Posted on Dec 15, 2015
What do you think about the US following in Israels foot steps and making it mandatory to serve two years at the age of 18?
17.9K
189
93
27
27
0
http://newsblaze.com/story/ [login to see] 2145zzzz.nb/topstory.html
Personally, I think it's a GREAT idea. Once you turn 18 and if you are not a full time college student or disabled in any way etc....then both men and women should have to serve a minimum of two years.
I believe this would be great for the US...I think it will take the kids of today and tomorrow and instill some discipline into them...and maybe they'll learn humility.
It's working great for Israel and has been working for many years.
What say you RP members? Do you think this is a good idea or not?...and why?
Personally, I think it's a GREAT idea. Once you turn 18 and if you are not a full time college student or disabled in any way etc....then both men and women should have to serve a minimum of two years.
I believe this would be great for the US...I think it will take the kids of today and tomorrow and instill some discipline into them...and maybe they'll learn humility.
It's working great for Israel and has been working for many years.
What say you RP members? Do you think this is a good idea or not?...and why?
Posted in these groups: 
Military Industry
Mandatory
Military Industry Mandatory
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 43
14
14
0
We are not the Israeli Army or Israel.
Nor with the required end strength authorized by the nation capable of affording that bill. We have the capacity to grow fairly quickly; however, to maintain a military force as a "rite of passage" is currently not cost effective... Nor in my humble opinion... in the best interest to the American people. I provide this submission based on need and requirement. There is no mandated need for a force that would require every 18 being inducted into the service. If there is no need... Then why burden the American people with the financial burden?
As for the youth being soft... That is hollow. They are no softer the i was at 18... And they are a hell of a lot smarter and agile. I know.... I see them everyday.
My 2 cents
Nor with the required end strength authorized by the nation capable of affording that bill. We have the capacity to grow fairly quickly; however, to maintain a military force as a "rite of passage" is currently not cost effective... Nor in my humble opinion... in the best interest to the American people. I provide this submission based on need and requirement. There is no mandated need for a force that would require every 18 being inducted into the service. If there is no need... Then why burden the American people with the financial burden?
As for the youth being soft... That is hollow. They are no softer the i was at 18... And they are a hell of a lot smarter and agile. I know.... I see them everyday.
My 2 cents
(14)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
I did a very quick Google search, I found (at the nces.ed.gov website) that the number of persons entering 9th grade in 2015 was 4.1 million. That should give us some idea how many people would be 18 years old a few years later, whether they graduate or not. If you put them in at 18 and make them spend two years, that would give you about twice that many in service at any given time. Can you imagine a military that had something like 8 MILLION personnel? What would you do with that?
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
(0)
(0)
1SG Cameron M. Wesson
SPC Donald Moore nice right up.... And good wirk. Only if it was only $96B.... But what does it cost to train, outfit, care and equip a force 8 million? What does it cost to maintain the core force? Multiple that by 10x. As I mentioned... The cost benefit... This side of Full scale major combat operation... Is not cost effective when the American people are concetned that about 1/6 of the budget (appropriated and not) goes to defense... Of course you hear sometimes over 50%... But that is not accurate.
(1)
(0)
1stSgt Eugene Harless
Roughly 30% of the "Greatest Generation" were 4F. When my kids attended high school I would pick them up and watch the Teens leaving school. At least 1/3 of them were overweight to the point they would not even be accepted. I'm sure a good portion of the remaining 2/3s had physical and mental disqualifications or abused substances or had poor attitudes about serving. You are correct in saying the 18 year olds who do sign up are as good or better than the raw materiel the US has had for its military in all eras. They are an exception.
(0)
(0)
1SG Cameron M. Wesson
1stSgt Eugene Harless True... Very true. when I recruited 92-94... I found that only about 45% of any HS graduating class were qualified to enlist based on ASVAB scores as a CAT 3A.... after further prequal.... that dropped further. In one HS of 26 seniors... Only 3 were qualified... Dont think any joined... but the soldiers that I did enlist... With one exception... were very good!
(2)
(0)
10
10
0
NO! I do not want anything but an all volunteer military. Although I believe many kids would benefit from the military experience, it would more likely bring us down. There is a huge difference between a country which is effectively at war on their own soil vs ours which has yet to experience the violence going on there. Those are the times where I would then agree a draft or mandatory service for all eligible adults would be necessary.
To force mandatory service you have to consider how we will pay and employ the huge number of troops we would then have. Sorry but I don't want my tax dollars working to sustain such a thing.
To force mandatory service you have to consider how we will pay and employ the huge number of troops we would then have. Sorry but I don't want my tax dollars working to sustain such a thing.
(10)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin - Sir, I completely agree. I did a very quick Google search, I found (at the nces.ed.gov website) that the number of persons entering 9th grade in 2015 was 4.1 million. That should give us some idea how many people would be 18 years old a few years later, whether they graduate or not. If you put them in at 18 and make them spend two years, that would give you about twice that many in service at any given time. Can you imagine a military that had something like 8 MILLION personnel? What would you do with that?
