Re: Agree or Disagree: National Service Should Be Mandatory

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-12-02, 21:02

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:How about no option TN? I can't believe you're actually onboard with any mandated service to the country. FUCK that. We think we are "free" now, what does that look like? Jesus.

Because you are too valuable to tote a gun or carry a laser to point out targets and that's a job for someone other than yourself?

You have the life you have because my father and perhaps your grandfather didn't worry about being too busy or too good to serve their country.

If everyone got to serve it might be 2 years active duty and 1 year inactive reserve.

Make sure everyone has skin in the game. Do you think Iraq would have lasted so long if the Bush2 administration had a broad cross section of the US population in Iraq instead of the underclass and folks who needed a job while those who could afford a college education on way or another.

Like Colonel Jack Jacobs (Medal of Honor, 2 Silver Stars, 3 Bronze Stars, 2 Purple Hearts) said, "Everybody supports the troops because everybody doesn't have to be one of the troops."

by **Cameron** 2016-12-03, 03:52

GRR Spartan wrote:
Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:How about no option TN? I can't believe you're actually onboard with any mandated service to the country. FUCK that. We think we are "free" now, what does that look like? Jesus.

Because you are too valuable to tote a gun or carry a laser to point out targets and that's a job for someone other than yourself?

You have the life you have because my father and perhaps your grandfather didn't worry about being too busy or too good to serve their country.

If everyone got to serve it might be 2 years active duty and 1 year inactive reserve.

Make sure everyone has skin in the game. Do you think Iraq would have lasted so long if the Bush2 administration had a broad cross section of the US population in Iraq instead of the underclass and folks who needed a job while those who could afford a college education on way or another.

Like Colonel Jack Jacobs (Medal of Honor, 2 Silver Stars, 3 Bronze Stars, 2 Purple Hearts) said, "Everybody supports the troops because everybody doesn't have to be one of the troops."

I AM too valuable to tote a gun or point out targets. So is everyone else. If someone feels compelled to volunteer to do that, good for them, but no one should be made to do it against their will.

I dream of a society in which the government declares war but the people decline to fight it. A draft doesn't "make sure everyone has skin in the game," as you so daftly put it, a draft simply forces those who don't want to fight but don't have the resources to exploit the loopholes to fight anyway.

by **xsanguine** 2016-12-03, 20:07

Turtleneck wrote:

I would argue the absence of civic culture is allowing for an authoritarian turn in this country. So again, how to we get to a more civic culture? This is just one idea.

I think instead of it focusing on being mandatory... perhaps foster an environment that makes a civic culture necessary. I just don't have a lot of faith in social engineering. And that's without mentioning my major problem with forcing people to do things because you (or we) think it's a good idea.

Edit: Plus, I think it would backfire. To even think people would feel a better sense of community if they were forced to do military or community service is a bit naive. People are going to resent that, for sure.

by **xsanguine** 2016-12-03, 20:08

AnomanderRake wrote:You guys are out of your fucking minds.

Yes, this.

by **Turtleneck** 2017-11-20, 21:12

Background: Seventy years after the signing of the 1947 National Security Act, the world is still an unpredictable and dangerous place, but it is not governed by the same fears. In 1947, the chief concerns of U.S. national security professionals were re-establishing European stability, and preparing for the coming Cold War with the Soviet Union, and ensuring the United States remained atop the new post-war order in an age of industrialized, mass-produced warfare and nuclear bombs. The urgency of a threat could be measured in the number of troops, tanks, ships, missiles etcetera that enemy states could marshal. As such, the 1947 National Security Act established an American military and intelligence complex meant to sustain American interests in the face of these challenges. Today, conventional warfare remains a primary concern, but not the only one.

Significance: The modern American political environment has revealed intense cleavages in American socio-politics. Social trust seems on the verge of breakdown as citizens retreat to curated information bubbles not limited to of-the-day political commentary but expanding into the very facts and analysis of events both modern and historical. Shared truths are shrinking and becoming a thing of the past. Internal divisions are the greatest existential threat to the United States of America. A 2017 National Security Act that includes provisions to bridge this divide could reunite the American people behind the values that helped shape America.

