Should military service be a requirement of citizenship?

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 06:06:02 -0500

I know Israel has some sort of requirement. I was wondering we in the military thought. It is my opinion, that a two year requirement would be beneficial on many fronts. I think the average citizen would pay more attention to the politics of our nation, and therefore be more educated on who they vote for. What are your thoughts?

Response by SSG Alleria Stanley made Jan 13 at 2014 6:32 AM

SSG Alleria Stanley — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 06:32:12 -0500

That would make everyone Voluntold.
I disagree on two principles.
First, there's a lot to be said for the volunteer military. Everyone wants to be there. Are there legitimate questions about the stratification and whether or not certain elements of our society serve? Yes. However, incumbent in our Freedoms for which we serve should be the freedom not to serve.
Second, logistically that's a lot for TRADOC to handle. Plus, where would they serve? Not enough slots.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Jan 13 at 2014 4:21 PM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:21:47 -0500

I'm a firm believer that having an interest in politics, one should also have an understanding of what it is when they call for people to man the trenches.

2 Years to vote

4 years to hold public office

The Defenders of the Republic want their guns, become a part of the well regulated U.S. State militias. National Guard and ready reserve for local law enforcement agencies.

By the way, most of them don't vote now anyway, so they won't be missing that much if they don't serve.

Might suck for people like Ted Nugent who might have to give up his guns since he's disqualified from militia service.... (Let the butt hurt flow....;)

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 13 at 2014 4:44 PM

1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:44:30 -0500

A good intent. But generally a BAD idea. Not everyone is suited to the military. I've known a lot of great Americans who've never been in uniform. Yet they serve our nation and their communities in the ways they can do best. I'm all for some sort of national service requirement. But I think defining it as solely military service is a mistake. I also believe it's a bit egotistical for us as soldiers to view it that way. I share GEN McChrystal's opinion.

Franklin Project: Gen. McChrystal Introduction

The Franklin Project is a new venture by the Aspen Institute to marshal the best case for a voluntary civilian counterpart to military service in the United ...

Response by SFC Stephen P. made Jan 13 at 2014 5:06 PM

SFC Stephen P. — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 17:06:51 -0500

The theory has merit, but the potential for abuse of 'non-citizens' is too great.

About 4 million reach the age of majority every year. More than the entire combined strength of all components of our armed forces. What do you propose we do with the additional numbers?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 13 at 2014 9:41 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 21:41:45 -0500

I answer with a strong NO.

Individuals do not owe the government anything at birth and freedom means being free not to do things. Everything we require of an individual makes them less free.

Response by SFC Josh Watson made Jan 14 at 2014 12:28 PM

SFC Josh Watson — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:28:00 -0500

I'd say yes if, and only if everyone in the country wanted to join a civil or military service. The reason I say no is because if you look at the military right now, there are plenty of "volunteers" who have since changed their minds and are not meeting the standards of the military because of their dismay. Imagine if we forced people into joining the military who didn't want to be in the service in the first place. It's a nice thought though.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 14 at 2014 12:41 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:41:26 -0500

We have the most educated and homogeneous society now than we have ever had before. We have near universal literacy with English spoken by more of the population than has historically been the case. Even 70 years ago, you would have been more likely to have heard Dutch spoken in Pella, Iowa, German in Bismarck, ND, Italian, Slovak, Polish, and Yiddish in New York, NY than English. Mass media has allowed Americanism to spread within our own country like it never has before.

Why would we require this now when we are more united as Americans (with a common language, culture, customs, etc) than we ever have been in history?

On top of that, I just think it's bad juju.

Response by 1LT(P) Jan I. made Jan 14 at 2014 1:04 PM

1LT(P) Jan I. — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:04:15 -0500

Strong NO on my part.

BLUF: degradation of military readiness outweigh the social benefits of the draft.

Israel is the ideal example, but if you have to look for a counterpoint, look no further than South Korea.

Israel, on one hand, has the dubious advantage of being surrounded by active conflict as a country. Thus, their citizens see first-hand the reason for a standing military, and the importance of serving.

South Korea, on the other hand, is experiencing a degradation of the quality of their military; even though the country is still technically at war, one can observe that their society is generally shifting away from military readiness as a priority, moving instead towards the development of pop culture, economic growth, and a general explosion of capitalism.

