jul 10 at 2015 2:19 AM

PO1 Michael G. — Fri, 10 Jul 2015 02:19:04 -0400

Truthfully, I am one who believes that, despite popular sentiment, freedom is, actually free. I am not saying that the sacrifices that countless service members before me have made.

However, I am of the mind that, as our Declaration of Independence states, our rights are inalienable and endowed by our Creator. I say this from a philosophical point of view: freedom cannot be gained or lost, given nor taken. It belongs to all people, and for the US to re-codify obligitory service, I feel, would go against the notion of what freedom actually *is*

Response by SPC Margaret Higgins made Jul 10 at 2015 10:45 PM

SPC Margaret Higgins — Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:45:18 -0400

Yes, women should be included.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 6:44 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:44:05 -0500

Part of me says yes. But the other part says we deal with enough people that don't have the heart for it and are just here for the free college to deal with.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 6:46 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:46:53 -0500

I don't think that all citizens should have to serve. I do believe that anyone who has the power to make decision that effect the military ( the president for example) should have to serve before being able to be in those positions of power so they better understand the impact that their decisions have on others

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 6:47 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:47:25 -0500

Yes! But, not necessarily in the military...some form of government service, taking into consideration each person isn't fully capable of military service. There's a lot to do out there, everyone needs to help out...in my opinion, you shouldn't be able to vote until you've done so.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 6:47 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:47:35 -0500

I feel that the reason we are THE BEST is because for the most part we are made up of volunteers. I love the fact that I work next to a battle buddy that wants to be there as much as I do!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 6:49 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:49:29 -0500

No way. Think of how bad the soldiers would be. We have enough problems with the ones that join willingly and unknowingly find out that they have to follow simple directions imagine if we forced them the excuses would be uncanny.

Response by SSG Kelly Ferguson made Jan 7 at 2016 6:54 PM

SSG Kelly Ferguson — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:54:59 -0500

Yes they should just for professional development, hopefully it will help with a mind set

Response by Cpl Nick Morales made Jan 7 at 2016 7:23 PM

Cpl Nick Morales — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 19:23:08 -0500

To serve in the military through conscription is the wrong way. However, having citizens do some kind of civil service upon graduation I could understand and more genuinely accept. Having the nation give back in way more than just military service will ideally rebuild unity within and a sense of belonging and respect for the country. Military service isn't for everybody and conscription will lead to a drop in effectiveness in comparison to the volunteer model.

Response by SSgt Henry Phillips made Jan 7 at 2016 8:15 PM

SSgt Henry Phillips — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:15:46 -0500

No. Most countries have gone away from compulsory service. History teaches us well that conscripted forces usually do not form a quality military even with professional members leading them. We should stay an all volunteer force. It's what our current and historical socioeconomic trends suggest.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Jan 7 at 2016 8:28 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:28:02 -0500

I believe no. Requiring everyone to serve means doing so is compulsory. When one is forced to serve, it ceases to be "service", and instead, becomes " servitude ". In actuality we would be turning every 18-20 year old into a slave, adding 4 million every year... (8 million at any given time).
"Servitude: a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life". Regards

Response by SSG Todd Halverson made Jan 7 at 2016 8:29 PM

SSG Todd Halverson — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:29:41 -0500

Making it a requirement is not a good idea. It would greatly degrade the effectiveness of our Military. Being an all-volunteer force has made us one the best militaries in the world. You know that the person next to will have your back and you have their back. We have people here who really want to be here. Yes, we have some that do a short enlistment, but that is because they have discovered the military life was not the lifestyle for them. I would rather have people who want to be there.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 8:32 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:32:03 -0500

I thought that same thought, but then what would make us any diffent then the Korean's or other dictatorship countrys that have a mandatory service obligation?

How about this??
1- Soldiers earn Citizenship after honerable 2 year term or longer.
2- Everyone is a resident untill a citizen
3- Only citizens can take a political office
4- Every citizen is required to vote, and there are no more college electorial votes.
6- citizens are in a lower tax bracket and exempt from others, residents pay majority of the tax.
7- Enlistment to service (no more Army, Airforce, Marine or Navy) standards are hightend to 90+ AFQT, no moral waivers... No waivers granted, for anything. You decide to enlist, you ship the next day.

Yep, sounds like a move?!? Its Starship Troopers.

I'll vote for that proposition everyday.

Response by SSG Leevon Leggins II made Jan 7 at 2016 9:09 PM

SSG Leevon Leggins II — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 21:09:51 -0500

I think it is a good idea. Having served in the military can for some be a good life start or a change for the better. I have also seen both the pros and cons of this ideal. All personnel that serve can also be added to the reserve roles or other facets of civil service.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 9:25 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 21:25:32 -0500

Yes, but in if they are not enrolled into college.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2016 9:29 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 21:29:03 -0500

This will only do us good with the probability of some staying after the 2yrs, and the ones that don't get to assist in making American civilian population a better one for the most part.