Option #1: Mandatory National Service.
Option #2: Re-Instate the Draft.

https://divergentoptions.org/2017/11/20/options-for-u-s-national-service/

by AnomanderRake 2017-11-21, 11:22

^ The Author draws some hilariously naive conclusions in his "Gain" sections. Both options are horrible ideas with absolutely no value to the public which the government is intended to serve, not enslave.

by **GRR Spartan** 2017-11-21, 12:07

Serving your country for a minimum active duty or service for 2-3 years with an additional reserve for on call ie hurricane relief isn’t enslaving citizens.

It removes the free ride and false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat. We would have better quality people for government service. Everyone could be one of the troops or busting it in multiple stateside or territory assignments like Puerto Rico.

I’m called a liberal, a progressive, even a Democrat and I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

by AnomanderRake 2017-11-21, 15:20

GRR Spartan wrote:Serving your country for a minimum active duty or service for 2-3 years with an additional reserve for on call ie hurricane relief isn’t enslaving citizens.

It removes the free ride and false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat. We would have better quality people for government service. Everyone could be one of the troops or busting it in multiple stateside or territory assignments like Puerto Rico.

I’m called a liberal, a progressive, even a Democrat and I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

Alright fine it's not slavery, it's penal servitude but it's still beyond stupid. I'd like to touch on a few points from the bold quote above.

GRR Spartan wrote:It removes the free ride

What free ride are you talking about exactly? Civilians pay the taxes that fund the military industrial complex, there's nothing free about it. The current system exploits civilians for their tax dollars, exploits our soldiers to sacrifice their blood, sweat, tears and lives to serve the interests of oligarchs under a guise of national security, patriotism and nationalism.

GRR Spartan wrote:false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat

I somewhat agree with this from a cultural perspective, but enlistment rates are highest in regions that are already "pro-military". Regions with low enlistment rates are already against the excessive use of our military around the world.

GRR Spartan wrote: We would have better quality people for government service.

Assuming ex-servicemen are somehow more qualified to govern is quite the assumption. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. Good people come from all walks of life.

GRR Spartan wrote:I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

I think this is a possibility, but not guaranteed. We've discussed this point before, you seem to view mandatory service as a means to an end, with the end being a more engaged civilian population, and less exploitative government/military.

I don't view it as a legitimate solution as it does not address the root cause of the problem without some sort of civilian revolution. Couldn't we just skip to the part where we overthrow the oligarchy without subjecting a few generations of youth to mandatory service, hoping we get fed up enough to put an end to the madness before we bankrupt the country?

by **Cameron** 2017-11-22, 19:57

AnomanderRake wrote:
GRR Spartan wrote:Serving your country for a minimum active duty or service for 2-3 years with an additional reserve for on call ie hurricane relief isn’t enslaving citizens.

It removes the free ride and false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat. We would have better quality people for government service. Everyone could be one of the troops or busting it in multiple stateside or territory assignments like Puerto Rico.

I’m called a liberal, a progressive, even a Democrat and I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

Alright fine it's not slavery, it's penal servitude but it's still beyond stupid. I'd like to touch on a few points from the bold quote above.

GRR Spartan wrote:It removes the free ride

What free ride are you talking about exactly? Civilians pay the taxes that fund the military industrial complex, there's nothing free about it. The current system exploits civilians for their tax dollars, exploits our soldiers to sacrifice their blood, sweat, tears and lives to serve the interests of oligarchs under a guise of national security, patriotism and nationalism.

GRR Spartan wrote:false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat

I somewhat agree with this from a cultural perspective, but enlistment rates are highest in regions that are already "pro-military". Regions with low enlistment rates are already against the excessive use of our military around the world.

GRR Spartan wrote: We would have better quality people for government service.

Assuming ex-servicemen are somehow more qualified to govern is quite the assumption. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. Good people come from all walks of life.