You can see the effects that this shift has had on the military, as many senior officers in the SKorea military are lamenting that they have done "too good" of a job, and are now dealing with a generation that have never seen war, the reality of the proximity of the NKorean threat, and would prefer to go to concerts, enjoy their youth, and quite simply NOT serve for two years in cold barracks, marching, being verbally abused, being away from home, and serving on a mission that holds little meaning to them today. These boys are NOT soldiers, period, and just not meant to serve as such - and, unfortunately due to the mandatory service requirement, make up a large part of the SKorean military.

If you need proof, look closely at the general SKorean populace's reaction to the rhetoric and threats that came from NKorea when Kim Jong Un came to power. They all went about their business, treating the threats of invasion and total obliteration from NKorea as everyday occurrence. Not exactly a people in touch with the importance of military readiness and service.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 14 at 2014 1:49 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:49:53 -0500

I do agree that there should be some sort of government service,
not just military I know to many kids that could never make it in the military,
but all government is a different story.
It can be a two year stent and could be you work in an office pushing
papers at the State Department or the EPA or NOAA, right down to your local mayor’s
township offices., set up a standard test like the ASVAB, for all the ones that
do not want to go military and depending on how they test is what jobs they can
pick from. Also like the military some of the work they do can be transferred
into college credits not much as we all know, but some.

I feel this would work to help kids today get a better
understanding of the government. I have seen to many kids that don’t even know
what the government does. (ok at time I can see that also but for different
reasons) When I first got off active duty I went to college and one of the
classes I took was Government. I was 24 at the time with 18-19 year olds right
out of high school, half of them were failing the class they could not even
tell you what are the 3 branches of our government. They all had taken government
in high school.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 14 at 2014 1:54 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:54:30 -0500

I don't know if conscription is the way to go. You do that, and it becomes somewhat of an indentured servitude. I think that if a legal immigrant serves honorably and does not get into trouble, there should be a streamlined process for citizenship. By a prerequisite for citizenship that mandates military service? Nah.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 14 at 2014 3:02 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:02:14 -0500

Absolutely it should be a requirement for citizenship. In order to gain citizenship, you must live in the country for 6 years. What a better way to get your citizenship than by working for your money, showing allegiance to the country you want to live and earning your right to be a citizen. It would eliminate a burden on tax payers to support these people for not being here legally with welfare and handouts. There are many ways this could end a lot of issues in our society today.

Response by LCpl Walter Greenwood made Jan 14 at 2014 4:21 PM

LCpl Walter Greenwood — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:21:10 -0500

you are absolutely wrong and here is why... i served with a guy in the marine corps that did not want to be there with all his might. he hated it. he was the biggest shit bird, skatebird, 10 percenter of all time. imagine serving with people whose lives were completey wrecked by being forced to serve and who hated everysingle aspect of the job they were supposed to be doing. second...people in the military are no more informed about or knowledgeable about or educated about or pay more attention to our nations politics than anyone else.

Response by Cpl Ray Fernandez made Jan 14 at 2014 4:37 PM

Cpl Ray Fernandez — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:37:40 -0500

In theory it sounds great because freedom would be enjoyed by those who have experienced the cost of protecting it. The reality is that we don't have the need of the manpower nor the resources to increase the military force to the size that it would take to train and equip every single person of military age.

Also it would destroy American life by creating two different classes of citizens in this country those that have rights and those that don't. Just because a person serves or has served does not meant that they will suddenly have more interest in the leadership of this country.

Response by SSG Ralph Watkins made Jan 14 at 2014 6:01 PM

SSG Ralph Watkins — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:01:38 -0500

It's bad enough to be in charge of slugs who were stupid enough to sign up. It would be even worse to try to lead people who don't want to do this to begin with. Under Reagan he did talk about an American Foreign Legion but those were different times. Even the draftees during Vietnam eventually gave in to fulfilling their duties but again, that was different times. The Phillipines used to have a program where 60 of their citizens used to be able to join the US military a year & become US citizens. Panama did as well until we gave back the Canal Zone. The world has changed.