Response by SSG Lenzie Bailey made Jan 8 at 2016 1:14 AM

SSG Lenzie Bailey — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 01:14:00 -0500

Yes they should! To include in potential presidential candidate!!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 8 at 2016 12:44 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 12:44:12 -0500

Probably unpopular, but I like the system in Starship Troopers (the book, not the movie). You're not a citizen unless you enlist. People that enlist (supposedly) understand sacrifice and the greater good because they are willing to die for it.

More to it, but you get the idea.

Response by SPC Dee Bartlett made Jan 8 at 2016 12:48 PM

SPC Dee Bartlett — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 12:48:04 -0500

If you get out of high school without a sustainable skill and you're not going to college, yes - your ass needs to go in the military to get skills and training because whatever you did during your twelve years in school previously obviously want enough.

Response by Cpl David Smith made Jan 8 at 2016 5:11 PM

Cpl David Smith — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 17:11:43 -0500

I use to think so, but this generation is too soft and they are infecting it bad enough with the volunteers.

Response by SSG Robert Spina made Jan 8 at 2016 5:45 PM

SSG Robert Spina — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 17:45:45 -0500

IT WOULD BENEFIT OUR CITIZENS BUT WOULD BE COSTLY

Response by PVT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 8 at 2016 8:56 PM

PVT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 20:56:54 -0500

With the amount of volunteers in all branches of our military, I don't think making two year mandatory service is the best option. The choice to choose one's own path is ultimately the foundation that makes our country great. I've had friends that I graduated HS with that went to college but couldn't make anything for themselves but after a while they decided to join the military and I'm pleased to say that all of them are doing great and climbing up...the sky is only the limits when someone voluntarily choose their own path in life rather than grudgingly doing it because they must.

Response by PO1 Melody Wenz made Jan 9 at 2016 3:54 PM

PO1 Melody Wenz — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 15:54:31 -0500

If anything, it should be a requirement for the President to have served at LEAST 2 years.

Response by CPL Joseph Montgonery made Jan 11 at 2016 4:25 PM

CPL Joseph Montgonery — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:25:29 -0500

I'm of two minds on this and before anyone comments let me explain. I Grew up military during the draft years. I met some great soldiers and when I enlisted ( just as my father did in 56) I was going to make it a career. I soon realized that the upper ranks were filled by those who during Vietnam were sent off to schools and a advance courses. Not because they were good soldiers but because their commanders and sgts knew they would get other killed! I even discussed this with my father who was a retired 1st Sgt. He heartily agreed as it was his assessment also. I got out but still used my experiences to shape who I am today. When I became a teacher (history) I always held up mandatory service as a way to make people grow up. Get out.of mommy and daddy's house and become responsible. That all changed as I have interacted with today's soldiers. Don't get me wrong there are some that I would gladly storm the gates of hell with a mouthful of gasoline with. Yet those are few and far between. Watching the trainees boo hoo and cry and show stress cards and be insubordinate grates on me. There is no esprit de corps, there is no effective leadership. People are coddled and babied. I no longer expouse joining the military. Mostly because it's become a social experiment rather than a fighting force. That's not to say we don't have one but there is no longer the sense of community there once was. Housing is segregated by mos, there is no mingling of soldier from different military backgrounds. Military installations now mirror outside civilian communities or look like the replaces back home.
Now whole units are deployed which while it looks good on the surface actually hinders the assimilation of various troops and ultimately different backgrounds. Individuals used to rotate in and out of deployment as individuals as needs arose. What I see now is a close minded society tat doesn't even associate with members with its own command.
When I went in in 79 there were still draftees who found their nitch in the military. For some they were given the choice military or jail. Others were drafted without having a choice which branch they served in. Every war we have ever been involved in was fought by a combination of draftees and volunteers up until tender post Vietnam era. History is still being written on this experiment but for me and what I see and have lived and experienced I would say making military service mandatory would cause some liberal to have a heart attack. God forbid that their son or daughter now be subject to being called up for service. Yet I know for a fact that a lot of people will never reach their full potential unless tested, lead and forced to confront themselves. To do that means that the military has to get back to its roots meaning get realizing that although they have a place within the civil and community ultimately they are a society unto themselves. They CAN function without any help or input from the civilian community and that to make a soldier it is sometimes necessary to not worry if you hurt their feelings or they feel bad about themselves.

Response by PO3 David Fries made Jan 12 at 2016 4:51 AM

PO3 David Fries — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 04:51:35 -0500

There are other ways to serve. The plain and simple fact is that not everyone is cut out for military life, even if they are physically and mentally capable.

