HR 748: All persons 18-25 required to serve....

[Shorts]

We should abolish the Selective Service. What an example of a complete waste of money. When I am 80 and looking to be a WalMart Greeter, I am still going to have to swear I am SS registered, because, you never know when we may need to draft 80 year olds.

Who's going to hand out Werther's Originals if we don't have 80yos?

 

[Pistol Pete]

Conscription is pretty nasty. If you have money you don't have to go, if you're poor you make good cannon fodder. I went to Vietnam because I felt it was my duty. I was drafted. I would hate to see the draft reinstated because it's so unfair. As far as blacks in the army, I didn't see a whole lot of them while I was in the army. One of the best NCOs we had was a black guy named Dossier.

 

[recoveringyankee]

I agree with much that has been said here, but think on this a little.....

Any serving age child or grandchild of any politician that gets us into a war must serve in some forward position.

Might make them think twice before committing somebody else's child to fight for them.

 

[M. Sage]

True "national service" is not limited to the military. In Germany there are a variety of other ways to serve, such as with local fire departments or whatnot. I have always felt it is a good idea.

William F. Buckley wrote a good book on the subject back in 1990, Gratitude: Reflections on What We Owe to Our Country, where he advocates such a program. In it, he proposes that "Americans, beginning at age 18, be encouraged to devote a year of their lives to civic or philanthropic work. For instance, helping the elderly and the sick, teaching illiterates, helping with environmental work—at that time there are more than 3 million slots where national service volunteers could profitably serve." What I really liked was that he tied government benefits such as federal college loans, to having completed the service; and that he doesn't make it compulsory.

Read more about his thoughts on the subject in this article, or better yet, actually read the book. Amazon still sells it here. A used copy can be had for a penny.

Cheers! M2

I'd be willing to do something like that, but they'd have to significantly reduce my tax burden to justify it. Even then, making it compulsory is wrong at the level of basic morality.

Again, the state does not own me. My town or county does not own me. My community does not own me.

I own me.

Voluntary service? Rock on. Forcing people to serve at the point of a gun? No.

WW1&2, draft seemed to work.

Estimates for those two wars are that less than 25 percent of combat troops actually aimed their weapons at the enemy and either did "make work" by running ammo and water around, or firing their weapons kind of toward the enemy.

Nothing worked out well in WWI. It was a slaughter on both sides, and we joined after most countries were basically emptied of men of military age...

Ask the Soviets how well conscription worked for them, burying the Nazis (eventually) under waves of dead bodies. Ask them how well their conscripts did against the motivated riflemen in Finland.

WWII was a bit different because we had high motivation throughout the war. Even the guys drafted acted in a lot of cases like volunteers.

 

[Army 1911]

The Viet Nam war, contrary to what many think, was fought mostly by volunteers. The military at the time was actually the best educated in our history. Volunteer rate for service in Viet Nam was higher that the combat volunteer rate in both WWI and WWII. See the book Stolen Valor by H.K. Burkett.

Now ever since they did away with the draft, I have supported a volunteer military but I think that every able bodied person, male, female or whatever, should be required to work for the country for 2 years. No exceptions. They could be teacher's aides, hospital orderlies, library workers, public works workers, labor in the nation or state parks, etc.

Requirements would include a military type of pay structure, work site a minimum of 500 miles from permanent home of residence. Dorm/barracks style living etc. The idea of this is to mix up the inner city kids with affluent kids, and from all over the county. It would be automatic beginning six months after high school graduation or six months after the 18th birthday. Kids would start college after completion of thier service. This would make the average age of college students older than now and they would be more appreciative of becoming educated.

In the long run I think it would make this a better country.

 

[Younggun]

I volunteered and served and I completely disagree with ANY form of mandatory civil service.

We are free men and free men are not forced to serve their government.

 

[Driller]

Agreed, agreed, and more agreed. We all saw how well the draft worked in the past. Then again, how else are they gonna manage to field a military against the American public? Conscription is their only choice in that matter. (ok, i'm putting up the tinfoil now)

Well if i am going to have to fight the military one day i hope it would be full of those grocery sackers at kroger.