Response by SrA Brian Walker made Jan 15 at 2014 4:19 AM

SrA Brian Walker — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 04:19:28 -0500

I could understand a civil service or military requirement. I just dont think that a lot of people in the U.S.A. are suitable for military service. I like the way germany and some other countries handle it, where you can elect to care for the elderly or work for the city/town you live instead of doing the military service. this two year requirement would infuse some much needed income into the economy and could help a lot of younger people find some direction with their lives. there are some societal issues to consider though so I fear it would cause a lot of problems at first.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 15 at 2014 5:25 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 05:25:07 -0500

While military service certainly isn't the answer for everyone, I do feel that there are places within the government, and public service fields that could provide coverage for that gap. An all volunteer military stands superior to a conscript type military simply because of that fact: Those service members WANT to be there. For those who are disinterested in defending their nation physically, there are plenty of other opportunities to serve their community, and gain a better perspective on politics, and have a vested interest in the happenings of their government. Red cross, UNICEF, recycling centers, power plants, highway repair and maintenance, agriculture, waste-management, wildlife conservation - all of these fields have strong ties to the country's political infrastructure, and can provide a broader understanding of what all it takes to make America great. And if there is only a one year service requirement, sometime after high school, and before or after college, but certainly before beginning your 'career', then it wouldn't negatively impact the plans of most citizens. It should definitely be a requirement to vote, and would almost certainly increase the amount of citizens overall who actually DO vote.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 15 at 2014 6:05 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 06:05:33 -0500

Many great responses and discussions. I'm convinced that it would not be a good idea. In a perfect world, our young people would look forward to the experience and people they would meet. Alas, we know through experience that they would be generally opposed to the idea and difficult to lead because of that.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Jan 15 at 2014 7:01 AM

1SG Michael Blount — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:01:39 -0500

As much as I would like military service to be a requirement of citizenship, my answer is NO. As a former Drill Sergeant, we have enough problems turning the ash and trash dumped on us by Recruiters (no offense intended) into Soldiers. Let's not make a bad situation worse.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 15 at 2014 7:13 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:13:05 -0500

Absolutely not.

I hear an underlying concern, and I agree with it, SGT Lawrence- in a culture of isolationism where we drive alone in cars to work, use cell-phones to communicate instead of face to face conversations, and town hall meetings stand empty, how do we motivate a disinterested population who has the sovereign right to decide the future of the nation? It is a disturbing thought that people who cannot find Kabul or Baghdad on a map are responsible for the national decisions of how we employ force there (and for how long).

The disagreement comes with mandatory "military" service. It is a life and death function, and not to be entrusted to forces that are not on the battlefield of their own volition.

Should the nation re-look terms like 'citizenship versus resident' or 'mandatory civil service'? There may be a stronger argument for either concept. Somehow we as a culture have accepted the fallacy of logic that because we are "free", we do not owe something to the nation in trade for that "freedom", and that is a societal shift that will have to occur before any such discussions take on the hues of reality.

Response by SGT Larry "Teruji" Sakai made Jan 15 at 2014 3:24 PM

SGT Larry "Teruji" Sakai — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:24:32 -0500

YES!!!! Men/Women

Response by SGT Thomas Lucken made Jan 15 at 2014 9:10 PM

SGT Thomas Lucken — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 21:10:37 -0500

This does not exactly go with the question, but I believe military service should be a requirement to be President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 16 at 2014 12:31 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:31:04 -0500

I think everyone whom is capable of serving should. It shouldn't be used as a reason for citizenship because we all know that could find dishonest people coming in learning it training to use it against us later on. But if you are naturalized and are of able body I full heartily believe they should serve at least two years in just to understand and show appreciation for what they have.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 16 at 2014 7:48 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 07:48:10 -0500

The book "Starship Troopers" is a great read for leadership and this idea for military experience to gain rights to vote and run for political spots.

Response by PFC Eric Minchey made Jan 16 at 2014 10:11 AM

PFC Eric Minchey — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 10:11:37 -0500

Why stop at just those seeking citizenship? I think it should be mandatory for everyone! https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/469-what-is-your-opinion-on-this

What is your opinion on this?

I think it would be a good idea to make it mandatory in the US for all 18-25 year old citizens to perform 2 years of civil service (military, law enforcement, fire-fighter, etc.) I believe this would ...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 16 at 2014 11:45 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:45:58 -0500

This system would not be a requirement. Civilians would be
born with the same amount of personal freedom as the next guy and while going
through school and growing up they would be informed of the benefits of serving
their country such as, right to vote, right to run for political office, and
the key part idea for this to work is to remind the population it is not a
requirement to serve. I don't know how many of you feel about the leadership in
the country, but for me I would feel better knowing that all key leadership has
done a tour in the service to know what it is like. The service could be accommodating
to people of all types and create jobs and opportunities to everyone. (To go to the extreme side of this idea and to
proof my point)” ...a blind, deaf and mute individual with 1 arm and no legs
can count the hairs of a caterpillar” (Starship troopers).