Response by CPL Howard Conover made Jan 12 at 2016 7:07 AM

CPL Howard Conover — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:07:47 -0500

I have been saying this for over a decade in personal, casual conversation. Give your country, I say at least 3years, of military service. This will especially help those High School students who are unsure of their future goals. The Military will assist them in making a career decision and it may include serving in the armed forces until retirement. It will however and assure that Military manpower will be stable from year to year.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2016 7:28 AM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:28:49 -0500

You cannot conscript your citizens, forcing them to enlist on the threat of a fine or imprisonment and also argue that we are a free nation in the same breath. Conscription is the utter negation of freedom. Also it was ruled otherwise by SCOTUS many years ago, conscription is also a blatant violation of the 13th amendment and a new ruling ought to be considered. No matter how much good you believe this would do for high school graduates or the nation, they are not subjects; their freedom of choice must be respected.

Response by TSgt Pennie Snyder made Jan 12 at 2016 7:38 AM

TSgt Pennie Snyder — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:38:48 -0500

For a long time I really felt that all should serve. The military instills discipline, work ethic, desire to serve your country, etc. But that being said we can learn from history; not everyone should be forced to serve; during the draft for the Viet Nam War the military allowed one hundred thousand people to enter the service that really weren't qualified to be there; some people that weren't mentally stable; some people who couldn't read or write, etc. The whole point to have bodies to fill the deployments to Viet Nam. Many didn't survive, those that did were given the opportunity to reenlist. As a personnel specialist working in reenlistments overseas in 1984, I had some guys who managed to make SSgt somehow but had no ability to supervise at all. Commanders didn't want to let them reenlist, however per the rules at the time they entered they could stay up to 20 years, longer if they managed to get promoted beyond E-5, a few did. This created a problem for the commanders and all of the people who had to do their jobs for them. It wasn't a good idea because they were not ready nor capable of contributing in any way except on the front lines. For students right out of high school some of them aren't ready either and truly not all who would be required to serve would help. Many would but it would create an administrative night mare for commanders and staff to deal with those who don't belong. Many would not even make it through basic training. I really feel volunteers is the way to go especially with the current generation of kids. You really have to want to be in the service to be successful and to be trusted. You want people you can trust next to you in the military. People you know will have your back.

Response by CPL Martin Wade Ezell made Jan 12 at 2016 7:45 AM

CPL Martin Wade Ezell — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:45:37 -0500

Other countries make military service compulsory, and we should be no different. That would make a lot of future politicians maybe recognize and understand the purpose and function of the military also. That being said, I would say mandatory service for three years, in order to get a decent return on investment in the training costs, and then you are eligible for three years of free tuition at the public institution of higher learning of your choice.

Response by SGT Thomas LaRochelle made Jan 12 at 2016 9:20 AM

SGT Thomas LaRochelle — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:20:35 -0500

Yes they should. These people, today, need to serve their country, forceably if neccessary. Maybe then they would have a better respect for servicemen and veterans.

Response by SGT Michelle Griffin-Franks made Jan 12 at 2016 9:20 AM

SGT Michelle Griffin-Franks — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:20:51 -0500

It should be mandatory then just maybe Americans would have more respect for the Freedom that Veteran's have lost their lives for. Only veteran's no and love our freedom because weve been to other countries and know we are Blessed to be American I embrace my freedom as an American woman its Priceless. Civilians only know and learn the freedom and this country is by being destroyed by greed and people who don't realize these wars that we see in other countries is coming very close. They don't care what religion race or gender we are Americans and they HATE us

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2016 9:29 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:29:09 -0500

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." -- Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution.

Response by SFC Raymond Thibault made Jan 12 at 2016 9:39 AM

SFC Raymond Thibault — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:39:32 -0500

I think that State or National Service would be a good thing. They don't necessarily need to be Active Military or Military at all. Peace Corps, Ameri Corps, the states could duplicate the Organizations and help Elderly, Homeless, Farmers and Teach these young people how to work as a team member.

Response by SGT David Shields made Jan 12 at 2016 10:20 AM

SGT David Shields — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:20:20 -0500

My 2¢ on the matter is that yes, all citizens should serve. Now, when I say "serve" I do not necessarily mean military service. First, not everyone is capable of serving. An individual may have a deficiency that disqualifies them from military service. Secondly, not everyone has a desire to serve in the military. However, that does not mean there are not community service tasks that can be performed.

Too many kids graduate high school these days, and wind up living with mommy and daddy until they are around the age of 30. What other species on the planet takes that long to get their offspring out on their own, and capable of self-sufficiency and/or survival? I enjoy a good video game, movie, concert, whatever, as much as anyone else of similar interests. That's not all I'm about, though. I was unemployed for approximately 3.5 months after I ETS'd, and I was bored after the first week. That is beside the point, though.

The point I am trying to make is a great number of modern youths have this misconception that the world owes them something from the get-go. Service can, in most cases, assist with getting feet in the door for better opportunities. It can also provide a sense of discipline, responsibility, and not add a drag to society on the whole and one's community. Most of us here know all of this, so I digress.