Driller

 

[London]

...but I think that every able bodied person, male, female or whatever, should be required to work for the country for 2 years. No exceptions. They could be teacher's aides, hospital orderlies, library workers, public works workers, labor in the nation or state parks, etc.

Requirements would include a military type of pay structure, work site a minimum of 500 miles from permanent home of residence. Dorm/barracks style living etc. The idea of this is to mix up the inner city kids with affluent kids, and from all over the county. It would be automatic beginning six months after high school graduation or six months after the 18th birthday. Kids would start college after completion of thier service. This would make the average age of college students older than now and they would be more appreciative of becoming educated.

In the long run I think it would make this a better country.

So you support government sponsored forced labor without due process for the purpose of social indoctrination? Sounds like the Hitlerjugend to me. Do you support any other types of socialist/communist programs as well?

 

[navyguy]

So you support government sponsored forced labor without due process for the purpose of social indoctrination? Sounds like the Hitlerjugend to me. Do you support any other types of socialist/communist programs as well?

Perhaps that is what Army is saying... I'll let him respond. A country is only as strong as it's citizens are willing to stand up and fight. Sometimes is seems, they need a push.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

This might be the push they need to fight back against government overreach...

 

[Texasjack]

I used to think this sort of thing was a good idea.

Then Obama got elected.

Now I fear that it's merely a means to try to indoctrinate the young to be enforcers for that commie rat bastard.

 

[London]

I used to think this sort of thing was a good idea.

Then Obama got elected.

Now I fear that it's merely a means to try to indoctrinate the young to be enforcers for that commie rat bastard.

That's why it's best to be cautious with granting the government any power; especially the power to mandatorily indocrinate our kids (see: public schools). Even if everyone working for the government today can be trusted with that power, you can't predict their replacements will.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I met with some .Gov folks today.

No effing way I would trust them with anything other than making me a sandwich.

 

[London]

I don't trust most government employees to figure out how to use velcro shoes, yet they are supposed to be the guiding lights on our paths toward patriotism?

 

[Shotgun Jeremy]

Hay hay hay naow-not ALL govt employees are that bad. When I was one, the crew I ran with did things pretty legit and put out quality products better than I have seen most shops be able to do. Buuuuuut....yea, I did see quite a few guys that just made me shake my head. Lol

 

[Coop45]

And it went over great for Vietnam.

Volunteers still work great for the Corps.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Hay hay hay naow-not ALL govt employees are that bad. When I was one, the crew I ran with did things pretty legit and put out quality products better than I have seen most shops be able to do. Buuuuuut....yea, I did see quite a few guys that just made me shake my head. Lol

I know, I was painting with a broad brush. There are some good individuals who do a great job want to lead, but they're often overruled or their voices drowned out by everyone else.

The structure of most .gov orgs is total FUBAR with all sorts of redundancy, budget hoarding instead of fiscal responsibility, a pretty strong sense of entitlement, and a "don't call me after 5:01" mentality vs getting things done. People are generally compensated more for years of service than given bonuses for accomplishments. The political nature is taken up a notch from more entrepreneurial private enterprises.

The structures of the orgs themselves and the compensations structures create a poor environment for efficiency and innovation. Leadership is just trying to cling on until they can get their pensions; very few want to truly lead and make decisive positive change. Everyone thinks their own job is "critical" and haven't been honest enough with themselves to really challenge that. After all, it may mean they lose their easy 9-5 lifestyle and have to go compete in the market.

Now this is true of some private organizations as well. But its much more the case in .gov orgs. The difference is that its usually easier to fix the private orgs. When I'm asked to help .govs I usually cringe because I know theres a good chance the don't really want the answers I'm bringing.

 

[Shotgun Jeremy]

Yea-that mostly sums it up lol. We had efficiency down at my shop because we truly were trying to keep tax dollars down...but as far as trying out new things-kinda hard to do because everyone's too afraid to lose the efficiency.