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Jan 16 at 2014 1:30 PM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:30:43 -0500

I have a better one for requirements for citizen at the time of application and processing:

1. Not be on federal or state government assistance because of a lack of a job and proper funds

2. Have valid heath insurance

3. Have a formal education (HS/GED)

4. Swear not to harm anyone or anything in the U.S. or over seas or face deportation and/or a lengthy prison sentence if convicted of a harming Americans in the U.S. or overseas.

5. Have a freaking job (if applicable)

That's all I have for now.

Response by PO1 George Toft made Jan 17 at 2014 12:35 AM

PO1 George Toft — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:35:08 -0500

I would have to say NO! I used to believe everyone should do 2 years of military after high school, but the reality is three are 3.3 million kids graduating high school this year (http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372) and if they did a 2 year stint, that's a military force of 6.6 million on top of the 1.5 million that want to be there. Congress is complaining now about the size of the military - we can't afford for it to become 5 times larger.

Now to answer your question . . . NBC News says 700,000 immigrants become citizens each year. Same problem as above - if you toss in 1,400,000 immigrants (2 years stint) who are not citizens into the military, they cannot do many of the jobs. Just ask Filipinos what options they get - nothing that exposes them to classified material. And now you're going to add 1.4 million people with no security clearances? We'll have 1.4 million janitors, cooks, and runway sweepers.

Oh, and how many of those immigrants are fluent in English so they can understand instructions? We had a LT from India and when the SHTF, he was not speaking English - don't know WTF it was, but it wasn't English (it got him relieved and discharged, though). Same problem would happen - last thing I want is some guy yelling at me and I don't know if he's warning me about a grenade or pissed at me for a log book entry.

Response by Capt Stephen Valance made Jan 17 at 2014 12:36 AM

Capt Stephen Valance — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:36:21 -0500

No, but there should be term limits for congress, like the president and 1 house rep for every 30,000 citizens, ummm, the way the constitution states.

Response by SFC Terry Wilcox made Jan 17 at 2014 10:00 AM

SFC Terry Wilcox — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 10:00:27 -0500

Yes!!! And that goes for those desiring American CITIZENSHIP. Americans have dropped so far into the abyss, that no one even knows who, what or why, let alone the when or where. And to make military decisions? Too many, so called Presidents (Commanders in Chief) haven't a clue as to how one defends this nation... just Tax and Spend... on special interests... FOR VOTES... not the security of this nation!

SFC Terry Wilcox, US Army Retired

Response by PFC Mark Shany made Jan 17 at 2014 11:25 AM

PFC Mark Shany — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 11:25:58 -0500

Yes! I agree Totally! You see, I'm canadian but, I served in the U.S. Army proudly but, unfortunately the U.S. Government didn't offer me citizenship. I know in my heart and soul that America is my home and always will be, and that I would re-enlist if I could. I hope one day soon that I will be able to return home.

Response by SPC Michael Wright made Jan 17 at 2014 11:35 AM

SPC Michael Wright — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 11:35:14 -0500

I BELIEVE THE DRAFT SHOULD BE REINSTATED. IT WILL WAKE UP THE YOUNG PEOPLE AND TEACH THEM RESPONSIBILITY AND HOW TO PROPERLY CONDUCT THEMSELVES.

Response by SPC Dejan Smaic made Jan 17 at 2014 11:44 AM

SPC Dejan Smaic — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 11:44:14 -0500

No.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2014 12:07 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:07:37 -0500

We need those willing to serve, not required to serve. That desire to serve within a person through training produces a different caliber of man vs somebody following the herd because they have to, not want to. There are exceptions to this but few.

Response by PO1 Jay Hershorin made Jan 17 at 2014 12:23 PM

PO1 Jay Hershorin — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:23:25 -0500

Israel has the requirement not only to peiple who wish to become citizens, but everyone must serve, regardless of sex. (Unless you are above their age requirement). They fight for their survival and very existence. I think the US should have it where aliens who want to be a citizen should have to serve.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2014 12:44 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:44:23 -0500

I think mandatory conscription degrades the Force. I know too many Russians and Ukrainians who served their two years, and they all have the same stories about low morale, low pay, getting beat up all the time their first year, then beating up the 1st year soldiers their second year. I am not saying the US Army would be the same, but I do not want to serve with unmotivated slugs who are just putting in their time.