Response by CPT Nick Bryan made Jan 12 at 2016 1:12 PM

CPT Nick Bryan — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:12:20 -0500

Not no, but hell no! Most countries that pull this off have much smaller populations and generally lean more towards the communist/socialist side. They do mandatory service out of need either because their country is so small they need mandatory service to fill their ranks or as a form of indoctrination into "party politics". And finally not everyone is made to serve, we'd be watering down the quality of our military and civil service organizations.

Response by PO1 Bradley Carnine made Jan 12 at 2016 2:36 PM

PO1 Bradley Carnine — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:36:39 -0500

Compulsory service should be mandatory but a choice between military service or a service organization would suffice , our once great nation has become full of the "entitled" that are convinced that service is beneath them, and those of us that have stepped up our somehow beneath them, this truly has to change in our country .

Response by PO3 Eugene Rizzardi made Jan 12 at 2016 5:25 PM

PO3 Eugene Rizzardi — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:25:16 -0500

I am not sure if Military service should be the answer, we have many services that could use a few extra people. This certainly would make make young people a bit more respectful of the time in service and give then some valuable skills in the workforce of today.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2016 5:49 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:49:09 -0500

Although I think some form of military service for both young men and women could better our society, the concept of "all-volunteer force" still is the best answer. As long as we don’t change the standards, you tend to get a better pool of dedicated forces.

Response by Sgt Kris Newcomb made Jan 12 at 2016 7:33 PM

Sgt Kris Newcomb — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:33:51 -0500

I would. I have encouraged all my kids to some military service. When I was in Europe in the 80's, some western European countries had this. My cousin did this in Denmark. I think after graduation from high school, if you are not going to a college or tech school. Then after do your 2 years.

Response by SFC Frank Ambriz made Jan 12 at 2016 7:44 PM

SFC Frank Ambriz — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:44:50 -0500

I would have people that want to be in the military; forcing people in our society may prove counterproductive. I have heard both options, my preference is a professional warrior which puts country - duty first.

Response by SGT Leon Riege made Jan 12 at 2016 8:02 PM

SGT Leon Riege — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:02:46 -0500

yup

Response by SPC Lee Beach made Jan 12 at 2016 11:16 PM

SPC Lee Beach — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 23:16:41 -0500

Yes

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Jan 13 at 2016 1:04 AM

SPC Byron Skinner — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 01:04:42 -0500

Sp4 Byron Skinner, What we are talking about here is conscription or aka the Draft. I was in a conscripted military and it was different then the current Army. First off the Army enlisted were better educated. Many Draftees already had college degrees and some even had Graduate school degrees. The diversity in the barracks was far greater then, then it is now. Life was tougher 50 years ago, unit cohesion was high and those that couldn't cut it or screwed up ofter were treated to a blanket party. Over all the conscripted soldiers were good soldiers but much harder to lead. Some of the crap I've heard about happening in iraq and Afghanistan would't have happened in Nam. There was none of the patriotic stuff and all of we love you in the ranks. Every draftee wanted to do their time and not get hit and get back to life. Drafting men, Yes. Drafting of women, No.

Response by CPT Jim Schwebach made Jan 13 at 2016 8:46 AM

CPT Jim Schwebach — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 08:46:42 -0500

Everyone who actually served with drafted Soldiers in combat please raise your hands. Now all of you with hands raised who led those Soldiers in combat please stand up. Those who are sitting with their hands in their laps do not have the chops to demean the service of draftees. I was privileged to serve with and lead drafted as well as volunteer Soldiers as an enlisted Soldier, an NCO and an officer in combat and non combat assignments in Infantry and Special Forces units during the period of the draft. Based on that service, I am in favor of implementing some form of National Service. Why? To this day I can not tell you what portion of the Soldiers I served with in those combat arms unit were RA or US(except SF, obviously, the eligibility and training requirements were such that every SF trooper was an RA); there was no discernible difference in performance levels between them in the field and very little difference in garrison. That difference in garrison showed up in the surprising fact that the rate of disciplinary action, judicial and non judicial, was higher for the RA's than the US's. I also found that there was little or no difference in combat performance, the bond that exists between Soldiers who have been under fire does not exist based on race, religion or basis of service. It was common to find daftness in leadership positions in Infantry units in RVN where those positions were filled based on performance only. Draftees were an asset to the military then as they had been during all of the previous periods when they had been integral parts of our military efforts. Basing opposition to the draft based on the performance of the "reluctant warriors" is misguided and ill-informed.