GRR Spartan wrote:I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

I think this is a possibility, but not guaranteed. We've discussed this point before, you seem to view mandatory service as a means to an end, with the end being a more engaged civilian population, and less exploitative government/military.

I don't view it as a legitimate solution as it does not address the root cause of the problem without some sort of civilian revolution. Couldn't we just skip to the part where we overthrow the oligarchy without subjecting a few generations of youth to mandatory service, hoping we get fed up enough to put an end to the madness before we bankrupt the country?

GRR volunteered himself, now he wants to volunteer everyone else as well.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-11-22, 21:08

GRR may not have volunteered himself Cameron I’m not sure on that detail but he definitely defines his existence based on that experience and thinks everyone else would be better off if they lived just like him. Which is bonkers AF.

by **Turtleneck** 2017-11-24, 23:30

AnomanderRake wrote:^ The Author draws some hilariously naive conclusions in his "Gain" sections. Both options are horrible ideas with absolutely no value to the public which the government is intended to serve, not enslave.

So you’re contending that something like the Corporation for National and Community Service, and programs like AmeriCorps or Teach for
America, have no public benefit?

by AnomanderRake 2017-11-26, 20:31

Turtleneck wrote:
AnomanderRake wrote:^ The Author draws some hilariously naive conclusions in his "Gain" sections. Both options are horrible ideas with absolutely no value to the public which the government is intended to serve, not enslave.

So you’re contending that something like the Corporation for National and Community Service, and programs like AmeriCorps or Teach for
America, have no public benefit?

I contend that they couldn't possibly be operated at the massive scale being suggested, in a way that would provide more value than their cost.

by **xsanguine** 2017-11-29, 20:42

GRR Spartan wrote:Serving your country for a minimum active duty or service for 2-3 years with an additional reserve for on call ie hurricane relief isn’t enslaving citizens.

It removes the free ride and false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat. We would have better quality people for government service. Everyone could be one of the troops or busting it in multiple stateside or territory assignments like Puerto Rico.

I’m called a liberal, a progressive, even a Democrat and I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

Agree or Disagree: National Service Should Be Mandatory - Page 2 1rb62d

by BobSaget 2017-11-29, 20:45

GRR Spartan wrote:Serving your country for a minimum active duty or service for 2-3 years with an additional reserve for on call ie hurricane relief isn’t enslaving citizens.

It removes the free ride and false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat. We would have better quality people for government service. Everyone could be one of the troops or busting it in multiple stateside or territory assignments like Puerto Rico.

I’m called a liberal, a progressive, even a Democrat and I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

by **Turtleneck** 2017-11-29, 20:46

xsanguine wrote:
GRR Spartan wrote:Serving your country for a minimum active duty or service for 2-3 years with an additional reserve for on call ie hurricane relief isn’t enslaving citizens.

It removes the free ride and false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat. We would have better quality people for government service. Everyone could be one of the troops or busting it in multiple stateside or territory assignments like Puerto Rico.

I’m called a liberal, a progressive, even a Democrat and I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

BobSaget wrote:
GRR Spartan wrote:Serving your country for a minimum active duty or service for 2-3 years with an additional reserve for on call ie hurricane relief isn’t enslaving citizens.

It removes the free ride and false patriotism that the current all volunteer system has begat. We would have better quality people for government service. Everyone could be one of the troops or busting it in multiple stateside or territory assignments like Puerto Rico.

I’m called a liberal, a progressive, even a Democrat and I truly believe a program like this would result in fewer head up the ass decisions if Americans were exposed to people outside their bubbles.

I like the .gif that X and Bob Saget posted right around the same time.

by **xsanguine** 2017-11-29, 20:49

Turtleneck wrote:

I like the .gif that X and Bob Saget posted right around the same time.

Agree or Disagree: National Service Should Be Mandatory - Page 2 8a8

by BobSaget 2017-11-29, 20:50

xsanguine wrote:
Turtleneck wrote:

I like the .gif that X and Bob Saget posted right around the same time.

Agree or Disagree: National Service Should Be Mandatory - Page 2 A0c

by Sponsored content

Should One Year of National Service Be Required?