Response by SFC Nikhil Kumra made Jan 18 at 2014 9:43 AM

SFC Nikhil Kumra — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 09:43:18 -0500

No Way! Military service isn't a sentence, it's an honor - besides, the majority of cowards who live in this country grow spontaneous "moral stances" rather than grab a rifle and serve when their country is at war, so how can we... why SHOULD we expect immigrants to?

How about this -- Anyone who is born here and is pissing and crying about how "immigrants" took their jobs, and how they're "just getting by" on their 99 weeks of unemployment - take those people, create special BCT units at benning, and just let some 11B drill's scream at them in a perpetual basic training environment until they quit crying, and then once they're deemed ready to go back to the civilian world, kick them out and send them on their way...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2014 10:20 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:20:36 -0500

Both Korea and Israel have some requirements for one service or another. With Korea, its either joining the Police Force or become a KUTUSA/Soldier. Two years minimum to be a requirement would put a lot of “average citizens” in a different frame of mind and give them a better perspective of the nation and our politics. I do recall the MP Corp had implemented a recruiting strategy/program where you joined, you were able to do 2 years. The catch (My understanding, and please correct me if I am wrong recruiters) is you were sent to Korea or Germany for those two years. I did have a Soldier who did come in under that program and is now a Staff Sergeant. BUT, If a person does NOT want to serve, don't force them to. I have seen this go both ways.

Response by CW2 Geoff Lachance made Jan 18 at 2014 10:21 AM

CW2 Geoff Lachance — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:21:07 -0500

Service to our country should be a requirement.  It doesn't need to be military.  Two years serving in some capacity whether military, community service, peace corps, etc would go a long way in building an understanding and appreciation of the true value of our freedom.  Graduate from high school and attend two years unselfish service, then off to college or into the workforce.  I'll bet there would be less deadbeats and more willing to contribute.  God Bless America!<div><br></div><div>Unfortunately though, with the ACLU, there could be less than honorable organizations with the sole purpose of undermining the integrety of selfless service, their right to exist and recruit.  So Caution!!!</div>

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Jan 18 at 2014 1:03 PM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 13:03:17 -0500

I think that either military or national civil service of some type should be mandatory for all citizens, this would ensure that everyone understands what the rights that we all hold so dear and that we all piss and moan about, are actually about. I believe that we would all be better citizens of this great nation of ours if this were true.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Jan 18 at 2014 8:01 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 20:01:38 -0500

Military service should NOT be a requirement for Citizenship. First of all there's the practicality issue. In order for this to happen you'd have to convince most of Congress, AND most of the States to Amend the Constitution to make it so. And in doing so you'd be asking most people to vote themselves OUT of citizenship.

That being said, a multitude of comments I've read here shows how quickly such ideas parlay into ideas such as "reinstating the Draft", or Universal compulsory service of one sort or another.

We had Compulsory service in the past it was called SLAVERY, and it's ALWAYS a bad idea. It's a bad idea when one group, believed to be beneath another group are forced into servitude to pick cotton, and it's a bad idea when the group is a bunch of young men and women being forced to fight unpopular, politically or financially motivated wars on behalf of crooked politicians, and their bankers and corporate cronies.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jan 18 at 2014 8:08 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 20:08:27 -0500

How about a compromise, the Starship Troopers approach? You don't have to perform military service, but if you don't, then you're not officially a citizen, and thus, not entitled to a vote.

Personally, I don't like the idea, even though I presented it as a compromise. As uber conservative as a lot of military folk can be, I can see this leading to our country resembling the love child of Fox News, the Bible, Duck Dynasty and Honey Boo Boo...

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Jan 18 at 2014 10:02 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 22:02:42 -0500

Milton Friedman had a great response to General Westmorland who advocated for the Draft during Vietnam....

"In the course of his [General Westmoreland's] testimony, he made the
statement that he did not want to command an army of mercenaries. I
[Milton Friedman] stopped him and said, 'General, would you rather
command an army of slaves?' He drew himself up and said, 'I don't like
to hear our patriotic draftees referred to as slaves.' I replied, 'I
don't like to hear our patriotic volunteers referred to as
mercenaries.' "

Response by SPC Dejan Smaic made Jan 19 at 2014 7:59 PM

SPC Dejan Smaic — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 19:59:07 -0500

Give me a break. The answer is NO. Not everyone is suited for the military, nor are we in a wartime economy. I would strongly oppose any such notion for an introduction of a Bill having this requirement.