Response by COL John Hudson made Jan 13 at 2016 9:08 AM

COL John Hudson — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 09:08:20 -0500

ABSOLUTEY NOT! PLEASE, TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO READ ALL THAT I HAVE LABORED TO PRESENT IN OPOSITION TO SUCH A POLICY. Too many out there in both the civil and military world give out about mandatory military service with such comments as, "It will make a man out of him; He'll grow up; It's good for him...," plus any and all opinions supporting the general idea. Of course, now we throw in the female aspect also...sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and all that. I walked the ground of Vietnam for TWO tours - arriving in that country during the TET invasion of 1968. The DRAFT was in full force and I worked side-by-side with draftees on a daily basis - IN FULL COMBAT! I saw the results of such policy up close and personal EVERY DAY...how many of you out there can say the same before you plaster the universe with such unsupported opinion? Yes, SOME individuals did in fact embrace forced military service but a GREAT MANY DID NOT! I NEVER heard a single draftee give praise to the circumstances of his situation. The best I ever encountered was a hard realization of 'do the two years and get out.' I will say this and I truly hope all of you out there grasp the full meaning: "YOU WILL NEVER GET THE BEST OUT OF ANY INDIVIDUAL TAKEN AGAINST THEIR WILL." What you will get is lackadaisical attitude, poor or barely acceptable job performance, constant friction, and a strong desire to be anywhere else. You should have been there to see what happened when some of those drafted individuals discovered how easy it was to get drugs...and I mean the hard stuff - heroin, cocaine, you name it, they got it. WWII - the last "Perfect War" was an event that affected everyone at that time. Men were lining up 30,000 per day to fight an enemy that had perceptually stabbed the U.S. in the back. The Draft was not seen in the same light as the highly educated, free thinking citizenry we have today. From that day forward, every conflict we engaged in was driven by a political decision for questionable gain. There's simply no connection across the population as a whole. Most everyday people in this country right now have no concept of what it's like to be in Iraq (me - 40 months there) or Afghanistan. They don't give a damn while sitting in their air-conditioned easy chairs watching the news, but give out about military service so long as it's someone else and not them or one of their family members having to go. I was raised in a military family - Air Force - my dad being an E9 Chief Master Sergeant (31 years). My older brother joined the Navy (Master Chief Petty Officer E-9, 26 years). The last brother, one year younger than I, joined the Army as I did. He lasted exactly three weeks and was kicked out for being "unable to conform to the military environment." After having lived his full life up to that time IN A MILITARY ENVIRONMENT!!! (Air Force). The military of the United States - Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard - is NOT a platform for social experimentation, is NOT a rug to sweep the naughty boys and girls under, hoping against hope that some good will come of it, is NOT a mechanism for Judges to send disenfranchised convicted felons into (It's jail or the Army, son, take your choice). And don't come on to me that such things don't happen...I'm here to tell you they did, and I'm a witness to that fact when assigned to Ft. Polk during the height of the draft (after my Vietnam postings), first as a Small Company Commander and further as a Section Chief at the Ft. Polk Reception Station. I lined up five convicted felons requiring "Morals Waivers," ordered my Sergeant to call the MP's and have them thrown in the brig after each one told me what he had been convicted of (attempted murder, rape, drug use and sale (2 of them), and grand theft auto). I was outraged that all I could do was sign a piece of paper NOT recommending a waiver and pass it up the chain). Do ANY OF YOU out there want to be working side-by-side with such individuals? ANYWHERE? Especially in COMBAT? Not me, I refuse. I will never again be a part of any such screwed up policy or event, and will do all I can to fight against it. The U.S. military has all the people it needs, populated by a volunteer force that have stepped up without coercion and of their own free will. JCH, E-1 thru E-7, WO1~CW2, 1LT, CPT, MAJ, LTC, COL (In order = Infantry, Aviation, Infantry, Quartermaster, Inspector General, General Staff: Vietnam (2x), Balkan Conflict (1x), Iraq (2x), 30 years).

Response by COL John Hudson made Jan 13 at 2016 9:08 AM

COL John Hudson — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 09:08:52 -0500

ABSOLUTEY NOT! PLEASE, TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO READ ALL THAT I HAVE LABORED TO PRESENT IN OPOSITION TO SUCH A POLICY.

Too many out there in both the civil and military world give out about mandatory military service with such comments as, "It will make a man out of him; He'll grow up; It's good for him...," plus any and all opinions supporting the general idea. Of course, now we throw in the female aspect also...sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and all that. I walked the ground of Vietnam for TWO tours - arriving in that country during the TET invasion of 1968. The DRAFT was in full force and I worked side-by-side with draftees on a daily basis - IN FULL COMBAT! I saw the results of such policy up close and personal EVERY DAY...how many of you out there can say the same before you plaster the universe with such unsupported opinion?

Yes, SOME individuals did in fact embrace forced military service but a GREAT MANY DID NOT! I NEVER heard a single draftee give praise to the circumstances of his situation. The best I ever encountered was a hard realization of 'do the two years and get out.' I will say this and I truly hope all of you out there grasp the full meaning: "YOU WILL NEVER GET THE BEST OUT OF ANY INDIVIDUAL TAKEN AGAINST THEIR WILL."