To put that in some perspective, there are about 318 million people in the US (total) and the military (active only, all branches, as of 2013) was about 1.4 million.
So, if all the current personal stayed, it would bring the total military from 1.4 million to around 9 and a half MILLION.
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
To put that in some perspective, there are about 318 million people in the US (total) and the military (active only, all branches, as of 2013) was about 1.4 million.
So, if all the current personal stayed, it would bring the total military from 1.4 million to around 9 and a half MILLION.
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
Sgt Kelli Mays
I think a lot of these "soft" kids today would find some reason to get out of a military obligation.
I think a lot of these "soft" kids today would find some reason to get out of a military obligation.
(7)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
SMSgt Emo McParland - As much as I like the idea, the people of the US should not have to pick up the tab on all the dead-head fools that a program like this would put into the military AND I wouldn't want to be subjected to having to work with them if they did manage to get through Basic.
(3)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SSgt Terry P. I certainly agree that I wouldn't want to work with people who can't succeed in as simple an environment as basic training. It would be like some of the draftees who served in Vietnam, honestly.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
As much as I would like for the rest of our men and women to pull their weight, i don't think that it would benefit us as a military (foremost) or as a nation. We already allow in so many bad servicemembers that just collect paychecks, why would we want some of the ungrateful, immature college kids who have had everything given to them? I just don't see it working out very well.
(6)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
SGT (Join to see) - Not only the bad apples, the total number of people involved is part of the problem with this suggestion. Just how many personnel are we talking about if we put every 18 year old (regardless of gender) into the military?
I did a very quick Google search, I found (at the nces.ed.gov website) that the number of persons entering 9th grade in 2015 was 4.1 million. That should give us some idea how many people would be 18 years old a few years later, whether they graduate or not. If you put them in at 18 and make them spend two years, that would give you about twice that many in service at any given time. Can you imagine a military that had something like 8 MILLION personnel? What would you do with that?
To put that in some perspective, there are about 318 million people in the US (total) and the military (active only, all branches, as of 2013) was about 1.4 million.
So, if all the current personal stayed, it would bring the total military from 1.4 million to around 9 and a half MILLION.
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
I did a very quick Google search, I found (at the nces.ed.gov website) that the number of persons entering 9th grade in 2015 was 4.1 million. That should give us some idea how many people would be 18 years old a few years later, whether they graduate or not. If you put them in at 18 and make them spend two years, that would give you about twice that many in service at any given time. Can you imagine a military that had something like 8 MILLION personnel? What would you do with that?
To put that in some perspective, there are about 318 million people in the US (total) and the military (active only, all branches, as of 2013) was about 1.4 million.
So, if all the current personal stayed, it would bring the total military from 1.4 million to around 9 and a half MILLION.
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SPC Donald Moore These figures out astounding. I could hardly imagine that the American people would be willing to up the taxes to reflect ANY of that. The masses cry out to de-fund more and more of defense spending (which isn't completely errant) as it is now. I'm sure that these estimates are conservative compared with what the actual numbers could be. Great point my friend!
(1)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
SGT (Join to see) - People seldom think of the cost involved when they come up with these terribly sensible sounding ideas.
The total cost when you consider the additional training and equipment would probably be three times that $96 Billion estimate above, but even that was based on only paying $1000 a month total pay which is a low estimate.
The total cost when you consider the additional training and equipment would probably be three times that $96 Billion estimate above, but even that was based on only paying $1000 a month total pay which is a low estimate.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
There was a time when I strongly advocated a program of mandatory national service for all youth upon graduation from high school or age 18, whichever occurred later. Now, I'm hesitant. Can we make effective use of a cheap labor pool of untrained youth? Can we undo the damage of 18 years of entitlement mentality? (Would you like to be the leader tasked with that job?) Then there's the political issue of would such a program merely provide political leaders with an opportunity to indoctrinate these youth into their peculiar brand of ideology? They already have a theater for propaganda with those who attend college. Mandatory federal service would provide them with a similar theater for indoctrinating those who don't go on to college. Like I said, I'm now seeing downsides to this proposal that I hadn't seen before.
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
Eh. I used to think this was a fair idea, but personally, I think it flies in the face of the very freedom we protect. The government shouldn't have the right to involuntarily hijack any number of years of a person's life for anything less than a crime.
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
If we had enemies at all of our borders who intended to kill every man, woman and child in the USA then it might make sense for the USA to follow Israel's example of mandatory service for 18 year old men and women Sgt Kelli Mays
In the mid-1990's I supported a USAF FMS contract which provided direct support to the IDF. Israel has east to west borders which are much more narrow than Delewares.
Perhaps if we bring in 100 million more muslims into this nation with 20 percent who would love to kill us then we would be in a similar situation as Israel.