Response by SSG Benjamin Cho made Jan 19 at 2014 8:13 PM

SSG Benjamin Cho — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 20:13:02 -0500

we aren't living in a Heinlein novel of starship troopers fascist nationalist society. so the answer is no. It is a dream thinkers conjuring to believe such ideas. Be practical and you realize that your average military servicemember is only interested in beer, chasing women, buying a ford mustang or jeep wrangler and the next xbox game.

Russia, Israel, South Korea are some of the countries with compulsory military service but that doesn't make them any better or worse societies.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2014 11:30 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 23:30:04 -0500

I have a big reservation with it because I remember troops who were drafted of threatened to be and they eventually become a distraction and negative on the morale of others. I do not want military haters besides me.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 7:32 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 07:32:33 -0500

Why restrict it to *male* citizens??  If military service is going to be required, it should be required across the board.<br><br>But to answer the original question, public service, yes, mandatory military service, HELL NO!  The military should be composed of those who want to be there.  'Draftees' in this day and age will have horrible attitudes.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 8:16 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:16:55 -0500

No<div><br></div><div>That's not what freedom looks like.</div>

Response by SFC Robert Trodahl made Jan 21 at 2014 9:10 AM

SFC Robert Trodahl — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 09:10:30 -0500

I agree with public service across the board, but with a 2 year limit instead of 4 years. This should be long enough to provide them with some job and life skills and an appreciation of service to someone other than themselves.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Jan 21 at 2014 10:06 AM

SSG Gerhard S. — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:06:17 -0500

My answer is a respectful, but emphatic NO, for a number of reasons.

First, you used the word "required" which is just a nice way of saying "compulsory" or "force". At best such a system is Extortion, and at worst it is Slavery.

Second, though I am a believer in service, (I have 22 years of military service prior to my retirement, and nearly 20 years in Public Safety as a Emergency Communications Supervisor, and as a Firefighter-Fire Lieutenant/Paramedic.) I am a firm believer that service should be voluntary. (see my first point)

Third, the Military is NOT the best place for everyone. Some people simply don't belong there, while others talents are better utilized elsewhere. Our draft in Vietnam proved that, particularly when one considers how many officers were "fragged" by their own men. "Throughout the course of the Vietnam War, fragging was reportedly
common. Cases have been documented of at least 230 American officers
killed by their own troops, and as many as 1,400 other officers' deaths
could not be explained. Between 1970 and 1971 alone, there were 363 cases of "assault with explosive devices" against officers in Vietnam."

The flip side to that coin is that some people can be far more beneficial to society by utilizing their own special talents. Consider if you will, what would have happened if people like Bill Gates, or Steve Jobs had been forced to "serve" during the formative years of their society changing endeavors?

People should be free to follow their own path. It is best for individuals, for the Military, and for society.

Lastly I'll leave you with this exchange between Milton Freedman and Gen Westmoreland regarding the Vietnam draft.

"In the course of his [General Westmoreland's] testimony, he made the
statement that he did not want to command an army of mercenaries. I
[Milton Friedman] stopped him and said, 'General, would you rather
command an army of slaves?' He drew himself up and said, 'I don't like
to hear our patriotic draftees referred to as slaves.' I replied, 'I
don't like to hear our patriotic volunteers referred to as
mercenaries.' But I went on to say, 'If they are mercenaries, then I,
sir, am a mercenary professor, and you, sir, are a mercenary general; we
are served by mercenary physicians, we use a mercenary lawyer, and we
get our meat from a mercenary butcher.' That was the last that we heard
from the general about mercenaries."

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 11:06 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 11:06:03 -0500

NO. Only because I do not want resentful troops. I remember when the draft was going and the consequences or that.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 12:05 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:05:38 -0500

No individual should be required to serve. The beauty of the United State Armed Forces is the fact that we are an all volunteer army. However, we need to focus on restoring the pride for our country within the each person. Whenever this type of attitude exist there would be so many volunteers who willing want to serve their country that we could then go back to just choosing the best candidates to make us the strongest and most prepared military in the world. God Bless the U.S.A.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 12:05 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:05:51 -0500

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 12:06 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:06:03 -0500

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 12:06 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:06:11 -0500

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Jan 21 at 2014 4:51 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 16:51:58 -0500

Some of the people who are in SHOULDNT be! The last thing I want is to force a bunch of people in who are going to be nothing but problems. The military should be the best of those who have the desire to serve.

Think about the jobs we have. Not everyone should be trusted to drive a tank, push medications, handle money (especially mine), or point weapons at people.