What you will get is lackadaisical attitude, poor or barely acceptable job performance, constant friction, and a strong desire to be anywhere else. You should have been there to see what happened when some of those drafted individuals discovered how easy it was to get drugs...and I mean the hard stuff - full strength heroin, cocaine; you name it, they got it.

WWII - the last "Perfect War" was an event that affected everyone at that time. Men were lining up 30,000 per day to fight an enemy that had perceptually stabbed the U.S. in the back. The Draft was not seen in the same light as the highly educated, free thinking citizenry we have today. From that day forward, every conflict we engaged in was driven by a political decision for questionable gain. There's simply no connection across the population as a whole.

Most everyday people in this country right now have no concept of what it's like to be in Iraq (me - 40 months there) or Afghanistan. They don't give a damn while sitting in their air-conditioned easy chairs watching the news, but give out about military service so long as it's someone else and not them or one of their family members having to go. I was raised in a military family - Air Force - my dad being an E9 Chief Master Sergeant (31 years). My older brother joined the Navy (Master Chief Petty Officer E-9, 26 years). The last brother, one year younger than I, joined the Army as I did. He lasted exactly three weeks and was kicked out for being "unable to conform to the military environment." After having lived his full life up to that time IN A MILITARY ENVIRONMENT!!! (Air Force).

The military of the United States - Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard - is NOT a platform for social experimentation, is NOT a rug to sweep the naughty boys and girls under, hoping against hope that some good will come of it, is NOT a mechanism for Judges to send disenfranchised convicted felons into (It's jail or the Army, son, take your choice). And don't come on to me that such things don't happen...I'm here to tell you they did, and I'm a witness to that fact when assigned to Ft. Polk during the height of the draft (after my Vietnam postings), first as a Small Company Commander and further as a Section Chief at the Ft. Polk Reception Station.

I lined up five convicted felons requiring "Morals Waivers," ordered my Sergeant to call the MP's and have them thrown in the brig after each one told me what he had been convicted of (attempted murder, rape, drug use and sale (2 of them), and grand theft auto). I was outraged that all I could do was sign a piece of paper NOT recommending a waiver and pass it up the chain). Do ANY OF YOU out there want to be working side-by-side with such individuals? ANYWHERE? Especially in COMBAT?

NOT ME...I REFUSE ! I will never again be a part of any such screwed up policy or event, and will do all I can to fight against it. The U.S. military has all the people it needs, populated by a volunteer force that have stepped up without coercion and of their own free will. JCH, E-1 thru E-7, WO1~CW2, 1LT, CPT, MAJ, LTC, COL (In order = Infantry, Aviation, Infantry, Quartermaster, Inspector General, General Staff: Vietnam (2x), Balkan Conflict (1x), Iraq (2x), 30 years).

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 13 at 2016 3:14 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 15:14:42 -0500

I believe that military service should be required of all males. It would improve society over time by instilling discipline and a broader view of the world in our children.

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Jan 13 at 2016 3:41 PM

MSgt Michael Smith — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 15:41:15 -0500

Absolutely NOT! More people means loads more money being spent for manpower that is absolutely not needed nor wanted. We have the force size we need with volunteers. Why would you want to increase that size 20-fold? What are those people going to do? No matter what they do, they are not going to do it well, or even willingly! This argument has been brought up over an over and the answer is always 'BAD IDEA'

Response by SMSgt Tim Shuey made Jan 15 at 2016 2:59 AM

SMSgt Tim Shuey — Fri, 15 Jan 2016 02:59:30 -0500

The issue I have is trying to maintain a professional force with a bunch of fat stupid kids who don't understand personal responsibility. I think the wash out rates would be astronomical, so we end up spending limited resources to train people who can't or aren't willing to make the cut. During times when military budgets were higher and we were able to devote more time and money for training maybe it would have a chance, but when we have to make decisions based on limited budgets, spending money on people who won't benefit the mission seems wasteful.

Response by PV2 Jessie Wininger made Jan 15 at 2016 3:08 AM

PV2 Jessie Wininger — Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:08:24 -0500

I think women should have to sign up for selective service just like men do.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 15 at 2016 6:12 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Jan 2016 18:12:20 -0500

Service, yes. Military, no. They can't all handle it, and honestly I don't want some of those punks around. They don't all qualify anyways. Keep the standards up.

IF some kind of service period is required, military or civil, it should not be male or social class exclusive. It should be male and female, rich and poor, loddy doddy every body. Give them an option on how and when to do it. Fine them annually in their taxes for every year past their obligations required complete by date.

Response by SGT Keith Wilson made Jan 16 at 2016 6:48 AM

SGT Keith Wilson — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 06:48:51 -0500

I don't think after HS there should be a mandatory 2 yr obligation. For one the military is not for everyone, 2nd the military would have to lower their current standards even more so everyone would technically qualify to enlist, 3rd it could put the VA in debt and even the government and 4th it would just be a huge mistake.

