we have a lottery system in which all able men participate, if you you get unlucky you have to go get some basic, paid, military training for *gasp* 4 months! it's basically some marching, military stuff, and then helpful civilian stuff like fire control, first aid, etc.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-10 19:49 ID:tZI9l7Bu
all countries should do it. do something for your country other than just pay taxes and feel apart of the community.
or shoot shit.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-10 20:28 ID:kIg8V8f4
I am against military service, whether mandatory or voluntary. War is not the answer
>>6
who said anything about war? mititary do more than just blow the fuck outta shit.
plus there would be less fat fuckers around (like me) if we were forced into a fitness regime.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-10 21:04 ID:vpstAqg7
conscription are favored for paranoid politicians.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-10 21:07 ID:tZI9l7Bu
conscription is completely different to mandatory service...
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-10 21:07 ID:tZI9l7Bu
P.S. still makes what you said true though.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-10 21:21 ID:tsMZdyzP
I'd be okay with mandatory military training
but not with mandatory military service in America, were you train for 3 weeks, you get sent to the front line, get blown in half, and then get shitty health care and benefits.
>>4 Here.
Also, you cannot get sent anywhere after/during your military service. If you want to go to 'war'/peacekeeping missions, you have to actually join the army.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-11 5:40 ID:mYKZUnoj
I wouldn't mind joining the military. But as it were neither I nor the military saw it fitting that I did. If the government would have wanted me to then I would not disagree.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-11 9:54 ID:/1R83WSH
The UK needs to bring back national sirvice to give some of the 'dole dossing' SCUM a good kick up the arse! I'm join as an officer affter uni.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-11 16:29 ID:f+uSzg/l
>>6
If you get invaded war is pretty much the answer.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-11 16:33 ID:JbHnsAn5
War means competition and thus advancement of the human kind.
Make the world a better place and start a war right NOW!
People in the U.S. who don't want to join the military actually pay good money to run through the civilian version of "boot camp" solely for this reason.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-11 20:36 ID:RNF8xCrC
>>19
thats choice still. you choose to pay a "boot camp" to get you fit which means you can choose to leave if you think it's getting too hard for wittle ol' me.
with mandatory national service you dont get that choice. either get fit for your country or you dont reap the benefits offered (health care, welfare, etc)
hey its the best we can do since we dont have the same lifestyles 100 to 2000 yrs ago. everything is brought to us and we've become lazy. we need it.
I know, I was just pointing out that the training in these "civilian boot camps" is truly rigorous, and if your up for it, and have the time and money, then it makes a very effective form of fitness.
Of course, "walking five miles in the snow to school, uphill, both ways," as our parents and grandparents did, gets about the same effect over a longer term.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-12 12:03 ID:UtMJimQC
Don't worry. When fuel from crude oil gets as expensive as fuel from vegetable oils we will have to walk everywhere.
You're saying the government has the right to force us not to be lazy?
/gb2/ gulags, commutard.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-12 22:24 ID:+OwOGnb8
I think perhaps mandatory training would be good, though not mandatory service.
In addition to that, I think the right to vote should be reserved for those who have served in the military.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-12 23:51 ID:WqgXoH/m
This is beginning to sound like a Heinleinian wet dream.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-13 21:18 ID:rbGfqgqa
>>23
then dont expect benefits when all you do is sit on your lazy fucking ass
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-14 12:28 ID:nMMhKxPa
>>12
"I'd be okay with mandatory military training
but not with mandatory military service"
I agree, but I would take the emphasis off the military aspect of it though. I would suggest just familiarizing the populous with firearms and gun safety. Make it kindof like the Swiss system, but with less emphasis on the military aspect of it, and more emphasis on safety and rangetime or something. Mandatory military service, I would be against though.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-15 7:31 ID:iQP9gVxz
>>27
I recomend mandatory ballet training. Plenty of exercise, no horrible military training and you can learn how to die gracefully like swans.
How do conservative heads not explode from the hypocrisy when they tell us so often that the soldiers are fighting for our freedoms in Iraq yet they want to institute mandatory military service? Where's my freedom to NOT join the military? We already have enough volunteer soldiers to defend the country and I already pay enough taxes towards the military.
Sure I do, that's what a right _is_. Read the fucking constitution sometime (assuming you're not some Eurofag), and then you can point out to me exactly which part of it compels me to serve in the armed forces, lest my rights be revoked.
Until then, have fun getting blown to shit "for your country."
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-16 6:14 ID:WCmy5BBf
who invite the rights-fairy? she magically grants rights to all the children y'know...
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-16 7:18 ID:aLfErooA
>>32
Excuse me, whiner, but conservatives have not called for mandatory service. Liberal democrats are asking for a draft for some unexplained reason. >>35
Freedom, like life, is a right that belongs exclusively to those who will fight for it. >>37
President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 which created the country's first peacetime draft and formally established the Selective Service System as an independent Federal agency.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-16 13:54 ID:c3pRC4hV
>>37
When Iran invades will you protect America or keep up the myth that freedom is a given?
Mahatma Gandhi's strategy only works against a democracy, if Britain were like the Nazis he would have been publicly disembowled and all his followers sent to the salt mines to be worked to death.
Name:
thre Swede2007-04-16 15:54 ID:QcLNjfEf
Mandatory military service has the effect that it decreases risks for military coups since a military without professional grunts is a lot less powerful (politcally). Its cheaper than having lax gun laws, plus it increases population fitness, decreasing population sickness and health care costs. Its not viable for the country who wants to send troops to foreign soils though.
Name:
Anonymous2007-04-16 17:14 ID:nUBG2rO5
Calm down folks. I think I was the one who started this whole thing by saying I support gun safety and educational programs. I am against mandatory military service, as this would be unconstitutional. The 13th (I think)? Amendment prohibits involuntary servitude, after all. That said, I'm against mandatory military service... but I do think it would be a good idea to encourage responsible firearms ownership here and teach safety classes - much like the Swiss do in their country. I would suggest possibly teaching such classes in high schools - just make sure they are done under close supervision and make sure that proper security and safety measures are taken. This is not mandatory military service... and it wouldn't involve forcing anyone into the military or forcing them to go fight and or die in any war.
I agree with the Gandhi thing, and I'm certainly no ultra-pacifist. And if it comes down to a situation where it's necessary to fight, I'll of course gladly do so. What I'm arguing against is mandatory service when there's no imminent threat- especially for nebulous, bullshit reasons like "paying the price of freedom." Finland (for example) hasn't seen a major armed conflict since WW2, yet that country has universal (male) conscription. I see no good reason for it.