The last thing I want to do is FORCE someone to do something they don't have any business doing in the first place.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 23 at 2014 9:38 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Jan 2014 09:38:14 -0500

As a knee jerk reaction, I would give a resounding, unequivocal YES to making people serve. I'm 24 and in general my generation is full of entitlement, ignorance, lack of respect or work ethic and the list goes on. It isn't everyone but a great many do show these negative qualities. Military service for sure has given me far more than I could ever imagine in the way of opportunity, experience, friendships and the appreciation of respect and work ethic. With all that being said, the caveat is that I CHOSE to serve. Big difference in that because people who choose to better themselves will get better. If you don't care, you won't. If the U.S had a service requirement like Israel, you'd only see mass desertion and widespread blatant disrespect or breaking of UCMJ by all the people who simply refuse to serve. Ultimately you would face a bloated military in desperate need of cleansing even more so than we do now. I doubt even a quarter of the people who would have to serve would take anything positive away from the military because its simply not for everyone. So in conclusion, leave it a choice. I take great pride in saying I do something that 1% of the US does, that the rest will never do.

Response by MCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 13 at 2014 4:16 PM

MCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Mar 2014 16:16:19 -0400

That's a complicated question. On one hand, it would increase military and political awareness for the vast majority of citizens; although, this would be the only significant benefit. The list of drawbacks is a bit more extensive. Primarily, and this is my personal opinion, it is time consuming enough from a leadership perspective to motivate sailors who made the decision to serve willingly for any of a long list of reasons. I couldn't imagine compounding that with motivating those that have even less desire to be there. There is also the increased financial burden on the nation. It is a constant struggle to get personnel the schools that would benefit both them and the command. Again, compound this with the added expense of enlisting every eligible citizen and the rapidly-depleting defense budget would be practically non-existent.

In summary, I believe the negatives outweigh the benefits in this particular case. And, to echo many of the other responses on this thread, citizens owe nothing to the country just by virtue of being born citizens. Military service has been, and should continue being, a volunteer service.

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made May 17 at 2014 5:11 PM

MSG Wade Huffman — Sat, 17 May 2014 17:11:54 -0400

somehow this got merged incorrectly, the following is a response to the inverse question Citizenship for service. I am editing and providing the question first, then my reply:

Citizenship for Service
SSG Joseph G., Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, MD
[login to see] _armyssg
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117810/gop-wont-vote-give-illegal-immigrants-who-are-veterans-green-cards

What are your thoughts on citizenship for service?

OK.. where to begin.
First of all, there IS an 'express lane' to citizenship for those who entered the country legally, received a green card and decided to join one of the branches of the military. I fully support this and hope that they continue with the policy.

Now to the article. This article is in reference to those who are in the country ILLEGALLY and manage (somehow) to join the military. First of all, their enlistments should immediately be voided (fraudulent enlistment - not a citizen nor a green card holder). Now they illegally entered the country and illegally joined the military and they should be rewarded with a green card for this??? REALLY????? Who thinks this way?? Am I the only one to see the irony here??

I am also against providing an 'escape clause' whereby those who are in the country illegally would be 'rewarded' with a green card for serving. We are in the midst of a drawdown and recruiters are turning away around 80% of applicants as it is, so... would it make sense to allow illegals to serve and reward them with a green card when citizens are being turned away????

**SIGH**

Response by SSG Matt Murphy made Jun 23 at 2014 6:45 PM

SSG Matt Murphy — Mon, 23 Jun 2014 18:45:44 -0400

Yes....if you are talking about universal service by all able bodied citizens.

Response by SPC Richard White made Jul 29 at 2014 10:03 PM

SPC Richard White — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 22:03:04 -0400

In all honesty I think everyone should do some sort of military service

Response by SGT William Howell made Dec 11 at 2014 5:38 PM

SGT William Howell — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 17:38:35 -0500

It absolutely should. We allow any smuck to vote in this country without the least understanding of what it means to be a citizen. They scream about rights that they have actually never even read.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Dec 12 at 2014 11:55 AM

SSG Gerhard S. — Fri, 12 Dec 2014 11:55:31 -0500

I respectfully disagree. Compulsory service is compulsory servitude, also known as SLAVERY. I believe we should maintain our voluntary force, and do away with the "Selective Service" system. If the cause is just there will be plenty of volunteers, and if the cause is not just then perhaps we shouldn't engage in such an endeavor. Any requirement to serve leaves politicians with an involuntary force to do with as they please.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Mar 23 at 2015 11:38 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Mon, 23 Mar 2015 23:38:45 -0400

Sounds familiar. Would you like to know more?