Response by SSG Red Hoffman made Jan 17 at 2016 12:09 PM

SSG Red Hoffman — Sun, 17 Jan 2016 12:09:31 -0500

IMO, two years of service for every 18 year old can only benefit them with lessons in integrity, esprit de corps, teamwork and hopefully negate some of the racial tensions in this country. It sure would not hurt.

Response by SFC John Lee Washington made Jan 18 at 2016 3:25 PM

SFC John Lee Washington — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:25:09 -0500

should we send anyone to prison who choose not to serve? That is the question.

Response by SPC Dominic Cruz made Jan 19 at 2016 6:51 AM

SPC Dominic Cruz — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 06:51:42 -0500

I think that is a good idea it's the least an American can do for his country.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2016 8:16 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:16:51 -0500

I still say the IDF has a system we should follow. Two years (ish) mandatory service for all citizens. I think it would have a huge amount of positive effects on our society. I think we would see a dramatic upswing in both physical and societal areas. The obesity epidemic in our country would be likely to drastically decrease. The average citizen would learn much more about personal responsibility, working in a team, and other important life lessons. Self-respect, respect for others, you name it. Of course, in the style of the IDF, this would not be literally for every citizen. Exceptions would be made on the basis of religious, psychological, or physical grounds.

Response by SSG David Bachrach made Jan 23 at 2016 9:43 PM

SSG David Bachrach — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 21:43:25 -0500

No I wouldn't agree service should for those who want it, other wise our lives would be like a Russian roulette on the battle field. Could we trust them to do what's needed or die because of no honor from those who don't care.

Response by 1SG Richard Valdez made Mar 8 at 2016 8:00 PM

1SG Richard Valdez — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 20:00:25 -0500

Yep, what else are they doing

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made May 17 at 2016 9:55 AM

MSgt Michael Smith — Tue, 17 May 2016 09:55:17 -0400

No. It is unneeded, unsustainable, and would cost taxpayers a fortune.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 26 at 2016 12:38 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 May 2016 12:38:08 -0400

This question pops up at least twice a year. Every time, I'm forced to ask how a country that can't afford to pay the slim portion of the population currently serving (2% at the height of the GWOT) is ever going to afford paying EVERYONE to serve?

So far...no answer. :-/

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 2 at 2016 3:33 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:33:56 -0400

Ok this post is over a year old but as stated earlier in another response this does pop up time and time again. My personal feeling is that there should be some sort of mandatory service once you are of eligible age (to be determined at a later discussion). Here are my caveats for this, If a person wants to get an education then let them get it, but you wont be eligible for Pell grants or other federally backed loans to pay for the education until you have completed your service. I would look at it like a one for one system. Now I am not saying that a person needs to be in the Military (we all know that would be a very bad idea). You need to be in some kind of public service (Ameri-Corps, Vista, public works, working for the parks service or a community based volunteer program) once complete and you have proven your service to your local board you will be eligible for all federal assistance programs.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 2 at 2016 3:40 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:07 -0400

Response by CPT Nick Bryan made Jun 9 at 2016 1:01 PM

CPT Nick Bryan — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 13:01:07 -0400

With this country already over $17 Trillion in debt and running on a budget deficit I don't see how it'd be fiscally possible. You're talking 10-15 million 18-19 year olds if total compensation (pay and benefits) averaged out to $25k per year you're talking over $250 Billion a year just in pay and benefits. And unlike most corporations the government doesn't produce anything. They don't make anything to sell, and before you say taxes at that income level any federal taxes they paid in would come back them in April. As financially screwed up the government is there's no way they could afford it. And frankly I don't know if they ever could.

Response by SFC Ernest Thurston made Jun 9 at 2016 3:22 PM

SFC Ernest Thurston — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:22:07 -0400

I think that all adults male/female(or whatever) should be registered and be required to do some sort of service. Military service should be based on the needs of the military for combat. It should not be simply a place for to do community service.

Response by SGT Daniel Quigley made Oct 6 at 2016 8:50 PM

SGT Daniel Quigley — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 20:50:17 -0400

Yes between High School and Collage unless they are going to be attending a Miitary Academy

Response by SPC Roberto Martinez made Jul 2 at 2017 11:04 AM

SPC Roberto Martinez — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 11:04:54 -0400

Yes all citizens should serve !!

Response by CN Rickie DeFehr made Jul 30 at 2017 6:13 PM

CN Rickie DeFehr — Sun, 30 Jul 2017 18:13:21 -0400

NO. I don't want a quitter next to me overseas. They get what I gave quitters. Sock of "Soap".