In the mid-1990's I supported a USAF FMS contract which provided direct support to the IDF. Israel has east to west borders which are much more narrow than Delewares.
Perhaps if we bring in 100 million more muslims into this nation with 20 percent who would love to kill us then we would be in a similar situation as Israel.
(6)
(0)
5
5
0
Sgt Kelli Mays, we had the draft when I was 18, and it is a two-edged sword. On the positive side you get a lot more people exposed to the realities of world policy and conflicts so that they will have a more responsible outlook on politics for the rest of their lives. You also have a military made up of citizen soldiers that would act as a check against governmental overreach such as we saw with the gun confiscations following Katrina. There are orders that a citizen soldier would not carry out against fellow citizens that a professional military might; this was the reason the Founding Fathers mistrusted a standing army.
On the negative side, the draft brings in people that really don't want to be there and which become a disciplinary problem which degrades force effectiveness. We saw that in Viet Nam when there was widespread drug use, mutiny under fire, and fragging of officers and senior NCOs. In I-Corps in 1970 it was against regulations for officers or senior NCOs to ride in closed top vehicles even in a monsoon - there needed to be a quick way out if their men tossed a grenade in with them.
Today's all-volunteer military is probable the best military we have ever fielded, but it is relatively small and has been worked to the breaking point from multiple combat tours close together. Since they also represent less than 1% of the population our military is increasingly subject to an us vs. them relationship with the civilian population.
Overall, I favor the draft as a means of educating the civilian population into the duties of citizenship more than as a means of meeting our defense requirements.
On the negative side, the draft brings in people that really don't want to be there and which become a disciplinary problem which degrades force effectiveness. We saw that in Viet Nam when there was widespread drug use, mutiny under fire, and fragging of officers and senior NCOs. In I-Corps in 1970 it was against regulations for officers or senior NCOs to ride in closed top vehicles even in a monsoon - there needed to be a quick way out if their men tossed a grenade in with them.
Today's all-volunteer military is probable the best military we have ever fielded, but it is relatively small and has been worked to the breaking point from multiple combat tours close together. Since they also represent less than 1% of the population our military is increasingly subject to an us vs. them relationship with the civilian population.
Overall, I favor the draft as a means of educating the civilian population into the duties of citizenship more than as a means of meeting our defense requirements.
(5)
(0)
SGT Jerrold Pesz
You are right that the draft brought in all types. We got many very good soldiers and we got the dregs of society. When I was in many of our junior officers and NCO's were either originally drafted or only joined to avoid being drafted. The negative to that was that almost none in that group stayed past their original obligation.
(2)
(0)
PO2 Mark Saffell
Been saying that for many years. I worked at MAC and of the group I was in 2 out of 10 of us served. The others went to school on Daddy's money. You could see the difference between the two of us and the other 8 and we use to tell them to take the pacifier out and grow up and stop being so spoiled. Military life teaches you its not all fun and games out there.
(2)
(0)
5
5
0
Sgt Kelli Mays, This has been done in South Korea for a long time. I talked with some ROK's while in Vietnam and they told me if you don't have a plan after you get out of school, or don't have a farm to work, you go into the military as young as 16. They are a force to be reckoned with.
(5)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
LTC Paul Labrador - The quantity of people involved is part of the problem with this suggestion and I am happy to see that someone other than me had that thought. Just how many personnel are we talking about if we put every 18 year old (regardless of gender) into the military?
I did a very quick Google search, I found (at the nces.ed.gov website) that the number of persons entering 9th grade in 2015 was 4.1 million. That should give us some idea how many people would be 18 years old a few years later, whether they graduate or not. If you put them in at 18 and make them spend two years, that would give you about twice that many in service at any given time. Can you imagine a military that had something like 8 MILLION personnel? What would you do with that?
To put that in some perspective, there are about 318 million people in the US (total) and the military (active only, all branches, as of 2013) was about 1.4 million.
So, if all the current personal stayed, it would bring the total military from 1.4 million to around 9 and a half MILLION.
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
I did a very quick Google search, I found (at the nces.ed.gov website) that the number of persons entering 9th grade in 2015 was 4.1 million. That should give us some idea how many people would be 18 years old a few years later, whether they graduate or not. If you put them in at 18 and make them spend two years, that would give you about twice that many in service at any given time. Can you imagine a military that had something like 8 MILLION personnel? What would you do with that?
To put that in some perspective, there are about 318 million people in the US (total) and the military (active only, all branches, as of 2013) was about 1.4 million.
So, if all the current personal stayed, it would bring the total military from 1.4 million to around 9 and a half MILLION.
If I did my math right, and you only paid these extra 8 MILLION people $1000 a month as a salary, it would cost the government about $96,000,000,000 a year.
Is that money well spent?
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I think it's a terrible idea. I want to serve with people who want to be there and who have a genuine sense of duty and pride.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google