Response by PO2 Neil Manischewitz made Mar 24 at 2015 12:09 AM

PO2 Neil Manischewitz — Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:09:09 -0400

No. However I do believe we should be funding a six month military-style "bootcamp" to all teens after highschool to at least provide the tools they'll need to be more productive members of society. Forcing them to serve would only make them resentful if they don't want to be there.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 24 at 2015 2:06 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Mar 2015 02:06:26 -0400

No. Not a good idea the mandate governmental service in the land of the 'free'. Also, being politically aware and military service are not mutually exclusive.

Response by TSgt Tim (lj) Littlejohn made Mar 24 at 2015 11:53 AM

TSgt Tim (lj) Littlejohn — Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:53:28 -0400

The countries that do have citizens who love their country and pay close attention to politics and it works well for them. That being said I believe it's to late for anything like that here!

Response by SPC Jerome Putnam made Mar 25 at 2015 4:37 PM

SPC Jerome Putnam — Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:37:08 -0400

I think so!!

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2015 4:37 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:37:15 -0400

Absolutely not, we volunteer for service and understand what we are getting into. We are a small elite professional military and we excel at what we do. If it is made mandatory then we would have to lower acceptance standards and would be overwhelmed by the cost of bringing conscripts up to speed that do not want to be involved to begin with.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2015 10:01 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 22:01:42 -0400

No, takes away citizenship rights from those physically/medically/spiritually incompatible with military service.

Response by SFC Terry Wilcox made Jul 9 at 2015 2:12 PM

SFC Terry Wilcox — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 14:12:37 -0400

Most Definitely, There are worse things than having to train some knot head how to tie his boots. Such as the knowledge you got some social reject off the Welfare line, and made something productive from that being. Like a high school drop-out, that the Army accepted, trained, provided guidance and purpose... that soldier made a career of the military and retired after 21 years of faithful duty. Yes I do believe that Service in one if the five branches should be a requirement, especially in this day and age of directionless kids and lackeys that haven't a prayer of going anywhere. I wrote the following a few years ago:

I AM -
By Terry Wilcox
I met with the youth of today.
They were angry, misunderstood,
Had multi colored hair and overly pierced bodies.
I offered them direction, someone to notice them and a feeling of belonging.
I gave them purpose, honor and justice.

I saw a person of dark skin, asked him; “Are you an American?”
That person proudly said, “Yes, born in Atlanta”.
I said, “I will spill blood with you, to defend your rights”.

I greeted a person with clothing different from mine. I asked if he was American.
He vowed with a heavy accent, he would pass his citizenship test the next month.
I replied, “I vow to protect your beliefs and rights of religion, so long as I breathe.

I came upon an oriental family and asked if they were Americans. Head up proud, they replied, “Born and raised”. I said, “I will lay down my life beside you, defending your family’s freedom.

I met a person with a turban on his head, I extended my hand, he accepted.
I asked if he were born here, or from a far off land.
With a tear in his eye, pride in his heart he said he was proud to be a New Yorker.
I vowed to share the lives of other young American soldiers of many ethnicities with him, defending his freedom.

I met a group of people, not of this nation; they said they were allies and friends.
I vowed I would lay on the field of battle, spilling the charge of life with their soldiers.
Vowing to help defend their rights and religions against all who would oppose them.
So long as they believe in and practice, freedom of religion, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, of all peoples.

I met with my neighbors and bonded with them.
We agreed; so long as human rights are respected, both worked to defend against the forces of oppression and believe in liberty and justice for all, we would spill the blood of our compatriots to help protect and defend each other’s borders.
- The United States ARMY

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2015 2:18 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 14:18:37 -0400

While I agree that military service tends to produce "better" citizens, I've got a giant NEGATIVE on making it some sort of required condition for citizenship. My main reason is that requirement is nowhere in the Constitution (and I cannot imagine the Founding Fathers being on board with that sort of requirement). But, to look at it another way, think about all of the problems (attitude, motivation, suitability, etc.) we currently have in a VOLUNTEER military and then try to figure how much worse things could get with folks who don't want to be there. No thanks...

Response by TSgt Tim (lj) Littlejohn made Jul 10 at 2015 11:53 AM

TSgt Tim (lj) Littlejohn — Fri, 10 Jul 2015 11:53:40 -0400

In a word, Yes!