Response by SP5 Norman McGill made Jul 30 at 2017 6:59 PM

SP5 Norman McGill — Sun, 30 Jul 2017 18:59:40 -0400

I do agree with the premise that our young men would benefit from six months in the service. Women too but on a voluntary basis.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Jul 30 at 2017 10:00 PM

LTC Jason Mackay — Sun, 30 Jul 2017 22:00:15 -0400

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2017 6:09 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Aug 2017 18:09:37 -0400

I think that people who voluntarily join the military are better soldiers than those who are forced to do that. If you do something you like you're better at this and more loyal. Though, from other side, it's useful to have basic combat training for all citizens in case if there ever (I hope not) would be a war on American soil.

Response by MSG Richard Cooper, PMP, SIPM, CMAS made Oct 6 at 2017 1:49 PM

MSG Richard Cooper, PMP, SIPM, CMAS — Fri, 06 Oct 2017 13:49:22 -0400

I would expand the mandatory 2 year obligation:
All male and female no deferments.
2 years
Military or resurrect the Civilian Conservation Corps to assist in infrastructure projects or peace corps.

Response by PO3 Eugene Rizzardi made Dec 3 at 2017 9:53 AM

PO3 Eugene Rizzardi — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 09:53:54 -0500

A conscripted service is not a great idea, if it came to that all people, men or woman or trans should be conscripted.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Jun 23 at 2018 12:57 AM

LTC Jason Mackay — Sat, 23 Jun 2018 00:57:11 -0400

3.5 million kids are projected to graduate high school in 2016-17. All components of the Army are about one million. We would have to support all these people. Come up with something meaningful for them to do (so they don't resent it). It would be at least 24 months to get anything from them from a utility stand point. The nation would have to really accept the fact that we would take to take off the gloves compared to an all volunteer service and its policies, benefits, and culture. We would have to give carte Blanche to Company Commanders and more importantly, NCOs. Can you imagine the social media butt hurt from draftees? We would also likely have to bring back CCF and local stockades. Americans are able to endure drafted service and the privation (real or imagined) if they see the purpose in it. If they don't buy it, then it will be bad for all the professional centurions who have to keep the Army rolling along. But grass, motor pools, rocks, parking lots, PMCS, command inspection checklists would look great. No excuses, oodles of people to do all that. Part of the soldier task invention we would need to keep them busy. I don't want anyone fighting beside me that doesn't want to be there, resenting the military.

Equipping all these youngsters. I think the clothing bag value is about $500. CIF will issue them $4-6000 worth of kit. Each one will need to be issued a $500 rifle. Each will receive in aggregate $1M in training just to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. We would likely have to invent a few MOS's. Each one getting three hots and a cot every day for 18-24 months. Installation functions could revert to Soldiers by MOS or by BMM. I would prefer the former.

We would have to build installations, possibly out of virgin land, probably done by these same draftees who need something to do. Would need MILCON in the trillions for barracks, motorpools, DFACs just to make the self licking ice cream cone work.

How much more materiel would we need to: vehicles, tanks, Bradleys, APCs, aircraft. Can't just have a bunch of millenials running around in the woods with sticks.

Some say national service is the answer. I personally don't think treading water for a year or two cleaning up inner city neighborhoods is going to resound with the same value as surviving the forge of initial entry training in the armed forces. Another option I think has merit is that the UN consistently suffers from the lack of standing formations for urgent humanitarian missions. This could be a source of do gooders to go deal with disaster and genocide rather than people expressing moral outrage for 15 minutes on social media.

The real question is will the nation accept the burden and will the country benefit from the investment? Robert Heinlein once said that if no one wants to serve we should let the whole damn thing fall. At the end of it all, I think people will benefit and be better citizens if they had some skin in the game.

We need a draft system in case of total war. Citizens need to be prepared for national service if it comes to that.
Edit

Response by SSG Jose M. Hernandezsanchez made Sep 25 at 2018 8:21 AM

SSG Jose M. Hernandezsanchez — Tue, 25 Sep 2018 08:21:03 -0400

I think a couple of years of service wouldn't hurt. But, it has to start from early age to mold them into the idea that at 18, you're serving. I think once kids are out of elementary school is a little too late in my opinion.

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made Jun 13 at 2021 11:01 PM

SSG Roger Ayscue — Sun, 13 Jun 2021 23:01:20 -0400

Without Question and Without Exception EVERYONE should serve some form of public service. Rich, Poor, male, female, EVERYONE.
Everyone needs to learn that there is something more important in this world than they are. Some type of public service, minimum of FOUR years with a year of college at an in-state school for every year completed honorably, and a prohibition of college for NOT completing it. Yes, I said it...If you don't do your service you don't go to college.
Military service to being teacher's aids to working in a nursing home. EVERYONE should serve somehow.

Response by SSG Jack Scott made Jun 4 at 2022 2:41 PM

SSG Jack Scott — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 14:41:14 -0400

As long as that includes women and for the draft. Equality is a bitch